National gets a smacking on the housing crisis

59 comments on “National gets a smacking on the housing crisis ”

• Comments are now closed

1. TepidSupport 1

   20 April 2016 at 7:41 am

   Yep. If nothing else, “middle NZ” will vote according to their pocket.
   Home ownership is a massive thing in NZ (or lack of) and when the govt is slow to act or doesn’t respond to threats to this ‘dream’ they will suffer.
   Even traditional Nats voters affected will be vying for a credible alternative…
   Right now, Nats seem arrogant due to lack of a strong opposition that presents a threat to them and it’s a real shame.
   This may be a catalyst for these voters to start to shift
   • Keith 1.1

     20 April 2016 at 8:13 am

     Sorry to say but a fair proportion of those who vote love this shit. They can’t get enough of this fools paradise because they are all right Jack, fuck anyone else. They may even placate themselves with the fantasy they can help out the youngins’ but in Auckland that is bullshit not unless you are in the Key bracket of wealth and not unless you want to saddle your relatives with horrific debt at the low tide end of the interest rate cycle. There is going to be economic carnage if interest rates even double!

     Anyway wait for a Nick Smith gleeful media release telling us he has freed up a diused traffic island for a block of flats. Or some benny bashing policy to distract. Oh and John Key has sold our souls to China with one of his rancid trade deals. Whats the bet Chinese citizens who have no ties to NZ will be guaranteed unfettered access to play in our property market under this idiots negotiation skills!
2. AsleepWhileWalking 2

   20 April 2016 at 7:52 am

   At least Bridges didn’t make the “people need to lower their expectations”. Surprised he didn’t actually.
   • Sabine 2.1

     20 April 2016 at 8:15 am

     There is a hole raft of people not being able to buy a house.

     The first home buyers.
     the middle aged home buyers that have lost a home previously to divorce, job loss or illness
     the old ones that would like to down size but can’t because we are not building anything in their range.

     Coupled with the selling of our State Houses and the subsequent gentrification by stealth it has – at least for me – become quite apparent that there are a lot of people in this country that the National Party considers hopeless, and thus don’t need to be taken into account.
     • Heather Grimwood 2.1.1

       20 April 2016 at 10:17 am

       To Sabine at 2.1 : Though obviously caring and being an activist for those younger, I belong to your third bracket and indeed it is my personal Waterloo. Any warm two bedroom units ( I need a workroom and space for visitors) being built are far too pricey…..so much for retirement plans!
     • D'Esterre 2.1.2

       21 April 2016 at 9:43 am

       Sabine: “the old ones that would like to down size but can’t because we are not building anything in their range.”
       Indeed. This affects us; we’re stuck in a house too big for us because we can’t find anything in our area of a suitable size. Move out, you say? Nothing suitable elsewhere in the city; besides, we have long-established professional links which would be difficult or impossible to re-establish. We can tell you many tales of people in this area who’ve retired to satellite towns, but can’t get on a GP list in those places, and must come back to the city for health care.
3. maui 3

   20 April 2016 at 8:26 am

   There is no crisis if you’re a Wotton and can make 100 thou on a house in weeks on reality tv. The viewership probably agrees.
   • Sabine 3.1

     20 April 2016 at 8:37 am

     The guys that participated in the Hunger Games errrr My first Home errr My first flipper 🙂 did not make that much. At least the ones in my street. After buying costs and expenses for renovation if they come out with 10.000 after taxes they would have done well. The only other ones making money on the Hunger Games NZ Edition are Barfoot and Thompson and the TV Station.
     The one that made 70.000 in three month was the guy who bought the house and sold it to the Hunger Game Contestants. Bought it for 580.000 and sold it for 650.000. I am sure that guy also declared his earnings in NZ before leaving this fair island to elsewhere.
     • save NZ 3.1.1

       20 April 2016 at 8:47 am

       +1 Sabine

       And another interesting thing, is that it cost each couple approx $100,000 just to renovate within the existing building without the profit. Yep folks, the cost of building materials just to upgrade a 2- 3 bedroom state house type to modern living is costing big bucks.

