If National wins ...

[fungus pudding]

I think he made a mistake in talking about getting house price increases down to 2%pa. The number doesn't need to be quantified - it's the trend down that's important and pinning the number "2" out there may come back to haunt him - if he ever has the opportunity to do anything about the matter.

He won't.
.

[Sgt Pepper]

Interesting article in the Herald about the tension between the Reserve Bank, especially Grant Spencer and John Key regarding the housing market. As I am now leading the Sharetrader stock picking contest I think they both should listen to me.

[RGR367]

......
Bill was saying Labour will have $2bill as a fund, and with that will build 100,000 houses. Then Bill says that as each house costs at least $500,000, they only have enough for 4,000 houses. He looked quite pleased with his maths. No-one said anything (Rawden, I'm disappointed in your brainpower), then they repeated this clever dig on the next news, and I guess we'll hear it all day.

The truth: Labour is going to sell those houses as they go, recycling the fund. Each house they sell will free up another rental, there will be many thousands of newly trained employed people to do the extra work, with all kinds of skills needed. These homes will be affordable, the govt doesn't need to make a profit on them because they'll get their own kickback in PAYE taxes, GST, having less on the dole, less homeless etc. I would assume that since the state owns the houses, they can choose who buys them. They would be live-in buyers, not speculators, and there would be rules on the turnover of these houses.

Kiwibuild is a great vision from Labour - National cannot put up such an idea without looking incredibly lame - so I see just this one policy as an election winner.
.........

Is $500K for a house really affordable? By the time Labour can get this rolling, say in 2018, how much will this $500K cost in real money? And what about tax, will it be raised to fund this housing bill?

[elZorro]

Is $500K for a house really affordable? By the time Labour can get this rolling, say in 2018, how much will this $500K cost in real money? And what about tax, will it be raised to fund this housing bill?

I would think that Labour will be tidying up state houses as well, working out a correct treatment and prevention for P contamination issues (different scales), and in general the pricing for existing houses at the lower end of the market should settle back a bit. If you were a building materials supplier and the State rocked up looking for a bulk discount, and with a spotless credit record, I'm sure some deals would be done. Likewise, with land supply there is sure to be some crown land that will be in the melting pot. As for extra levied tax, why would that be needed, when the boost to the economy and the normal tax base will cover any shortfall in sales income.

[winner69]

Interesting quiz

http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/11-...ittle-in-2016/


I'll own up - i got less than 50% right ....maybe should have read the question properly or something

[Daytr]

If he achieves anywhere near that sort of stability I don't think anyone will quibble, besides those who would rather argue the small stuff than actually achieve for the greater good.

I think he made a mistake in talking about getting house price increases down to 2%pa. The number doesn't need to be quantified - it's the trend down that's important and pinning the number "2" out there may come back to haunt him - if he ever has the opportunity to do anything about the matter.

[Daytr]

Well apparently we don't have any inflation, or less than 2% which is quite ridiculous in itself.
Labour have said they will work on the supply chain, i.e. materials.
NZ pays a ridiculous premium on building materials so there could be a reasonable saving there.

I would think that Labour will be tidying up state houses as well, working out a correct treatment and prevention for P contamination issues (different scales), and in general the pricing for existing houses at the lower end of the market should settle back a bit. If you were a building materials supplier and the State rocked up looking for a bulk discount, and with a spotless credit record, I'm sure some deals would be done. Likewise, with land supply there is sure to be some crown land that will be in the melting pot. As for extra levied tax, why would that be needed, when the boost to the economy and the normal tax base will cover any shortfall in sales income.

[elZorro]

Interesting quiz

http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/11-...ittle-in-2016/


I'll own up - i got less than 50% right ....maybe should have read the question properly or something

I achieved 9/12 W69, should have done better I guess. One of those Key quotes sure sounded like it was Labour's. The charts do show a marked house inflation earlier in the 1999-2008 period. Everything went up, farm prices too. The difference is that this appeared to be based on real income increases. The Labour govt had a surplus every year, and paid off a lot of old debt. National hasn't done that at all. I think they have figured out that immigration can be a useful GDP-increasing tool. However, they're stretching the available infrastructure.

[elZorro]

As one of the few posters brave enough to list Hamilton as my address, I couldn't resist this article.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/8199...y+12+July+2016

[macduffy]

Well apparently we don't have any inflation, or less than 2% which is quite ridiculous in itself.
Labour have said they will work on the supply chain, i.e. materials.
NZ pays a ridiculous premium on building materials so there could be a reasonable saving there.

We must all be imagining all those price rises around us. Either that, or house prices, rents, local body rates, building materials etc must have a "Nil" weighting in the CPI!