       Nobody seems to care about the monopolies and ‘agreements’ operating within the building industry. You might be able to get that money back in Auckland, but other cities – not sure.

       Housing is made up of multiple issues, and one is, the exorbitant cost of basic building materials, that we often produced within our own country.
       • Sabine 3.1.1.1

         20 April 2016 at 8:57 am

         and then of course finding rotten floor boards do not help.
         Wanting to put in double glazed windows etc etc is not helping either.
         if they just wanted to do the cosmetic renovation i.e. a coat of wash and wear pooh vomit brown and cheap as fuck n ugly curtains (standard rental outfit) they would have made a some money.

         the house in my street at least went to a family that is going to live there. They will have given up on lifestyle, but are in close proximity to town, so don’t have to spend four hours a day commuting, have bus transport/train available and have a few decent schools in the neighborhood.

         But for what its worth, the house should not have gone for almost a million buckeroos. But then desperation will make people do weird things, deal with having to move every six month cause your rental is up for sale, live in a ditch or loan a million bucks. Decisions decisions decisions.

         Disclaimer, i am an unashamed labour supporter and call Helen Clark Aunty. But i know full well that under Labour everything was worse and then some. So fucking Burn me!
         • save NZ 3.1.1.1.1

           20 April 2016 at 9:12 am

           I agree with you again Sabine, but the same people complaining about disgusting damp rentals then complain about increasing rents when they need big bucks spent on them to make them dry warm homes.

           Apartments cost more per square meter to build than a detached home in most cases, so that old chestnut needs a lot more scrutiny.

           If wages were raising the same level as housing and building materials then the problem would be solved.

           And if there were proper taxes on flipping then the person who did nothing to the house but increased the price $70,000 were disincentivised to do so then again it would help solve the crisis.
           As you commented the person probably has already left the country so good luck IRD on collecting the taxes. The new speculator taxes sound pretty easy to evade anyway as it is not a set tax but I think something about your taxable income. Anyone with any info?

           And for those that are on a benefit, we used to have state houses!
           • Sabine 3.1.1.1.1.1

             20 April 2016 at 9:24 am

             but the rentals are disgusting and damp are not fixed are not renovated and still go up in price, in my area now you will be hard pressed to find anything below the 600 per week for your standard 3 bedder shitter.

             I have yet to meet a Landlord who would spend 120.000$ on his million dollar dump to upgrade this property before it is being rented out.
             I have rented in AKL ever since i lived here, and had everything from singing electricity (nothing like a bit of do your own wiring), to slugs in the kitchen/bathroom after a rainy day/night, to water running down the walls in winter, to windows that can’t be properly closed/opened, to duct tape holding together a roof, to the linoleum lifting from the floor on a windy day. All these houses were rented to ‘market’ value, non of them were renovated and frankly some should have been condemned.

             I spoke to a housing inspector at AKL Council some years ago in regards to a property that i was renting that started cracking down the walls , with a door coming of the door frame and ‘growth’ on the roof. I was told that if they would condemned all the houses that are beyond repair and actually unfit for human consumption we would loose about half of all of AKLs housing stock.

             So maybe i am thinking instead of creating a human standard fro habitat, we could just take the standard that we accord our dogs and their kennels. Maybe then we would create decent housing.

             My distrust of builders and the likes in NZ stems from the Ducttaped roof. I have pictures of it. Seriously half of the roof is held together with silver tape. Someone did that. Someone signed up on it. Someone got paid for it. And that someone who did this calls himself a roofer and a trades person. I call that person a fuckwit, but then i am not a roofer/builder/tradesmen.
             • Rocco Siffredi …

               20 April 2016 at 9:27 am

               “I have yet to meet a Landlord who would spend 120.000$ on his million dollar dump to upgrade this property before it is being rented out.”

               Capital improvements to rentals are no longer tax deductible. Any surprise this has an impact?
               • Sabine …

                 20 April 2016 at 9:35 am

                 Well i have lived in AKL for 20 years. I have seen a lot of houses ‘renovated’ with second hand carpet, and pooh brown wash and wear.

                 i don’t think that is an issue, it just means that if they now renovate their own houses they have to pay for it.
                 • Rocco Siffredi …

                   20 April 2016 at 10:09 am

                   Which, of course, clearly means they don’t. They don’t need too, the demand is there regardless.
     • maui 3.1.2

       20 April 2016 at 8:55 am

       Interesting, thanks Sabine. “My first flipper” lol!
       • Anno1701 3.1.2.1

         20 April 2016 at 1:03 pm

         we call those shows “mortgage porn” at my place
         • Incognito 3.1.2.1.1

           20 April 2016 at 9:25 pm

           I’d call them P addicts; P stands for Property.
     • save NZ 3.1.3

       20 April 2016 at 8:56 am

       And if you have a look at what would work the best for collecting taxes in this example, a stamp duty would work.

       The $70k guy who was the previous owner, would pay stamp duty, (immediate) real estate fees (immediate) and (hopefully) get caught by the speculator tax and pay tax on that too. Therefore it would probably not have been worth their while.

       Therefore when the my first home couple bought the property it would be valued at $580,000 not $650,000.

       It is the ‘flipping’ causing the most short term damage to Auckland property and people legitimately trying to buy.
       • save NZ 3.1.3.1

         20 April 2016 at 9:03 am

         And now I think the house is valued at $805,000. So approx 6 months ago the house was worth $580,000 and gone up approx 39% in approx 6 months over 2 owners. That is why Auckland is so unaffordable.
       • Molly 3.1.3.2

         20 April 2016 at 3:33 pm

         Stamp duty has not reduced speculation in the UK. Houses are put in the name of a company ie. “50 Paratai Drive Limited” and then the sale of the house is accomplished with the sale of the shares.

         The ones who pay the stamp duty every time, are genuine house buyers/residents.

         The loss of secure state housing adds to the debacle, along with the government subsidy of accommodation supplements to landlords.

         Additional changes that would immediately have an effect: restricting the sale of residential houses to NZ residents or citizens, and a higher tax on companies or trusts that deal in residential homes.
         • save NZ 3.1.3.2.1

           20 April 2016 at 8:51 pm

           I totally agree with you Molly

           “Additional changes that would immediately have an effect: restricting the sale of residential houses to NZ residents or citizens, and a higher tax on companies or trusts that deal in residential homes”

           My point about stamp duty is at least if a government were to put in a property tax, have one a tax that can not be evaded by the rich and raises real money that can be used for social spending. Think how much money could be raised. The problem with capital gains is that it is easy to evade (if you have enough money) and is a nightmare to administer and collect (especially from the rich with very good accountants).

           I just like the speed and fairness of the stamp duty as a tax, those who are buying a 10 million dollar house or a 100 million dollar farm pay a lot more than an average joe buying a $300,000 home but they can’t evade the tax as it is paid on title transfer.

           However I am not advocating Labour putting one in, because I think it will take away votes at election time, and I want a change of government.

           However stopping the sale of residential houses and farms to overseas investors will be a vote winner from Labour supporters in my view. BUT under the China free trade agreement I do not think a NZ government can even do this. That is how f**Ked these trade agreements are! Apparently in the fine print it says Chinese investors must be treated the same as Kiwis, therefore Kiwis can’t buy land in China (like Chinese as Chinese are not allowed to own land in China only the government) BUT the NZ government can’t stop Chinese owning land in NZ. Typical Kiwi blunder on the fine print.
           Anyway someone else here might have a lot more info, of whether under a Labour government they can ban foreigners buying up our land or if it will violate the free trade conditions in the China agreement. God knows how many other rights have been given away in these free trade agreements.
           • Molly 3.1.3.2.1.1

             21 April 2016 at 10:29 am

             “I just like the speed and fairness of the stamp duty as a tax, those who are buying a 10 million dollar house or a 100 million dollar farm pay a lot more than an average joe buying a $300,000 home but they can’t evade the tax as it is paid on title transfer.”

             My point is that stamp duty is easily avoided by putting the ownership of the property in a company.

             The title transfer doesn’t take place, as it is the company that changes hands.

             In the UK this has been the method of choice for speculators, and high turnover property developers to quite legally avoid stamp duty.
       • D'Esterre 3.1.3.3

         21 April 2016 at 9:29 am

         Save NZ: “It is the ‘flipping’ causing the most short term damage to Auckland property and people legitimately trying to buy.”
         It is this activity which will fall foul of the “bright line” test. Details on IRD website. You can’t dodge it either: you have to give your tax number as part of the conveyancing process! I know this, having recently sold a property – not in Auckland, as it happens.
     • D'Esterre 3.1.4

       21 April 2016 at 9:51 am

       Although there aren’t any silver bullets to fix the housing crisis,bthere is something we can all do: call out real estate agents when they talk up prices. I’ve begun doing this, and I’m delighted to find that others are too. Do it at open homes, in front of other people: you might be surprised…
       Just because an agent tells you that other sales in the area are x, it doesn’t at all follow that this property you’re looking at has to go for a similar price. Ask for RV, insist on them telling you. You don’t have to offer RV: you can start lower. The agent can put forward such offers: it’s the vendor’s choice whether to accept. Challenge those agents!
4. dv 4

   20 April 2016 at 8:37 am

   How about designating some problem housing areas like Auckland as special.

   In those areas
   Have a differential interest rate say +1% payable for infrastructure
   Increased deposit say 40%
   Only residents allowed to own residential property.
   Allow non residents to new build, and charge a transaction tax about say same size as a cc charge
   • CoroDale 4.1

     20 April 2016 at 8:58 am

     yep, and to top it off. All new-build after the about-to-crash-market, should be on a govt state-housing-scheme. Paid with normal long-term loan of Sovereign Money, 0% lending from Reserve Bank NZ, that’s what its for. Pay back our future good selves, at fair rent price, stabilising against UBI and net work rate.
     • dv 4.1.1

       20 April 2016 at 9:02 am

       Yes like that too- interest free loan for new build low income families, and pay as a mortgage
       • s y d 4.1.1.1

         20 April 2016 at 10:20 am

         Maaaate, it’s a supply side problem.
         Come on down to the sunny bay, you’ve never seen so many white vans….we got this shit covered.
         We got special housing areas all over – boom times I tell ya, can’t go wrong.
         You can get work easy as, building houses to house all the people who are building houses. Can’t get em up quick enough.
         Fucken council wankers holdin us back tho. Luckily we’ve rolled those losers and they’re letting us self inspect and self certify so sweet as.
         Simon and Todd, top blokes.
5. esoteric pineapples 5

   20 April 2016 at 8:44 am

   That photo of a man under an umbrella is from Supertramp’s “Crisis,What Crisis” album – arguably their best album. After that they became much more commercial. Given that we are on the verge of environmental catastrophe, the title seems more appropriate than ever.
6. CoroDale 6

   20 April 2016 at 8:45 am

   good comments, yeah I’ll never be able to buy a house, even after the brutal crash (less so in NZ than internationally). Will have to acquire my home, like all the other “people” (/corporations).

   Had calculated that “housing myth” was Nationals last lag. Gona be cold down there at the bottom, poor Nats.
7. Lanthanide 7

   20 April 2016 at 9:04 am

   I think Bridges is suggesting it’s not a crisis, because no-one’s life is in danger, and it’s a medium to long term problem, not an acute short-term problem.

   If that is indeed what he meant, he should have said that, instead of calling it a “top-tier issue”.
   • Sabine 7.1

     20 April 2016 at 9:31 am

     or maybe he is just suggesting that it is not a crisis, as the ones that are important to him, his career and the well being of his party are the ones that are profiting handsomely of the ‘non’ crisis.
     And the others can get fucked. They would not vote National anyways, so why care.
     And if they can’t afford to pay the high rents National will subsidize the landlord with the Accommodation Supplement, so again, you see no crisis. Business, as usual, the market fixing and stuff.

     Incompetence is incompetence the first time, the second time one is a slow learner, the third time one could say its intentional. After 8 years of refusing to see a crisis and do something about it, maybe we can just simply say that National does not give a fuck about Kiwis that can’t afford to buy or rent a house anywhere in this country.

     Maybe Mr. Bridges should go into Ditch Rental. I think that would have a future.
8. Ad 8

   20 April 2016 at 9:37 am

   The city home owners, who are getting rich, vote.

   It’s up to the Opposition to mobilize the young renters into voting.

   The harvest is great, the workers few.
   • adam 8.1

     20 April 2016 at 10:09 am

     So what are you doing?

     Seeing as you oppose any other form of democracy.
   • TC 8.2

     20 April 2016 at 10:12 am

     Exactly but short snappy slogans not long nerdy waffle from the likes of twyford.

     Style over substance, brevity over boring and get some emotion into it and stop behaving like the troughers you seem to be so voters are motivated to remove team shonky
     • maui 8.2.1

       20 April 2016 at 10:29 am

       Twyford knows his stuff and is clear in getting the housing issue points across. He just needs more air time, which probably won’t happen in our media environment. After watching this, its hard for me to see who could do a better job really.
       https://youtu.be/QxUh9Tic4po
       • TC 8.2.1.1

         20 April 2016 at 12:47 pm

         So if he continues in this style and will not get his ponts across due to the lack of airtime, how does that help ?

         He is the best person but where’s the media training so he can cut through with catchy soundbites.

         Folk who read this site are not the target audience if labour want govt back.
   • Gangnam Style 8.3

     20 April 2016 at 10:16 am

     Rent controls like they have in places like Ontario? Would be nice to have rental house WOFs too. I am in my 40s, still rent, the house is crap but it’s home & our landlords are OK. The city we live in still has pretty cheap houses to buy, but both my wife & I have jobs that won’t exist in 10-20 years, been trying to get our shit together & get more qualifications/training. I have good super & wife has Kiwisaver so we going to give home ownership a go but neither of us are too hopeful or fussy or greedy, so should be interesting to see how we go. Wish us luck!
9. NZJester 9

   20 April 2016 at 10:03 am

   I saw this in the NZ Herald

   Reserve Bank tipped to toughen rules for borrowers.
   The Reserve Bank could expand mortgage lending restrictions or take even more radical measures in an effort to head off the housing boom as it rolls down the country, economists say.
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11625346

   That will just make it harder for kiwi’s as a lot of the money the foreign buyers are using to get the houses is coming form overseas banks at much lower rates than available for borrowers here.
   Far from stopping the crisis it will just lock more locals out from the bidding.
   • In Vino 9.1

     20 April 2016 at 7:23 pm

     I thought the same – this favours the rich investors, and penalises only the the less rich hoping to buy their first home.
10. TC 10

    20 April 2016 at 10:05 am

    Bridges arrogance reflects national perfectly.

    This market is performing exactly as they expected as they deliberately set it to run this course.

    Its their brighter future folks and if you cant be involved then tough shit get another job and aspire some more.
11. Expat 11

    20 April 2016 at 10:38 am

    Auckland house prices have seen large jumps in the past, my mother bought a unit in Browns Bay in the late 80’s, and then decided she didn’t want live in Auclkand and wanted to return to Waiheke, she paid $84k for the unit in May and sold it for $140k in Sept of the same year, I, myself bought a home in the upper north shore in the early 90’s (93) and paid $150k for it, in 1997 I sold it for $320k.

    The difference then, was wages were keeping up with cost of living, but the last 8 years has seen wages eroded significantly through typical punitive right wing policies to keep wages low, NZ has the lowest avg incomes in the OECD and the highest CPI.

    A few nights ago on the news there was an article about Chinese investment in the Sydney property market, nearly 7000 new homes or units were bought at a cost of $6b, and a further 3000 existing homes bought at an avg of $1.3m ($4b), and that’s just one group, the state Govt reaped $6b in stamp duty from the market in one year and are happy for things to continue, but, like in NZ, it priced most locals out of the market, particularly first home buyers, and a lot have conceded they will never own their own home.

    Unfortunately, investment in property is currently the best investment with the greatest returns, and until that changes, speculation in the market will continue, I’m in favor of the German way, oversupply and regulate speculation out of the market through excessive TAX on profits, every person needs a roof over their head, and it should be affordable, it’s an absolute necessity of life.
12. Sacha 12

    20 April 2016 at 11:08 am

    Salmond’s title refers to this satirical obituary from last year: http://www.metromag.co.nz/city-life/columnists/david-slack-the-obituary-of-nick-smith-mp/
13. Keith 13

    20 April 2016 at 11:18 am

    The Herald are helpfully directing Aucklands genuine home buyers FAILED by this government to “affordable” locations around NZ. It’s really really helpful and a neat alternative where these buyers who work in this city can seek refuge. It’s a kind of PR soft soap that tells the Muppets that they can simply up sticks and move to Taihape and own their own home. The obvious trouble is moving away from gainful employment solves nothing and these “alternatives” that I assume National want conveyed in the most part will never fly. And there is no evidence the government are doing anything to develop the region’s to fit this scenario.

    Putting on the happy face to this crisis with this kind of useless journalism helps National but few else.
14. Hami Shearlie 14

    20 April 2016 at 11:42 am

    Immigration is what has caused the housing crisis as in Vancouver. Twenty years ago we built a house on our back section after cross-leasing – there was no shortage of houses then and they were not the prices they are now, they were about a third or less of today’s prices – interest rates were much higher but young people could afford a small place to start off. Since then we have seen massive immigration mostly to Auckland, huge numbers of Chinese and Indians on top of the usual people from Europe and the Pacific Islands etc – they all want to come to Auckland so this is why we have the problems now – the Nats keep bringing in these immigrants because they will all vote for them. Simple politics.

    I don’t agree with Lachlan Forsyth re the old people – who does he think paid for all the roads and schools and hospitals etc – those old people went through the Second World War and had a hell of a life early on, that is, if they actually survived the war. They got superannuation when they retired after working hard from their teens on. They got education free sure, but the country could easily afford that then – because very few of those people went to University – only the really academically gifted or wealthy kids went there – the rest of the “old people” went straight out to work from school or into an apprenticeship – not like today where nearly every kid is at Uni whether they deserve to be there or not academically. My old mother knew of very few people who went to University – mainly teachers and perhaps people studying science or medicine etc. I don’t think that many people realise that the taxpayer still picks up about three quarters of the cost of a university education – the kids pay about a quarter – maybe they should try going to the USA and see how much they pay over there?
    • Lanthanide 14.1

      20 April 2016 at 12:55 pm

      Firstly, the ‘old people’ he is mostly talking about are Baby Boomers, ie those born after WW2

      Secondly, although university was free, few people went to it. There are many reasons for that, but the primary ones are that the entrance requirements were much higher, and most importantly, YOU DIDN’T NEED A TERTIARY EDUCATION TO GET A WELL PAYING JOB.

      Saying that kids today are ‘privileged’ because they ‘get’ to go to university is asinine. Kids today HAVE to go to university (or further training such as apprenticeships / polytech) if they want to get a well-paying job.
      • jcuknz 14.1.1

        21 April 2016 at 8:40 am

        But as is increasingly happening today that even with a tertiary qualification there is no certainty of a well paid job. The young end up owing thousands and little income … a right con IMO. Not to mention the many more thousands it has cost the taxpayer to keep the universities in work along with borrowing the money to fund the student loans..
        • Lanthanide 14.1.1.1

          21 April 2016 at 8:52 am

          +1
    • Anno1701 14.2

      20 April 2016 at 1:13 pm

      “the kids pay about a quarter – maybe they should try going to the USA and see how much they pay over there?”

      classic

      pay no attention to the person shafting you, look at the other guy over there getting shafted harder, see you dont know how good you have it that other guy is in REAL pain , now bend over a liiiitle further…
15. millsy 15

    20 April 2016 at 10:55 pm

    The only solution to this crisis is a massive increase in state housing.
    • Pat 15.1

      20 April 2016 at 11:01 pm

      +1…but won’t happen
16. Jenny 16

    21 April 2016 at 4:29 am

    The Question:

    How many Aucklanders are just one illness (or job loss) away from starvation?

    A young Tuakau couple who find themselves in this very situation ask the same question.

    “We don’t drink, we don’t gamble, we aren’t drug addicts, we don’t have heaps of debt… We are thinking about other people in the community who might be struggling as well.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/79090356/3-left-for-weekly-food-leaves-Tuakau-couple-starving

    Take into account that Tuakau is a small rural, (supposedly) low rent town at the very furtherest reaches of South Auckland.

    My guess is that are a hell of a lot working poor in Auckland that barely manage to meet their weekly rents.

    The slightest downturn in the economy, resulting in job losses, especially in the Auckland region could see a Tsunami of these working poor out in the street, or starving.

    And what about the middle class who have been investing in property to bolster their falling incomes by syphoning income from the low income renters?

    What happens to these middle class investors, when the high rents they have been demanding to cover the mortgages they took out for their investment properties are no longer sustainable?

    Will they be driven into the ranks of the working poor?

    What about the 1 percenters at the top of the heap?

    Or the upper Middle class National voters that support them?

    Will they still be partying it up?

    Time for another flag referendum?

    Or maybe a new sports stadium?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11605561

    Meanwhile at the bottom, the whole creaky edifice is in danger of collapsing.

    A spectre is haunting Auckland, that spectre is the property market.
    • s y d 16.1

      21 April 2016 at 8:49 am

      Remember, we’re on the cusp of something special.
      Also a crisis is also a good way to really get the programme going.

      The last sacred cows will be sacrificed on the altar on TINA.

      We will eat next seasons seed.
    • Sabine 16.2

      21 April 2016 at 8:54 am

      not just Aucklanders.

      We really need to stop making this an “Auckland” problem.
      This is a problem that is everywhere all over the country. Heck, a year ago Tuakau was Tuakau and not a suburb of Auckland.

      And fwiw, these guys have a rental (and not even an expensive one), what is doing them in is a Welfare system that does not help cover the basics while sick and unable to provide for themselves. And that is what the Welfare system should do especially considering that these guys did pay taxes.

      And the bottom has already collapsed, it is just now that others that previously thought it would only happen to the ones that make bad lifestyle choices like having kids, working in a dying industry, or smoking, are not getting hit by it. And it becomes more and more visual. Hence the ‘should we outlaw begging” screams from certain people in certain councils.

      It would be nice to know what happened to the 750+ Fonterra staff that lost their jobs last year. A. how many have found jobs, b. how many are still on the benefit, c. how many are in the process of loosing their homes, d. how many only hold on their homes by pawning off any and all possessions they may have.
17. jcuknz 17

    21 April 2016 at 8:44 am

    *100 Jenny
    And everybody from the politicians upwards are shaking in their boots for fear the whole edifice will crumble. 160% debt level we hear this morning.
    • Colonial Viper 17.1

      21 April 2016 at 9:09 am

      They’ve gotten extremely good at the game of pretend and extend.
18. jcuknz 18

    21 April 2016 at 9:00 am

    Once upon a time I had a dream after reading ‘The Responsible Society’ and was currently paying four pounds a week rent out of income eleven pw. for half a flat.

    The dream was that there would be a warm and dry place for everybody who wanted it … nothing flash but what they actually NEEDED .. like the single mens accomodation at Trentham with communal abulution block upwards as they got married and a further move to accomodate children if they arrived. Rent based on your income.
    If you wanted better then go to the private sector.

    A dream just as far away now as when it came to me in the 1950’s.
19. AsleepWhileWalking 19

    21 April 2016 at 3:33 pm

    Our future?
    http://financialsurvivalnetwork.com/2016/04/jefferson-lilly-theres-gold-thar-trailer-parks/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS