Labour govt 2020-23

[artemis]

And my post was in answer to the idea from Balance that we should do as Singapore do. It was then pointed out that they use their Sovereign fund and that National (Muldoon) scrapped ours way back.
Context is everything!

Of course, Key kept saying that there wasn't a housing problem so wouldn't do anything to help.

IIRC Mr Key called it a housing challenge. And personally I think that was about right. National seems to have changed their tune a bit about that recently. So if it was a crisis then what is it now?

You could say National sold thousands of social houses, but suggest you don't.

[Balance]

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/ardern-wants-tackle-housing-crisis-multiple-fronts-amid-unsustainable-price-growth

Oh, so it's now a decade old problem according to the one who promised to fix the housing problem with Kiwibuild.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2016/07/labour-kiwibuild-money-spent-more-than-20-times.html

Never mind the fact that she and her team of incompetents have turned a crisis into a full blown disaster.

[Logen Ninefingers]

And what part would you say the Reserve Bank has played in the full blown disaster? They are the ones pouring petrol on the fire via ultra-low interest rates and money printing.

[Balance]

And what part would you say the Reserve Bank has played in the full blown disaster? They are the ones pouring petrol on the fire via ultra-low interest rates and money printing.

It’s a global thing and as I have written before, the alternative is a full blown global depression.

You choose.

[Logen Ninefingers]

When most of the ‘funding for lending’ billions are going straight into the property ‘market’ rather than productive businesses, are you saying that we need the ‘wealth effect’ of an ultra-hot housing market to stave off recession?

And if you are, why are you criticising the government for a situation you believe is necessary?

[Balance]

When most of the ‘funding for lending’ billions are going straight into the property ‘market’ rather than productive businesses, are you saying that we need the ‘wealth effect’ of an ultra-hot housing market to stave off recession?

And if you are, why are you criticising the government for a situation you believe is necessary?

Because this Labour government led by Cynical Cindy has not come up with a single effective policy & a strategy to increase the supply of affordable homes - after pledging to do so.

And still has not got a clue what to do!

I have mentioned the Singapore housing model - what model has Cindy come up with?

[artemis]

.... I have mentioned the Singapore housing model - what model has Cindy come up with?

Cover of Vogue, silly.

[dobby41]

I have mentioned the Singapore housing model - what model has Cindy come up with?

Unfortunately they'd have to come up with something that would work - you just have to have an opinion.

[dobby41]

Never mind the fact that she and her team of incompetents have turned a crisis into a full blown disaster.

What I don't understand is that in the 2 months Sep/Oct last year 1000 families were added - where did they live before? Did we have 1000 families come in from overseas who weren't living here before and take their houses?
The problem needs more analysis to understand what is happening.

By the way - how did the Govt turn it into a disaster if they did nothing? National did nothing.
Aren't 'market forces' supposed to solve everything - keep the Govt out of it?

[jonu]

What I don't understand is that in the 2 months Sep/Oct last year 1000 families were added - where did they live before? Did we have 1000 families come in from overseas who weren't living here before and take their houses?
The problem needs more analysis to understand what is happening.

By the way - how did the Govt turn it into a disaster if they did nothing? National did nothing.
Aren't 'market forces' supposed to solve everything - keep the Govt out of it?

And you've gone full circle back to Logen's argument. Market forces are being disrupted by Reserve Bank policy and Government Rent Subsidies.

[Balance]

What I don't understand is that in the 2 months Sep/Oct last year 1000 families were added - where did they live before? Did we have 1000 families come in from overseas who weren't living here before and take their houses?
The problem needs more analysis to understand what is happening.

By the way - how did the Govt turn it into a disaster if they did nothing? National did nothing.
Aren't 'market forces' supposed to solve everything - keep the Govt out of it?

3 years into Cindy’s government and you are still busy making excuses and playing the blame game!

No wonder the housing disaster escalates month by month!

[Balance]

Cover of Vogue, silly.

You, Sir - are a CHAMPION!

Love it!

[iceman]

What I don't understand is that in the 2 months Sep/Oct last year 1000 families were added - where did they live before? Did we have 1000 families come in from overseas who weren't living here before and take their houses?
The problem needs more analysis to understand what is happening.

By the way - how did the Govt turn it into a disaster if they did nothing? National did nothing.
Aren't 'market forces' supposed to solve everything - keep the Govt out of it?

You can hardly say the Government is not in the housing markets with all it's social housing, accommodation supplements and we could go on and on. Government is seriously distorting the housing market with a suite of scatter gun like approach that achieve absolutely nothing. Not just this Government either although they've made things a lot worse, greatly assisted by the RBNZ.

[iceman]

You, Sir - are a CHAMPION!

Love it!

I'm not sure artemis appreciates being called a Sir !!

[dobby41]

3 years into Cindy’s government and you are still busy making excuses and playing the blame game!

No wonder the housing disaster escalates month by month!

I'm not actually.
I agree that Labour failed (as expected) on the Kiwibuild - a farce!
I think the question is still valid - I haven't assumed any answer.


What I don't understand is that in the 2 months Sep/Oct last year 1000 families were added - where did they live before? Did we have 1000 families come in from overseas who weren't living here before and take their houses?
The problem needs more analysis to understand what is happening.

By the way - how did the Govt turn it into a disaster if they did nothing?

[dobby41]

And you've gone full circle back to Logen's argument. Market forces are being disrupted by Reserve Bank policy and Government Rent Subsidies.


You can hardly say the Government is not in the housing markets with all it's social housing, accommodation supplements and we could go on and on. Government is seriously distorting the housing market with a suite of scatter gun like approach that achieve absolutely nothing. Not just this Government either although they've made things a lot worse, greatly assisted by the RBNZ.

I agree that the rent subsidies are wrong.
The Govt should house those who can't afford a real rent (or help social housing providers do it).
The private sector should house the rest - students, those just starting out, more wealthy people who don't want to buy or are between houses etc.

I believe that what the RBNZ does is part of market forces.

[Balance]

Unfortunately they'd have to come up with something that would work - you just have to have an opinion.

The Singapore model would work in NZ - NZ did the same thing during the 50s to the early 70s. In fact, Singapore sent teams to study how countries like Australia, NZ and UK provided state housing! The massive state housing building program in NZ was discontinued due to budgetary constraints and never restarted again.


You can hardly say the Government is not in the housing markets with all it's social housing, accommodation supplements and we could go on and on. Government is seriously distorting the housing market with a suite of scatter gun like approach that achieve absolutely nothing. Not just this Government either although they've made things a lot worse, greatly assisted by the RBNZ.

Billions of dollars spent each year on rental subsidies, emergency housing and for what? Creating expanding state dependency and an ever growing list.

[dobby41]

The Singapore model would work in NZ - NZ did the same thing during the 50s to the early 70s!

Doesn't overcome the issue of trades people - that's what sunk Kiwibuild as much as anything else.
The Singapore model builds up, in the 50's to 70's we built out.
The biggest problem with housing affordability is land cost and infrastructure financing.
Both could be helped by the Toronto (I think) model. When land is re-zoned for housing it suddenly become worth more - a windfall for the owner.
In Toronto a portion of that windfall goes to the city for the infrastructure needed.

[Balance]

Doesn't overcome the issue of trades people - that's what sunk Kiwibuild as much as anything else.
The Singapore model builds up, in the 50's to 70's we built out.
The biggest problem with housing affordability is land cost and infrastructure financing.
Both could be helped by the Toronto (I think) model. When land is re-zoned for housing it suddenly become worth more - a windfall for the owner.
In Toronto a portion of that windfall goes to the city for the infrastructure needed.

Building up or out - costs will be the same as high rises are expensive to build! Ask any apartment and high rise developers!

And remember that Singapore imports all of its building materials - all of it! So how the heck can they build affordable housing? Answer - scale & buying power.

We have land for Africa in NZ!

Re Toronto - now that's sensible and that's what China does too. Why not learn from other countries' experiences rather than this nonsense of throwing money with no properly defined outcomes?

Re issue of trades people - import them. That's what Singapore does. Change building methods - which we are now belatedly doing with modular & terrace housing.

[dobby41]

Re Toronto - now that's sensible and that's what China does too. Why not learn from other countries' experiences rather than this nonsense of throwing money with no properly defined outcomes?

Re issue of trades people - import them. That's what Singapore does. Change building methods - which we are now belatedly doing with modular & terrace housing.
We have issues around peoples expectations.
The 50's build was interesting - produced a huge number of houses that looked the same but people were happy with that, now the bitch and moan.
Take some of peoples unearned profit (land value change) and they will be called Communist.
Import labour - you did see how the migrant labour were housed in Singapore? And the Covid infection rate - over half got infected. Probably not the conditions that would be acceptable here.
It is hard to take different countries systems piecemeal and expect the same outcomes.

Having said that - more could be done.
Apprentices is a good start.
Overcome the infrastructure financing issues would help.
Break the materials strangle-hold the current players have - the Govt could import materials in bulk for their jobs (has to still be BRANZ approved of course - we don't want to cut corners and create the next 'leaky home' like disaster).

[777]

I always thought that the councils took huge amounts off subdivision developers for the infrastructure costs.

[dobby41]

I always thought that the councils took huge amounts off subdivision developers for the infrastructure costs.

They do - and the developers then charge the buyer. So an asset that should last 50+ years is paid for up front - hence the high cost of sections.
The developers also paid the land owner heaps because the land value suddenly went up when it was re-zoned.

[artemis]

I'm not sure artemis appreciates being called a Sir !!

Heh, thinking about transitioning as then I get to be a victim and this kind government will tip loads of dosh my way.

[BeeBop]

I always thought that the councils took huge amounts off subdivision developers for the infrastructure costs.

For a 600k priced unit (inc GST), the infrastructure cost allocation is around 25k of that total pricing structure.

[Balance]

We have issues around peoples expectations.
The 50's build was interesting - produced a huge number of houses that looked the same but people were happy with that, now the bitch and moan.
Take some of peoples unearned profit (land value change) and they will be called Communist.
Import labour - you did see how the migrant labour were housed in Singapore? And the Covid infection rate - over half got infected. Probably not the conditions that would be acceptable here.
It is hard to take different countries systems piecemeal and expect the same outcomes.

Having said that - more could be done.
Apprentices is a good start.
Overcome the infrastructure financing issues would help.
Break the materials strangle-hold the current players have - the Govt could import materials in bulk for their jobs (has to still be BRANZ approved of course - we don't want to cut corners and create the next 'leaky home' like disaster).

Why do we have to blindly follow other countries' policies and said practices? We learn, adapt and do even better.

Currently, housing solutions are all piecemeal and ad his with no defined outcomes - just more state dependency and despondency.

Think of what the billions of dollars wasted each year on rental subsidies and emergency accommodation could be used for - a huge pool of funds to properly build houses on an ongoing basis and long term solution.

[artemis]

Building up or out - costs will be the same as high rises are expensive to build! Ask any apartment and high rise developers! ....

There is a potential maybe actual issue with high rise. People don't want to live in them. In the past investors have bought them as rentals, and if that slows then developers will not be able to finance the project. Dead in the water. The government has set aside a few hundred mill to prop up developers but who knows what that impact will be.

Investors have been buying up at similar rate to the last few years, except for the last couple of months when sales to the sector have been up. Why? Because LVRs are back in a few weeks and the government has announced there is a plan to have a plan (to have a plan?) to fix a housing crisis. Good chance that will impact 'evil and greedy landlords' (called speculators by politicians) so best to hop in now.

Even terrace housing is struggling to sell, as witness hundreds of apparently affordable Kiwibuild homes available to buy but selling ever so slowly with hundreds more under construction. And some being bought by taxpayers probably for social housing.

[dobby41]

Why do we have to blindly follow other countries' policies and said practices? We learn, adapt and do even better.

Currently, housing solutions are all piecemeal and ad his with no defined outcomes - just more state dependency and despondency.

Think of what the billions of dollars wasted each year on rental subsidies and emergency accommodation could be used for - a huge pool of funds to properly build houses on an ongoing basis and long term solution.

Emergency accommodation is wasted in the sense that it would be better to have real houses instead. But you can't divert that emergency money into houses as then there would be a bunch of people on the street in the meantime (while the houses were built).
Rental subsidies of some sort will always be necessary as part of the welfare state - unless we pay people more and many don't seem to like that idea (people against raising the minimum wage).

Not a simple problem and there won't be a simple solution.

[artemis]

Emergency accommodation is wasted in the sense that it would be better to have real houses instead. But you can't divert that emergency money into houses as then there would be a bunch of people on the street in the meantime (while the houses were built).....

Tens of thousands of vacant rentals, homes for sale (including Kiwibuild) and ads for flatmates. Maybe those in emergency housing should be supported into some of them. Cheaper than motels. And they are already there and built right now.

Maybe it is not so much an actual shortage then.

[Logen Ninefingers]

I agree that the rent subsidies are wrong.
The Govt should house those who can't afford a real rent (or help social housing providers do it).
The private sector should house the rest - students, those just starting out, more wealthy people who don't want to buy or are between houses etc.

I believe that what the RBNZ does is part of market forces.

I believe that what the RBNZ does is part of market forces.

You cannot be serious. You really cannot. Whenever market forces look like tipping the balance in the buyers favour, we get this 'Deus ex Machina' of the Reserve Bank swooping in from the heavens and lowering interest rates, and now printing money - to the tune of $100 Billion to fund government spending and $28 Billion to retail banks for so-called 'Funding for Lending'....basically being pumped straight into the property market & bypassing savers / depositors.

This is not market forces. It really isn't. If the market was allowed to do it's own thing without the high-handed / heavy handed intervention at the stroke of a computer keyboard, then rising interest rates would be rewarding savers and bond holders & curbing speculative investment. This would quickly moderate house prices and start to restore the (broken) balance between saving and lending.

We see another poster saying "they had to do it, otherwise recession". We have made recession a dirty word, some monstrous thing that must not be allowed. Recessions are usually short and sharp, are nowhere near as bad as the hysterics make out, and offer the chance of 'creative destruction' and renewal. Bad businesses fail, malinvestment is punished, and the economic up-tick that results does so with the economy in a stronger position.

This is the steady creeping of the aims of socialism: something failing due to a bad choice is 'unfair', therefore we must extend the blanket of socialism across all households and businesses when it comes to the consequences of their capitalistic endeavours. Everyone will be bailed-out if things go wrong.

With the economic cycle being suppressed, it becomes constipated with debt: we are just headed for stagnation as we move forward loaded down with debt and with no incentive to save or to invest in the productive parts of the economy.

Now we come to the politicians meddling in all of this: Labour changed the mandate of the Reserve Bank to include full employmrent as one of its prime goals. So now the Reserve Bank must act to defeat the economic cycle. What was previously the preserve of the government via economic policy has now been pushed on to the Reserve Bank, muddling their focus with both inflation & employment targets.

We have moved to a system of "full Keynes, all the time" - rather than dealing with a clear recession with a short, sharp burst of government spending, economists and the government and Reserve Bank feel they have to throw the kitchen sink at it every time GDP figures start to dip. They are clearly over-egging the pudding, and we see the consequences in out fo control asset prices.

So this is not market forces as all. It is the exact opposite. It is total control by the state, in an increasing - and ultimately futile - effort to defeat the economic cycle.

[Panda-NZ-]

The alternative is deflation and the effects of that.
The current policy is good all round but there are side effects. I'd rather have that problem than everything else though.

For many kiwis housing is their retirement plan and they don't really want it solved. Similar to australia and the UK in this respect.

[Logen Ninefingers]

The alternative is deflation and the effects of that.
The current policy is good all round but there are side effects. I'd rather have that problem than everything else though.

For many kiwis housing is their retirement plan and they don't really want it solved. Similar to australia and the UK in this respect.

I truly and sincerely believe people like you are the real problem. The property 'market' (ponzi scheme) is a government guaranteed rort that is costing us billions and will end up costing us trillions. The syphoning of taxpayer money into the pockets of speculators is happening in many forms, not least of which is landlords increasing rents and taxpayers paying for it via 'accomodation supplements' (taxpayer subsidies).....which further incentivizes investing in the housing 'market' and leads to higher house prices. It is a vicious cycle with no end in sight.

Just saying housing is many people's retirement plan is a rather bland answer. Fair enough to have a plan for retirement, but this system of outrageously large capital gains sustained and gauranteed by central bank / government stimulus and subsidies & suppression of interest rates....it is just taking the p*ss, it really is.

Unfortunately for everyone, a large group of very greedy and entitled people are leadimng the country down the road to hell.

[macduffy]

Tens of thousands of vacant rentals, homes for sale (including Kiwibuild) and ads for flatmates. Maybe those in emergency housing should be supported into some of them. Cheaper than motels. And they are already there and built right now.

Maybe it is not so much an actual shortage then.

It doesn't help much if the unsold Kiwibuild homes are in, say, Wanaka - which some were - but the unhoused families are in, say, Auckland. I don't think there is much doubt that there is an actual shortage of housing in places where it's needed.

[artemis]

It doesn't help much if the unsold Kiwibuild homes are in, say, Wanaka - which some were - but the unhoused families are in, say, Auckland. I don't think there is much doubt that there is an actual shortage of housing in places where it's needed.

Quite a few Kiwibuild places available in Auckland.

[Balance]

Quite a few Kiwibuild places available in Auckland.

Now why would anyone (in the right mind) buy (and invest) in a Kiwibuild home if they know what they are doing?

I have heard stories of owners waking up one fine morning and find that state tenants have moved in next door, and bluntly, we all know what that means for property values.

[artemis]

Now why would anyone (in the right mind) buy (and invest) in a Kiwibuild home if they know what they are doing?

I have heard stories of owners waking up one fine morning and find that state tenants have moved in next door, and bluntly, we all know what that means for property values.

Completely agree. Buyers have to live in their purchase for a 3 year period and not necessarily with nice marketing managers and junior doctors next door. Though I hear on the grapevine that it is easy enough to get an exemption. Then the buyers will move on and tenants will move in. Huge developments like Unitec were to be a mix of Kiwibuild, social housing and private sector.

No need to hold our breath though - it was estimated that at current progress Kiwibuild would be done and dusted in 400 years. Of course that was before the Great Kiwibuild Reset and now there seems to be no plan at all.

[Balance]

Emergency accommodation is wasted in the sense that it would be better to have real houses instead. But you can't divert that emergency money into houses as then there would be a bunch of people on the street in the meantime (while the houses were built).
Rental subsidies of some sort will always be necessary as part of the welfare state - unless we pay people more and many don't seem to like that idea (people against raising the minimum wage).

Not a simple problem and there won't be a simple solution.

NZ desperately needs a circuit breaker to stop this vicious cycle now of high rents for those who cannot afford ever increasing house prices which in turn push rents up even higher etc etc etc.

I honestly thought Kiwibuild was a brilliant idea which coupled with a CGT would be the circuit breaker.

Unfortunately .... :t_down:

[dobby41]

NZ desperately needs a circuit breaker to stop this vicious cycle now of high rents for those who cannot afford ever increasing house prices which in turn push rents up even higher etc etc etc.

I honestly thought Kiwibuild was a brilliant idea which coupled with a CGT would be the circuit breaker.

Unfortunately .... :t_down:

You're right - we do.
And to get there we need more investment before we can make the savings.
Kiwibuild was a good idea but the numbers were never going to work.

[FTG]

The alternative is deflation and the effects of that.
The current policy is good all round but there are side effects. I'd rather have that problem than everything else though.

For many kiwis housing is their retirement plan and they don't really want it solved. Similar to australia and the UK in this respect.

Sort of akin to an alcoholic who would rather remain in a drunken state so they don't have to experience the painful hangover.

Panda; don't lose sight of the painful reality that ALL artificial "highs" will eventually be followed by artificial lows.

[Balance]

Sort of akin to an alcoholic who would rather remain in a drunken state so they don't have to experience the painful hangover.

Panda; don't lose sight of the painful reality that ALL artificial "highs" will eventually be followed by artificial lows.

Not with property.

[artemis]

NZ desperately needs a circuit breaker to stop this vicious cycle now of high rents for those who cannot afford ever increasing house prices which in turn push rents up even higher etc etc etc.

I honestly thought Kiwibuild was a brilliant idea which coupled with a CGT would be the circuit breaker.

Unfortunately .... :t_down:

Well what about substantially and temporarily increasing the Accommodation Supplement for those in emergency housing. Give them a couple of hundred a week extra for 6 months, paid to the landlord, plus budgeting support. Other things being equal that will make it possible for them to pay private sector rents.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Sort of akin to an alcoholic who would rather remain in a drunken state so they don't have to experience the painful hangover.

Panda; don't lose sight of the painful reality that ALL artificial "highs" will eventually be followed by artificial lows.

Yes, it’s like saying the answer to drug abuse is more drug abuse - in ever greater quantities - simply because people don’t want to deal with the consequences.

The problem is that the ‘drug abusers’ have control of the government. Both major parties rely on their support and are now effectively held hostage by them - so this large group can continue to loot the government finances and banking system with impunity. It won’t end well - but for the moment, this selfish greedfest continues.

[FTG]

Not with property.

Even with property I'm afraid. :-(

The Japanese asset (read property) bubble of the mid-late 80's is a classic case in point.

Of course, as we know but sometimes forget, any market can remain irrational for far longer than the anticipated. But just like the law of gravity the universal law of artificial highs eventually being followed by an artificial low ALWAYS prevails.

[Logen Ninefingers]

A property crash, as with most things (financial crises, pandemics, major wars) is simply not conceivable to most human minds. They can’t believe it will happen, until it happens. They delight in pointing out just how long those who make the warnings have been ‘wrong’ for. But history tells us that property markets can - and do - crash. Most notably it happened in Japan, it happened in the US, it happened in Ireland. All major and advanced economies.

[Baa_Baa]

Yes, it’s like saying the answer to drug abuse is more drug abuse - in ever greater quantities - simply because people don’t want to deal with the consequences.

The problem is that the ‘drug abusers’ have control of the government. Both major parties rely on their support and are now effectively held hostage by them - so this large group can continue to loot the government finances and banking system with impunity. It won’t end well - but for the moment, this selfish greedfest continues.

It's far from ideal, and I admire the implication of your idealogical position being (excuse my interpretation) what's best for all of society, however if you have seen that it is going to continue for a while but at some point it all turns to custard, regardless of how that happens, at some stage one needs imo to take a selfish viewpoint and decide what they, personally, are going to do. The instincts of self accumulation and preservation of wealth is deeply rooted in those who have it. They also presumably in toto have the smarts to ride the dysfunction while it lasts and be gone when the **** hits the fan.

[Logen Ninefingers]

It's far from ideal, and I admire the implication of your idealogical position being (excuse my interpretation) what's best for all of society, however if you have seen that it is going to continue for a while but at some point it all turns to custard, regardless of how that happens, at some stage one needs imo to take a selfish viewpoint and decide what they, personally, are going to do. The instincts of self accumulation and preservation of wealth is deeply rooted in those who have it. They also presumably in toto have the smarts to ride the dysfunction while it lasts and be gone when the **** hits the fan.

I guess what’s best for society is one aspect, but when inflation shows up its the purchasing power of all our money that goes down the tubes, so there is certainly self interest there as well. When will general price inflation kick in? Again, some say that because it hasn’t happened yet it won’t happen. If it does we will have big problems, with house prices having far outstripped wages and salaries.

The idea that there are a whole bunch of savy people out there that can time the housing market and will be able to get out has already proven to be a fallacy I would say. Take this COVID crisis for example: all those people that overpaid needed saving. Huge fears the property market would crash, kitchen sink thrown into saving it, market responds by taking all that stimulus and rocketing higher. So it’s an attempted bail-out that’s gone pear-shaped.

In a bad market, houses are highly illiquid. I can list shares and sell them in a minute. That’s a liquid investment. You can’t do that with a house. So a nice quick escape during a crash wouldn’t be possible I’m afraid.

[fungus pudding]

I guess what’s best for society is one aspect, but when inflation shows up its the purchasing power of all our money that goes down the tubes, so there is certainly self interest there as well. When will general price inflation kick in? Again, some say that because it hasn’t happened yet it won’t happen. If it does we will have big problems, with house prices having far outstripped wages and salaries.

The idea that there are a whole bunch of savy people out there that can time the housing market and will be able to get out has already proven to be a fallacy I would say. Take this COVID crisis for example: all those people that overpaid needed saving. Huge fears the property market would crash, kitchen sink thrown into saving it, market responds by taking all that stimulus and rocketing higher. So it’s an attempted bail-out that’s gone pear-shaped.

In a bad market, houses are highly illiquid. I can list shares and sell them in a minute. That’s a liquid investment. You can’t do that with a house. So a nice quick escape during a crash wouldn’t be possible I’m afraid.

You can do that with a house; albeit at a punishing price - just like shares at the wrong time.

[Balance]

The long term trend of house prices is up.

Unlike shares, a house is a home as well as an investment.

Location obviously is all important as is long term thinking.

[iceman]

An article written by Steven Joyce on housing in the Herald today worth reading

[artemis]

An article written by Steven Joyce on housing in the Herald today worth reading

Yes it is worth reading (paywalled). One aspect Mr Joyce mentions is that it is very common to hear that National caused a housing crisis by selling off a massive number of state houses. Mr Joyce correctly points out that most of these went to Community Housing Providers at a serious discount and their tenants are eligible for income related (cheap as chips) rent and support from the CHP.

Of the others sold off most went to Panuku and similar for redevelopment, eg redevelopment. Some were sold because there was no demand for the size and the location - there was rather less demand then and none at all in some places.

Now it's back to central government to build, manage and be kind to tenants.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Yes it is worth reading (paywalled). One aspect Mr Joyce mentions is that it is very common to hear that National caused a housing crisis by selling off a massive number of state houses. Mr Joyce correctly points out that most of these went to Community Housing Providers at a serious discount and their tenants are eligible for income related (cheap as chips) rent and support from the CHP.

Of the others sold off most went to Panuku and similar for redevelopment, eg redevelopment. Some were sold because there was no demand for the size and the location - there was rather less demand then and none at all in some places.

Now it's back to central government to build, manage and be kind to tenants.

The Labour whinge doesn’t make sense anyway, because if they sold a house and someone bought it, that hasn’t reduced the housing stock. Someone will still be living in that house.

But this is another example of Labour trying to make out that the housing crisis is about homelessness, rather than it always having been an umbrella term that covers both the homelessness issue and the housing affordability issue.

I find it deeply cynical that Labour has pivoted from the clear emphasis on KiwiBuild (addressing the affordability issue) to now focus almost solely on social housing. It makes me believe that there was never any intention to look after the people that originally voted for Labour because they believed Labour’s promises around KiwiBuild. Labour simply needed their votes at that election, and did what it took to secure them by telling lies. It represents the biggest broken promise in NZ political history in my view. And yet you often see their supporters saying “at least they tried”. The alleged try was absolutely pitiful, mainly seeming to consist of photos of Twyford standing round in flouro vest and hard hat grinning.

[Panda-NZ-]

National brought in 73k migrants per year to fill low tier roles with no idea where to put them. This "legacy issue" has been lumped onto labour's desk I think.

[artemis]

.... I find it deeply cynical that Labour has pivoted from the clear emphasis on KiwiBuild (addressing the affordability issue) to now focus almost solely on social housing. It makes me believe that there was never any intention to look after the people that originally voted for Labour because they believed Labour’s promises around KiwiBuild. Labour simply needed their votes at that election, and did what it took to secure them by telling lies. It represents the biggest broken promise in NZ political history in my view. And yet you often see their supporters saying “at least they tried”. The alleged try was absolutely pitiful, mainly seeming to consist of photos of Twyford standing round in flouro vest and hard hat grinning.

There is a huge difference between social housing and Kiwibuild. It is control. Social housing - only one party in charge of the transaction so they can say and do what they like. Kiwibuild - many parties need to be lined up, a much more complex proposition. Too complex for an inexperienced* government despite Kiwibuild being Labour flagship policy for years.

*being polite rather than correctly descriptive

[artemis]

National brought in 73k migrants per year to fill low tier roles with no idea where to put them. This "legacy issue" has been lumped onto labour's desk I think.

Were they all homeless. Living in cars and under bridges? Of course not.

[jonu]

National brought in 73k migrants per year to fill low tier roles with no idea where to put them. This "legacy issue" has been lumped onto labour's desk I think.

Nonsense. Despite Winnie and Cindy pledging to reduce immigration, pre-covid numbers were almost identical.

[macduffy]

No, Logen. I think it was incompetence on the part of the Labour govt rather than a calculated broken promise. Unfortunately, the new model govt doesn't look any better.

[Panda-NZ-]

Were they all homeless. Living in cars and under bridges? Of course not.

It did go down by a third pre-pandemic.

Stephen joyce seems to think we should start a house building program during a pandemic.

What happens if we lock down again? who will pay the workers during their weeks off?

[jonu]

It did go down by a third pre-pandemic.

Stephen joyce seems to think we should start a house building program during a pandemic.

What happens if we lock down again? who will pay the workers during their weeks off?

Really Panda-NZ? Are you saying Labour are not going to build houses? Something they have repeatedly pledged to do and failed miserably in their targets. How are we to take you seriously?

[Balance]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/124038161/low-income-kiwi-households-struggling-with-unaffordable-housing-oecd-report-says

NZ the worse in housing affordability according to OECD - Cindy’s doing

[fungus pudding]

The Labour whinge doesn’t make sense anyway, because if they sold a house and someone bought it, that hasn’t reduced the housing stock. Someone will still be living in that house.

But this is another example of Labour trying to make out that the housing crisis is about homelessness, rather than it always having been an umbrella term that covers both the homelessness issue and the housing affordability issue.

I find it deeply cynical that Labour has pivoted from the clear emphasis on KiwiBuild (addressing the affordability issue) to now focus almost solely on social housing. It makes me believe that there was never any intention to look after the people that originally voted for Labour because they believed Labour’s promises around KiwiBuild. Labour simply needed their votes at that election, and did what it took to secure them by telling lies. It represents the biggest broken promise in NZ political history in my view. And yet you often see their supporters saying “at least they tried”. The alleged try was absolutely pitiful, mainly seeming to consist of photos of Twyford standing round in flouro vest and hard hat grinning.

Remember Labour were wild and loose with their 2017 promises because they didn't expect to win, and they didn't of course. but landed in the hot-seat thanks to Winnie.

[Panda-NZ-]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/124038161/low-income-kiwi-households-struggling-with-unaffordable-housing-oecd-report-says

NZ the worse in housing affordability according to OECD - Cindy’s doing


So that makes a change from the worst under National.. to the worst today.

NZ is far better than living in a desert (australia) or shoe box (UK) I'd say.

[fungus pudding]

So that makes a change from the worst under National.. to the worst today.

NZ is far better than living in a desert (australia) or shoe box (UK) I'd say.

Southern China would be the best place for you.

[Panda-NZ-]

There's only one team who wants to sell assets and land to China and historically that has been "inter"national.

Now that millionaires can't as easily buy an nz passport, along with their house, then we have to assume that mostly NZ citizens are buying them. If they are doing that then maybe it's only because we have a strong economy and high incomes.

Why don't you like the look of prosperity ? :)

[jonu]

There's only one team who wants to sell assets and land to China and historically that has been "inter"national.

Now that millionaires can't as easily buy a passport (along with their house) then we have to assume that mostly NZ citizens are buying them. If they are doing that it's only because we have a strong economy and high incomes.

Unfortunately I fear this is also the position of Ardern and Robertson. Absolutely no clue.

[Logen Ninefingers]

There's only one team who wants to sell assets and land to China and historically that has been "inter"national.

Now that o/s millionaires can't as easily buy a passport (along with their house) then we have to assume that mostly NZ citizens are buying them. If they are doing that, then it's only because we have a strong economy and high incomes.

Why don't you like the look of prosperity ? :)

Why don't you shelve such trite utterings, which clearly come direct from your political bias, and tell us why you think the economy is so fundamentally strong?

In NZ's urban centres the economy revolves around flipping houses. There are more real estate agents than there are farmers. Do you really believe that an economy based on the property 'market' is a country standing on solid economic ground? If you look at the NZX, the cupboard is pretty bare. In fact, if it weren't for the power companies I'd say they might as well close the NZX down.

I'd say you were born into a Labourite family and are probably a teacher or trade union official, as you clearly have the blinkers on. NZ is known as a low wage economy, yet you are claiming that incomes are high. Some fairly basic research would show you that house prices have far outstripped incomes, which lag well behind - in part because of the NatioBour addiction to mass immigration as a lazy way of boosting GDP growth.

[Panda-NZ-]

Other countries seem to think we are doing well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlhUMFOBZHU&t=2s

I agree with you on migration though.

[Bjauck]

So that makes a change from the worst under National.. to the worst today.

NZ is far better than living in a desert (australia) or shoe box (UK) I'd say.

Maybe true if you ignore the fact that the vast majority of Aussies live in its coastal and fertile areas, and the quality of housing in both of those countries probably exceeds what we have in NZL.

NZL under both Nat and Lab has done a poor job of providing for infrastructure and housing needs to cater for population growth as a result of its liberal immigration policies.

Also when you allow investor housing (with an absence of stamp duties and a CGT) to act as the de facto pension scheme for so long, unaffordable first homes for young adults (without wealthy family to help out) are a result.

[Balance]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/travel/clarke-gayford-on-what-makes-the-perfect-beach/SYJJLHBATVDAHSI65D4MJXDYDY/

Life's a beach for some but what a bitch for those who cannot afford a home.

[Panda-NZ-]

Maybe true if you ignore the fact that the vast majority of Aussies live in its coastal and fertile areas, and the quality of housing in both of those countries probably exceeds what we have in NZL.


Still there are water shortages and farmers want 'drought relief' every year.

NZ should recieve a premium as one of the countries which may benefit overall from climate change or be a safe haven from it.
No more free water for China or sale of passports.

[Bjauck]

Still there are water shortages and farmers want 'drought relief' every year.

NZ should recieve a premium as one of the countries which may benefit overall from climate change or be a safe haven from it.
No more free water for China or sale of passports. I don't think there is anywhere to hide from climate change and the socio-economic impact that has. For example, look at the impact of lower than average rain in damp Auckland.

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/likely-impacts-of-climate-change/likely-climate-change-impacts-nz

[Panda-NZ-]

It may be relative of course, I doubt Australia is going to fare well. There are some good things in that list like lower flu rates and higher agricultural output.

Maybe the world will move to GMO foods to mitigate that last point.

[Balance]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/124052014/rents-soar-after-covid19-freeze-ends

Rents soar after Covid freeze lifted.

Hardly surprising given how this government has systematically undermined the rental market.

Warm homes regulations passed on in full to tenants.

Rental shortage continues.

[Balance]

And of course, up goes the government budget for rental support.

What a friend this government of incompetents is proving to be for the very people they loath - landlords!

[Marilyn Munroe]

Your government at work;

Why don't we bring in a burdensome vehicle emissions standard which reduces car affordability making people hang on to their polluting old bangers for longer?

Stuff: "Government introducing car import rules aimed at lowering emissions"

Boop boop de do
Marilyn

[Zaphod]

Regulating CO2 emissions to 105g/km will be difficult to achieve within the four year period, especially given the supply chains under enormous pressure. Many vehicle manufactures have already cut production due to key component shortages.

What will probably result, is older vehicles being kept for longer, causing the complete opposite effect of what the government wish to achieve. Prices for new vehicles will also increase substantially, while the range of models will also decrease.

Electrification of urban bus fleets nationwide will also be highly contentious given the massive capital costs involved not only in purchasing the replacement vehicles, but also the additional vehicles required to operate due to the length of time required to recharge each vehicle, and the associated charging infrastructure. A number of Wellington's fleet are already suffering from very degraded batteries, after only a year or two, so further buses have been added to provide cover.

[iceman]

Regulating CO2 emissions to 105g/km will be difficult to achieve within the four year period, especially given the supply chains under enormous pressure. Many vehicle manufactures have already cut production due to key component shortages.

What will probably result, is older vehicles being kept for longer, causing the complete opposite effect of what the government wish to achieve. Prices for new vehicles will also increase substantially, while the range of models will also decrease.

Electrification of urban bus fleets nationwide will also be highly contentious given the massive capital costs involved not only in purchasing the replacement vehicles, but also the additional vehicles required to operate due to the length of time required to recharge each vehicle, and the associated charging infrastructure. A number of Wellington's fleet are already suffering from very degraded batteries, after only a year or two, so further buses have been added to provide cover.

I think that banning imports of 2nd hand cars would be an easier change to implement. NZ is on its own in the Western World with imports of old (+8 yo) cars that are being registered for the 1st time in the country. Old technology with higher emissions and less safety features. It's nuts that 1 in 4 "new" registrations are +8 yo cars

[Zaphod]

I think that banning imports of 2nd hand cars would be an easier change to implement. NZ is on its own in the Western World with imports of old (+8 yo) cars that are being registered for the 1st time in the country. Old technology with higher emissions and less safety features. It's nuts that 1 in 4 "new" registrations are +8 yo cars

IMO we probably don't need to go as far as banning all 2nd hand imports, perhaps just tighten the existing regulations around safety features, emissions and perhaps introduce a fuel consumption check. At the moment the maximum age of a vehicle you can import is as you stated, set at 8 year old. From a practical perspective however there are very few cars available from Japan that old that also comply with the other requirements, such as emissions standards, ESC, VSS, airbags etc. Practically, most vehicles are 5 years old or less, many with very low Km.

We'd still need to be careful about how stringent changes to these regulations are, as we could end up causing the exact same effect; shrinking the pool of available vehicles, causing prices to rise, and providing an incentive to keep our existing relatively polluting inefficient vehicles for longer.

[tga_trader]

Since they're giving dealers a 'buy out' option to pay for penalties for vehicles that are over the threshold, it just means that increase will just get passed on to consumers (and will result in far less fun options). Honda, and probably others, do not currently sell a single vehicle in NZ that would comply with that limit. Even the hugely popular RAV4 hybrid doesn't comply.

And none of this makes manufacturers deal with the emissions produced for the manufacture of the vehicle.

Good article on Driven listing how limited the car selection will be with todays offerings;
https://www.driven.co.nz/news/government-clean-car-standard-for-new-zealand-what-exactly-does-a-105g-model-look-like/
(https://www.driven.co.nz/news/government-clean-car-standard-for-new-zealand-what-exactly-does-a-105g-model-look-like/)

[Zaphod]

The Honda Jazz e:HEV, set to be released next month will comply. There are a fewadditional models sold in Japan that will also comply, but they are not offered in NZ at this time.

My understanding of the proposed legislation is that vehicle manufacturers will also be allowed to average the emissions across the model range, so selling a range of EV's could offset the higher emission vehicles on offer.

Good point about the emissions from manufacture. It would be interesting to see what modeling the government have undertaken to determine whether forcing fleet upgrades in NZ to meet stringent new emissions standards has a net positive environmental effect, or do we not care since the manufacturing takes place in another country and therefore is a problem for someone else to deal with?

[iceman]

I am sure I read somewhere recently that the "new" standard set for vehicle emissions in NZ was achieved by Japan in 2014 & EU in 2020

[Zaphod]

I am sure I read somewhere recently that the "new" standard set for vehicle emissions in NZ was achieved by Japan in 2014 & EU in 2020

The 2020 standard in Japan is the 105g/100km that we are proposing to achieve in 2025, however this value is an average across the model range, so there are numerous non-compliant models from each manufacturer. For example, the 2.0L 2021 Honda Accord Hybrid emits about 100g/100km (lower than required), however the 2021 Honda Civic (non hybrid) exceeds the standard at about 140g/100km.

Japan also has a graduated fuel efficiency scale according to weight, while the EU appears to mandate fleet-wide average fuel efficiency standards broken up by vehicle type (truck/bus, passenger car etc.) We haven't seen the details of what the government are proposing yet, but I would expect the system here will be similar to these.

Other nations have however had far longer to reduce emissions that what is being proposed for us. Again using the Japanese CO2 target example (although don't forget the standards also regulate CO, NOx etc.), in 1995 the standard was 188g/100km with the next step being 153g/100km in 2010 some 15 years later and 23% lower.

What the government here are proposing is to implement a 40% change over to 2025, so we'll need mass adoption of hybrid and EV's for manufacturers to comply. Some manufacturers may exit the market, while others will need to adjust their supply chains to source from Japan or the Eu rather than Thailand etc. further driving up costs.

The Australian government hasn't mandated any changes to emissions standards, so it appears the vehicle manufactures have done it themselves, while using additional tools such as carry forward debits and credits. It's complicated.

[iceman]

Thanks for an informative post Zaphod

[fungus pudding]

Maybe true if you ignore the fact that the vast majority of Aussies live in its coastal and fertile areas, and the quality of housing in both of those countries probably exceeds what we have in NZL.


I don't know about the UK, but the building codes in Australia allow structural building standards far below ours.

[winner69]

Is Megan Woods still around

[fungus pudding]

Is Megan Woods still around

It's possible.

[Logen Ninefingers]

If Megan Woods is their ‘go to’ minister to sort out housing, then how just bad in Phil Twyford? Would he struggle to run a bath? How do people who are literally idiots end up as government ministers?

[jonu]

Cindy complains about "Vaccine Nationalism" by engaging in vaccine nationalism.

What happened to "front of the queue? Another of Cindy and her cohort's fibs.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/ardern-expresses-concern-about-vaccine-nationalism-as-national-pushes-for-roll-out-date/ar-BB1dkVHG?ocid=msedgntp

[dobby41]

Cindy complains about "Vaccine Nationalism" by engaging in vaccine nationalism.

What happened to "front of the queue? Another of Cindy and her cohort's fibs.

How is any of that nationalism from the PM?
I'd like to know how Bishop would get the vaccine earlier.
There are contracts with dates, not sure what we can do if the supplier misses those dates (which hasn't happened yet) - refuse to buy or pay?
Just look at EU v's UK to see how this sort of thing plays out.

[jonu]

How is any of that nationalism from the PM?
I'd like to know how Bishop would get the vaccine earlier.
There are contracts with dates, not sure what we can do if the supplier misses those dates (which hasn't happened yet) - refuse to buy or pay?
Just look at EU v's UK to see how this sort of thing plays out.

Ardern made a point of saying we were acting on behalf of some PI nations as well, while at the same time suggesting that other countries were getting more than their fair share.

Bishop didn't tell us we were head of the queue.

If there are contracts with dates that haven't been missed we clearly have been lied to. We never were at the front of the queue. Presumably the PI nations have been misled as well.

Ardern can't blame Medsafe any longer. The toothy one has played us yet again. Honest and transparent! I wonder if we''ll ever hear that to describe Ardern. That was her own description....remember?

[Balance]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124143838/man-who-sued-mallard-for-defamation-felt-like-a-leper-lawyer-says

Cindy’s $300k man - so kind of her to defend & keep him in his job so that taxpayers can pick up the tab further for the employment grievance case.

The hypocrisy is overwhelming.

[winner69]

Seems PM talking about ‘foundational change’ rather than the previous ‘transformational change’ strategy

Some cynics would say if nobody knows what foundational change is, then how can they be held accountable?

Clever move

[Logen Ninefingers]

The unions control the Labour Party and always have. Just look at the way the party leader is elected for a prime example. I have a laugh at the so-called independence of the Reserve Bank when Labour passed a law which added employment to their mandate, additional to inflation targeting. So now if unemployment is on the rise the Reserve Bank is duty bound to deploy unconventional monetary policy to deal with it. Previously it would have been the governments responsibility to deal with it.

The Labour Party is there to run the country on behalf of the unions and to do so they need to con enough people into voting for them as is necessary to gain and hold power. Just look at the policies they actually do introduce: more sick leave and an extra public holiday, and increases in the minimum wage. It’s all on the Union wishlist, while most other stuff is neglected. This is a deeply cynical government hiding behind a mask of kindness and other buzzwords.

[Balance]

The unions control the Labour Party and always have. Just look at the way the party leader is elected for a prime example. I have a laugh at the so-called independence of the Reserve Bank when Labour passed a law which added employment to their mandate, additional to inflation targeting. So now if unemployment is on the rise the Reserve Bank is duty bound to deploy unconventional monetary policy to deal with it. Previously it would have been the governments responsibility to deal with it.

The Labour Party is there to run the country on behalf of the unions and to do so they need to con enough people into voting for them as is necessary to gain and hold power. Just look at the policies they actually do introduce: more sick leave and an extra public holiday, and increases in the minimum wage. It’s all on the Union wishlist, while most other stuff is neglected. This is a deeply cynical government hiding behind a mask of kindness and other buzzwords.

Simple question to Cynical Cindy :

"Does Trevor Mallard's behavior pass the sniff test?"

Cindy has got to be the biggest hypocrite and consummate con-artist around.

[Baa_Baa]

Simple question to Cynical Cindy :

"Does Trevor Mallard's behavior pass the sniff test?"

Cindy has got to be the biggest hypocrite and consummate con-artist around.

It's not about whether Trevor passes the test or how embarrassing he is to himself, it's about what the alternatives are. Remember the Speaker is elected by the house (which labour control), even a rotter isn't going to be despatched until an alternative is found and no alternative at this stage is more partisan or palatable to the Labour party.

Live with it, it's politics, he's going nowhere until someone at least as partisan and less controversial emerges. Perhaps you have some candidate suggestions?

[fungus pudding]

A couple of articles for Jacinda and her merry band of pollies to read, from a former Labour MP.

https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/new-zealand-s-modern-cultural-cringe

https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/history-in-schools

[Logen Ninefingers]

It's not about whether Trevor passes the test or how embarrassing he is to himself, it's about what the alternatives are. Remember the Speaker is elected by the house (which labour control), even a rotter isn't going to be despatched until an alternative is found and no alternative at this stage is more partisan or palatable to the Labour party.

Live with it, it's politics, he's going nowhere until someone at least as partisan and less controversial emerges. Perhaps you have some candidate suggestions?

Yeah, Cindy gets to pass herself off as a genuine person, while all the while she’s an utterly ruthless politician. Machiavellian is the word. Why do we accept such cynicism?

[Balance]

It's not about whether Trevor passes the test or how embarrassing he is to himself, it's about what the alternatives are. Remember the Speaker is elected by the house (which labour control), even a rotter isn't going to be despatched until an alternative is found and no alternative at this stage is more partisan or palatable to the Labour party.

Live with it, it's politics, he's going nowhere until someone at least as partisan and less controversial emerges. Perhaps you have some candidate suggestions?

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/barry-soper-failure-to-hold-trevor-mallard-to-account-shows-labours-hypocrisy/GT5LNV7YTM7Z4GYKO36WNMUGSI/

Truth is that the Opposition is happy to let Trevor Mallard stay in the job - his presence destroys any moral or ethical authority that Cindy & her government used to command.

Cindy can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time but history serves the lesson that she cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Disgusting, repugnant, hypocrite and clueless - that's Cindy Adorn.

Excerpt :

"Jacinda Ardern preaches about it time and again: How we should all be kind to each other and to look after our wellbeing.

Well, the Prime Minister's just lost all moral authority to preach to us about niceness, because on that score she's failed miserably - and so have her Labour sheep in Parliament.

Perhaps they felt the argument for removing him would have been so overwhelming - and it would have been - that their defence of him would have burned their political capital in bucket loads.

So in reality they are now telling us it's okay to call a man a rapist, to ruin his life leaving him bereft and jobless? Well, that would seem to be the case.

For Ardern to simply say Mallard made a mistake and he's atoned with an apology for it is simply not good enough.

I lived under a hail of social media abuse and vitriol which of course paled into insignificance compared to what Mallard's target was condemned to live through.

This has been the shabbiest episode of inequality that I've experienced since starting work at Parliament before Jacinda Ardern was born.

If this is the Prime Minister's view of being kind and caring for the wellbeing of others, I'm most certainly not on the team five million to whom she so frequently refers.

[jonu]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/barry-soper-failure-to-hold-trevor-mallard-to-account-shows-labours-hypocrisy/GT5LNV7YTM7Z4GYKO36WNMUGSI/

Truth is that the Opposition is happy to let Trevor Mallard stay in the job - his presence destroys any moral or ethical authority that Cindy & her government used to command.

Cindy can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time but history serves the lesson that she cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Disgusting, repugnant, hypocrite and clueless - that's Cindy Adorn.

Excerpt :

"Jacinda Ardern preaches about it time and again: How we should all be kind to each other and to look after our wellbeing.

Well, the Prime Minister's just lost all moral authority to preach to us about niceness, because on that score she's failed miserably - and so have her Labour sheep in Parliament.

Perhaps they felt the argument for removing him would have been so overwhelming - and it would have been - that their defence of him would have burned their political capital in bucket loads.

So in reality they are now telling us it's okay to call a man a rapist, to ruin his life leaving him bereft and jobless? Well, that would seem to be the case.

For Ardern to simply say Mallard made a mistake and he's atoned with an apology for it is simply not good enough.

I lived under a hail of social media abuse and vitriol which of course paled into insignificance compared to what Mallard's target was condemned to live through.

This has been the shabbiest episode of inequality that I've experienced since starting work at Parliament before Jacinda Ardern was born.

If this is the Prime Minister's view of being kind and caring for the wellbeing of others, I'm most certainly not on the team five million to whom she so frequently refers.

Tells it how it is does Mr Soper.

"Shabbiest episode" he's seen in 40 years. Early days I gave Ardern the benefit of the doubt as to her absolute cynicism. Now I'm convinced she's worse than Muldoon. With the even more dangerous Andrew Little alongside who knows what damage they will inflict on our society?

[macduffy]

Yes, Barry Soper's spot on with this!

I'm starting to think that this nonsense about wearing ties in the House is a diversionary tactic to take attention away from the Speaker. IMO Maori members should be free to express their culture - but should also respect Western culture. eg take your hat off, indoors!

[fungus pudding]

Yes, Barry Soper's spot on with this!

I'm starting to think that this nonsense about wearing ties in the House is a diversionary tactic to take attention away from the Speaker. IMO Maori members should be free to express their culture - but should also respect Western culture. eg take your hat off, indoors!

...and wear a tie.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Well Mallard has scrapped the tie rule now. What a farce.

[Balance]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300226844/mps-from-all-sides-turn-on-treasury-reserve-bank-and-labour-over-failure-to-act-on-housing

Failure to deliver on housing - Cindy blamed everybody (especially the overseas speculators) but now, the cynical hypocrite looks in the mirror and the perpetrator is looking back at her.

A big supporter of Trevor Mallard is she so no pretence anymore either about being kind, except when it suits her.

[Logen Ninefingers]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300226844/mps-from-all-sides-turn-on-treasury-reserve-bank-and-labour-over-failure-to-act-on-housing

Failure to deliver on housing - Cindy blamed everybody (especially the overseas speculators) but now, the cynical hypocrite looks in the mirror and the perpetrator is looking back at her.

A big supporter of Trevor Mallard is she so no pretence anymore either about being kind, except when it suits her.

I notice she consistently talks about the foreign buyer ban, even though Labour were consistently told that foreign buyers were a negligible part of the market (remember the ‘Chinese sounding names’ furore). Why keep crowing about enacting something that has achieved absolutely nothing?

This government does the easy stuff like writing letters to Orr, creating a new Public Holiday, passing laws that have zero effect. They run a mile from anything requiring a bit of hard work. We’ve had 3 years of neglect, and looks like we in for at least another 3.

[Balance]

Cindy said the Air NZSaudi deal did not meet the sniff test. What exactly did she mean?

https://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/109043/those-wondering-why-our-prime-minister-was-so-willing-countenance-breaking-air-new

"Those wondering why our Prime Minister was so willing to countenance breaking the Air New Zealand-Saudi contract should wonder no longer. Jacinda Ardern has sniffed the wind and smelled Joe Biden’s aftershave"

Trotter is being polite. He should have wrote that the cynical Cindy has smelled the US armpit and realized the smell has changed - hence, the sniff test. :t_up:

[nztx]

I notice she consistently talks about the foreign buyer ban, even though Labour were consistently told that foreign buyers were a negligible part of the market (remember the ‘Chinese sounding names’ furore). Why keep crowing about enacting something that has achieved absolutely nothing?

This government does the easy stuff like writing letters to Orr, creating a new Public Holiday, passing laws that have zero effect. They run a mile from anything requiring a bit of hard work. We’ve had 3 years of neglect, and looks like we in for at least another 3.


that's what happens when the average Joe Bloggs's out there lose sight of what excellence in office looks like and get lumbered
instead with limping along on mediocre .. warts, klingons & all (and usually a cloud of BS to cover the ineptness & incompetence) ;)


don't forget the 'Supermarket bashing' then 'Any sort of Trust out there getting knifed' , then "large Foreign owned Corporations
not paying enough tax (in the Left's eyes that is) .. more like the prying eyes didn't know what they were looking at or doing .. ;)


Is Mallard still just clinging to the Control chair in the House for grim life, after his sins came back to revisit ? ;)

[nztx]

More success on Labour's pet projects:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/124271163/pike-river-recovery-agency-reaches-rockfall-at-top-of-mine-tunnel


$50m or was that $100 mil Bill covering until things finally grind to a screeching halt ? ;)

;)

[Panda-NZ-]

Thanks Labour for standing up for NZ interests in relation to the exported terrorists. Australia exporting terrorists here is not on.

They are the penal colony after all.

Nats would have caved in and said there's nothing we can do. :t_down:

[nztx]

Thanks Labour for standing up for NZ interests in relation to the exported terrorists. Australia exporting terrorists here is not on.

They are the penal colony after all.

Nats would have caved in and said there's nothing we can do. :t_down:


Simple solution + Leave her there .. follow Oz & cancel her Kiwi Visa too ? ;)

If they looked closely she is no longer a Kiwi citizen on our turf after habitating
Oz for a term before travelling over yonder so shouldn't have the privileges NZ Visa holds.

Do we want Terrorist collaborators running around on Kiwi Visa's ? ;)

She chose to go there and cross into Turkey .. shouldn't be our problem
but for Ms Bees-Knees sticky beaking for something to inflame the Aussies on .. ;)

Obviously there's plenty of time to interfere in other things instead of seeing to plugging
gaps in our border properly this time & getting things back to normal double smart
on NZ turf .. ;)

How many other Terrorists are there running around globally with Kiwi Visa's in their Pockets ? ;)

[Zaphod]

Simple solution + Leave her there .. follow Oz & cancel her Kiwi Visa too ? ;)


The thing is, you can't legally leave a person stateless. So unless she holds a Syrian visa or citizenship, we can't remove her NZ citizenship. From the sounds of things she has been a concubine, so while she did support terrorists, it's probably not the way we'd usually think of!

[macduffy]

Simple solution + Leave her there .. follow Oz & cancel her Kiwi Visa too ?


If only it was as "simple" as that. There's two young kids with inherited Kiwi citizenship to consider, remember?

[Logen Ninefingers]

If only it was as "simple" as that. There's two young kids with inherited Kiwi citizenship to consider, remember?

So children who are born in Syria automatically get NZ citizenship?

[iceman]

So children who are born in Syria automatically get NZ citizenship?

To a parent who is a NZ Citizen, the answer is yes.

nztx, the issue is much more complicated than you are suggesting. She has not got just a "NZ Visa". She is a NZ Citizen. Ardern, instead of go chatting to Morrison about this woman 2 years ago, should have canceled her NZ Citizenship instead and left her to Australia where she belongs. After all this woman had very limited connection to NZ since she was 2 years old. But Ardern procrastinated and lost.

[Balance]

To a parent who is a NZ Citizen, the answer is yes.

nztx, the issue is much more complicated than you are suggesting. She has not got just a "NZ Visa". She is a NZ Citizen. Ardern, instead of go chatting to Morrison about this woman 2 years ago, should have canceled her NZ Citizenship instead and left her to Australia where she belongs. After all this woman had very limited connection to NZ since she was 2 years old. But Ardern procrastinated and lost.

Yup - Cindy tried her kindness thingi and got outplayed by ScoMo, who is laughing his head off at the stupid & naive Kiwi do-gooder.

You can see the glee in ScoMo’s face as he basked in the accolades of Australians for extraditing yet another Australian problem (plus 2) to NZ.

[Bjauck]

To a parent who is a NZ Citizen, the answer is yes.

nztx, the issue is much more complicated than you are suggesting. She has not got just a "NZ Visa". She is a NZ Citizen. Ardern, instead of go chatting to Morrison about this woman 2 years ago, should have canceled her NZ Citizenship instead and left her to Australia where she belongs. After all this woman had very limited connection to NZ since she was 2 years old. But Ardern procrastinated and lost. As far as I am aware, The children born overseas to a NZ citizen, who obtained her citizenship by grant or birth, obtain NZ citizenship by descent. If these children who are NZ citizens by descent, themselves have children born outside NZ, then those children will not become NZ citizens by descent.

If Australian rules are similar to NZ's, Would the children of this ISIS woman, who had been an Australian citizen, have Australian citizenship by descent too. The children of this ISIS woman may still have dual Oz/NZ nationality in which case they should be the responsibility of both countries. Would the Australian government be able to strip Australian citizenship from minors, who have not committed any Anti-Australia offences?

[Balance]

The children were born to a Swedish father so are also entitled to Swedish citizenships.

They can go there.

[artemis]

The children were born to a Swedish father so are also entitled to Swedish citizenships.

They can go there.

That would be Swedish fathers.

[fungus pudding]

That would be Swedish fathers.

They both have a Swedish father.

[Bjauck]

The children were born to a Swedish father so are also entitled to Swedish citizenships.

They can go there. Are "Daesh" weddings between two known Isis terrorists still legally recognised by Sweden, Australia and NZ?

[Balance]

Are "Daesh" weddings between two known Isis terrorists still legally recognised by Sweden, Australia and NZ?

Even de facto relationships are recognized.

[Zaphod]

Call for national day to honour iconic Pineapple Chunks
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/call-for-national-day-to-honour-iconic-pineapple-chunks/FYYHFQ6JQJSCZ7V3CD5JXCZHLM/

November 22nd - Now we just need to convince Labour. Perhaps we can distribute free pineapple lumps (chunks) to every citizen?

[iceman]

Here is a good image that shows how successful the Government has been in dealing with the "housing crisis" they talked so much about while in opposition and went into the 2017 election with huge promises to fix it. Now into the 2nd term things are looking very much worse and no end in sight

https://www.interest.co.nz/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/embedded_images/easton-graph.jpg?itok=wyAl8UZb

[iceman]

Here is a good image that shows how successful the Government has been in dealing with the "housing crisis" they talked so much about while in opposition and went into the 2017 election with huge promises to fix it. Now into the 2nd term things are looking very much worse and no end in sight

https://www.interest.co.nz/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/embedded_images/easton-graph.jpg?itok=wyAl8UZb

[jonu]

Sign of a government on the run

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/124301816/grant-robertson-axes-weekly-interview-on-magic-talk-radio-show

Robertson asked some uncomfortable questions about the WEF and labels it "Conspiracy Theory" and refuses to come back.

All the more reason to worry about the influence the WEF has on both governments and NGOs.

By the way, it's not a conspiracy theory to quote the Chair of the WEF and his frankly scary vision of the future. "You will own nothing and you will be happy".

Just who will own things isn't clear. If Grant & Cindy remain in charge houses will be part of this list, that is for sure.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Jacinda Adern is just there to run NZ on behalf of the Council of Trade Unions. More sick days, another public holiday, minimum wage increases, increase the numbers in the public sector. This the the real agenda. A trade union wish-list being enacted by stealth.

A deeply cynical PM is what our cynical property-obsessed nation deserves. We have a slash & burn society gorging on cheap money who are hell-bent on leaving nothing for future generations. And we have a cynical left-wing media who are in effect owned by the property industry to top it all off.

[artemis]

Jacinda Adern is just there to run NZ on behalf of the Council of Trade Unions. More sick days, another public holiday, minimum wage increases, increase the numbers in the public sector. This the the real agenda. A trade union wish-list being enacted by stealth....

Matariki day off could cost businesses almost half a billion $$$ according to MBIE. A mere bagatelle.

Ms Ardern is on the record saying she plans policies that stick. That's comms speak for free stuff paid by 'somebody else'.

[Bjauck]

Here is a good image that shows how successful the Government has been in dealing with the "housing crisis" they talked so much about while in opposition and went into the 2017 election with huge promises to fix it. Now into the 2nd term things are looking very much worse and no end in sight

https://www.interest.co.nz/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/embedded_images/easton-graph.jpg?itok=wyAl8UZb A big failure with regards to making housing more affordable for those who may traditionally have been key Labour Party supporters. This government is National-lite. Traditional Labourites should continue to migrate to the Greens?

[Bjauck]

Matariki day off could cost businesses almost half a billion $$$ according to MBIE. A mere bagatelle.

Ms Ardern is on the record saying she plans policies that stick. That's comms speak for free stuff paid by 'somebody else'. Queen's Birthday may be for the chop?

[iceman]

Queen's Birthday may be for the chop?

Workplace Minister says no. They promised an "additional" statutory holiday and that's what we get

[fungus pudding]

Queen's Birthday may be for the chop?

Maybe it should be. There has to an offset for this new stat day. Personally I don't care whether we have Queen's birthday or Matariki, but not both. I very much doubt that many NZ'ers celebrate or rejoice in either, but are more than happy to have to just have a day off.

[iceman]

Maybe it should be. There has to an offset for this new stat day. Personally I don't care whether we have Queen's birthday or Matariki, but not both. I very much doubt that many NZ'ers celebrate or rejoice in either, but are more than happy to have to just have a day off.

Be kind. The Minister says this extra day will lead to improved work-life balance and increase productivity due to better rested staff. Apparently it also improves our cultural awareness !

[artemis]

Maybe it should be. There has to an offset for this new stat day. Personally I don't care whether we have Queen's birthday or Matariki, but not both. I very much doubt that many NZ'ers celebrate or rejoice in either, but are more than happy to have to just have a day off.

A day off with pay. Or with no pay for business owners and the self employed.

[macduffy]

A day off with pay. Or with no pay for business owners and the self employed.

However, I'm looking forward to the new Pineapple Chunk day holiday. Another one with pay, I expect?

;)

[Bjauck]

Maybe it should be. There has to an offset for this new stat day. Personally I don't care whether we have Queen's birthday or Matariki, but not both. I very much doubt that many NZ'ers celebrate or rejoice in either, but are more than happy to have to just have a day off.
Matariki is increasingly celebrated - certainly in Auckland anyway. Maybe Queen Victoria's birthday was a time for celebration back in those colonial and imperial times. I am not sure if we need two holidays quite close together in Winter.

[Zaphod]

Matariki is increasingly celebrated - certainly in Auckland anyway. Maybe Queen Victoria's birthday was a time for celebration back in those colonial and imperial times. I am not sure if we need two holidays quite close together in Winter.

One of the justifications announced was that NZ has fallen too far behind other OECD nations with respect to the number of public holidays provided per annum, so I can't see the PM advocating for cutting any existing holiday in return for Matariki.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Great watching on ‘Dog Squad’ tonight. The dog at the airport indicated on a Hong Kong couple coming in carrying NZD 26,000 in undeclared cash, but it was all good and their explanation was accepted and they just had to fill in a form. Meanwhile a group of ‘youths’ stole a car, rolled it and wrote it off after they were pursued by police. After a dog handler and his dog tracked them down they were taken home to their parents, and referred to ‘youth services’. Then the cop and his dog come across another stolen car occupied by 3 males. The driver was sentenced to 80 hours community work.

[fungus pudding]

One of the justifications announced was that NZ has fallen too far behind other OECD nations with respect to the number of public holidays provided per annum, so I can't see the PM advocating for cutting any existing holiday in return for Matariki.

Which nations are they?

[iceman]

"The most transparent Government" at it again https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124306169/half-of-new-public-houses-not-actually-new-stock

[jonu]

"The most transparent Government" at it again https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124306169/half-of-new-public-houses-not-actually-new-stock

Cindy do what Cindy does.

[Sgt Pepper]

(https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/progressive-home-ownership-scheme-houses-just-12-families-in-seven-months/ar-BB1dXrSE?ocid=BingHPC)

(https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/malaysia-deports-myanmar-nationals/ar-BB1dXmVE?ocid=BingHPC)
]Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March tried not once, but twice, to get an emergency spot in managed isolation, the first time as a "critical public or health service" and the second time as "required for national security"

Not the most auspicious start to his political career I think. Is the party leadership going to defend the undefendable?

.

[westerly]

Sign of a government on the run

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/124301816/grant-robertson-axes-weekly-interview-on-magic-talk-radio-show

Robertson asked some uncomfortable questions about the WEF and labels it "Conspiracy Theory" and refuses to come back.

All the more reason to worry about the influence the WEF has on both governments and NGOs.

By the way, it's not a conspiracy theory to quote the Chair of the WEF and his frankly scary vision of the future. "You will own nothing and you will be happy".

Just who will own things isn't clear. If Grant & Cindy remain in charge houses will be part of this list, that is for sure.

Robertson was right. Your comments are just more of the interpretations of a naive conspiracy theorist.

westerly

[Balance]

(https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/progressive-home-ownership-scheme-houses-just-12-families-in-seven-months/ar-BB1dXrSE?ocid=BingHPC)

(https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/malaysia-deports-myanmar-nationals/ar-BB1dXmVE?ocid=BingHPC)
]Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March tried not once, but twice, to get an emergency spot in managed isolation, the first time as a "critical public or health service" and the second time as "required for national security"

Not the most auspicious start to his political career I think. Is the party leadership going to defend the undefendable?

.

Oh dear! How is Cindy going to explain this one of her Coalition partner?

[Panda-NZ-]

double post --

[Panda-NZ-]

NZ credit rating increases to AA+ under Labour.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/new-zealand-reaps-recovery-rewards-with-sp-upgrade-to-aa-2021-02-22

[iceman]

NZ credit rating increases to AA+ under Labour.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/new-zealand-reaps-recovery-rewards-with-sp-upgrade-to-aa-2021-02-22

Yes it's great. Government Bond issuance only 445B this year and then outstanding GB rising from $128B to 200B in the next 4 years. And no plan to reduce deficits

[westerly]

Oh dear! How is Cindy going to explain this one of her Coalition partner?

Oh dear ! Why should she?

westerly

[jonu]

Robertson was right. Your comments are just more of the interpretations of a naive conspiracy theorist.

westerly

Again, just for you westerly, quoting someone is not a conspiracy.

[Panda-NZ-]

More details on NZ's credit rating upgrade:


"The changes make New Zealand the first developed country with investment-grade debt to receive an upgrade since COVID-19 hit.
New Zealand is recovering quicker from COVID-19 than most advanced economies, as it’s contained the spread of the virus.
“We now believe that the government’s credit metrics can withstand potential damage from negative shocks to the economy, including a possible weakening of the real estate market.” S&P said.

The upgrades signal buying bonds issued by the New Zealand Government and associated entities is a relatively safe investment.
This means New Zealand can technically lower the cost of issuing this debt.
S&P credited the New Zealand Government for having low debt by global standards.
https://www.interest.co.nz/news/109175/nz-dollar-hits-34-month-high-new-zealand-becomes-first-developed-country-investment

[Joshuatree]

Fran OSullivan headline in the NZ Herald today. Never seen Fran gushing before:t_up:

"Robertsons $50 Billion bet paid off to an AAA-Astounding degree."

"Borrowing to buffer Covid hit has won ultimate salute withS&P rating boost......." "They are the best ratings NZ has achieved in a decade " " The crowning glory which belongs to Robertson" is the ratings upgrade etcetc

[jonu]

Fran OSullivan headline in the NZ Herald today. Never seen Fran gushing before:t_up:

"Robertsons $50 Billion bet paid off to an AAA-Astounding degree."

"Borrowing to buffer Covid hit has won ultimate salute withS&P rating boost......." "They are the best ratings NZ has achieved in a decade " " The crowning glory which belongs to Robertson" is the ratings upgrade etcetc

Does Fran deal in sarcasm?

Just goes to show what bs the credit ratings system is. S&P still have egg on their faces from the GFC.

[westerly]

Again, just for you westerly, quoting someone is not a conspiracy.

The quote comes from an article written by an MP from Denmark https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/
Robertson was correct. Conspiracy theories have multiplied following it's publication.

westerly

[jonu]

The quote comes from an article written by an MP from Denmark https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/
Robertson was correct. Conspiracy theories have multiplied following it's publication.

westerly

The MP may have been the inspiration. It was later picked up by the Forum Chair from Austria and the quote I made was from a promo video they released and later took down after negative feedback.

The WEF still continues to peddle what they call "The Great Reset".

It isn't a conspiracy to ask....If you will own nothing, who will?

[nztx]

Fran OSullivan headline in the NZ Herald today. Never seen Fran gushing before:t_up:

"Robertsons $50 Billion bet paid off to an AAA-Astounding degree."

"Borrowing to buffer Covid hit has won ultimate salute withS&P rating boost......." "They are the best ratings NZ has achieved in a decade " " The crowning glory which belongs to Robertson" is the ratings upgrade etcetc


Hold your horses .. look what just came over the horizon last night .. another chunk of a shakey $100 Bills flushed down the can .. ;)

If it gets away even more gone .. ;)

Our Poli's are obviously too busy spouting off to have actually looked at where the weakest links lay .. ;)

Not surprising either .. ;)

[dobby41]

Oh dear! How is Cindy going to explain this one of her Coalition partner?

Why would she need to.
He applied, was turned down as the 'system' worked correctly.
No harm in trying.

[Balance]

Why would she need to.
He applied, was turned down as the 'system' worked correctly.
No harm in trying.

Because she has an answer for everything. Oops - excuse.

[dobby41]

Because she has an answer for everything. Oops - excuse.

Seems that you do too.

[artemis]

Why would she need to.
He applied, was turned down as the 'system' worked correctly.
No harm in trying.

Ms Ardern doesn't need to explain, and maybe nobody needs to do more explaining. Bad optics though when there are really heartbreaking stories in the media nearly every day. Which this one wasn't. Heartbreaking that is.

[dobby41]

Ms Ardern doesn't need to explain, and maybe nobody needs to do more explaining. Bad optics though when there are really heartbreaking stories in the media nearly every day. Which this one wasn't. Heartbreaking that is.

The media loves these stories which amount to nothing really - unless you have an axe to grind.
Since the Greens are just a support party what is there to explain (for Ardern) anyway?


Oh dear! How is Cindy going to explain this one of her Coalition partner?
By the way balance - they aren't in a coalition.

[Balance]

The media loves these stories which amount to nothing really - unless you have an axe to grind.
Since the Greens are just a support party what is there to explain (for Ardern) anyway?


By the way balance - they aren't in a coalition.

What about Trevor Mallard?

[dobby41]

What about Trevor Mallard?

You have a habit of conflating things - I kept it to the topic at hand.

[fungus pudding]

By the way balance - they aren't in a coalition.

They near as dammit are. They are a 'support party' with ministerial portfolios. What's in a name?

[dobby41]

They near as dammit are. They are a 'support party' with ministerial portfolios. What's in a name?

They aren't!
What's in a name - as a support party Jacinda would have less interest in something like one of their members asking for preferential treatment at the border.

[macduffy]

They aren't!
What's in a name - as a support party Jacinda would have less interest in something like one of their members asking for preferential treatment at the border.

Which implies that she would "have interest" in one of her own party seeking preferential treatment?

[dobby41]

Which implies that she would "have interest" in one of her own party seeking preferential treatment?

You'd think so (by 'own party' I would restrict that to MPs rather than any party member).
But asking for preferential treatment isn't a crime or morally reprehensible. Getting your mates to sign off on it and push it through wouldn't be a good look at all.

[Balance]

You have a habit of conflating things - I kept it to the topic at hand.

OK, dealt with that one so what about Trevor Mallard?

[fungus pudding]

They aren't!
What's in a name - as a support party Jacinda would have less interest in something like one of their members asking for preferential treatment at the border.

Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.

[artemis]

Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.

Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.

[dobby41]

OK, dealt with that one so what about Trevor Mallard?

What was the question?

[dobby41]

Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.

Not so fine - one would have a coalition agreement with lots of stuff you promise to let them do and the other doesn't (Labour didn't need to make any compromises for a support agreement, especially when they don't need support).

[dobby41]

Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.

It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.

[dobby41]

Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.

It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.

[artemis]

It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.

No reason that can't happen. How about Simon Bridges for Attorney General and Shane Reti for Minister of Health?

[dobby41]

No reason that can't happen. How about Simon Bridges for Attorney General and Shane Reti for Minister of Health?

Well there is a reason - politics. They would be bound by the collective cabinet responsibility and not be able to criticise.
Will never happen, unfortunately.

[fungus pudding]

Not so fine - one would have a coalition agreement with lots of stuff you promise to let them do and the other doesn't (Labour didn't need to make any compromises for a support agreement, especially when they don't need support).

In both cases the deal is negotiated. Not all that different.

[dobby41]

In both cases the deal is negotiated. Not all that different.

But not the same - Balance said they were in a coalition - they aren't!

[fungus pudding]

But not the same - Balance said they were in a coalition - they aren't!

Nothing could possibly ever pass Balance's lips that wasn't honest, true, accurate, and even fact checked! And it goes without saying - totally unbiased.

[macduffy]

Anger replaces compassion!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124398980/covid19-angry-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-tongue-lashes-covid19-cases-for-letting-down-team-of-five-million

[Balance]

But not the same - Balance said they were in a coalition - they aren't!

Cindy can twist and turn her words for all she wants - it looks like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck so we all know it is a duck.

Like her plea to all to practise kindness while she stood by and allowed Trevor Mallard to knife a hapless person's career and livelihood down the drain, but she has the hypocrisy to call the outcry against Trevor 'politicking!'.

[fungus pudding]

Anger replaces compassion!

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124398980/covid19-angry-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-tongue-lashes-covid19-cases-for-letting-down-team-of-five-million

If I hear that banal platitude, 'team of 5 million' from the PM once more I will puke violently.

[dobby41]

Cindy can twist and turn her words for all she wants - it looks like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck so we all know it is a duck.

You are the one who twists words.
You suggested that Jacinda would have to explain the actions of the Green MP as they are a coalition partner.
You are wrong - they are not a coalition partner so no need for her to explain anything. It is up to the Greens to do any explaining (if required).

[jonu]

If I hear that banal platitude, 'team of 5 million' from the PM once more I will puke violently.

I was talking to someone yesterday who voted for Cindy and previously generally thought the sun shone from her. My friend has noted the bullsh** around the vaccine roll out and for the first time has woken up to the fact that Ardern can't be trusted. I suspect there will be many around the country coming to the same conclusion.

Over exposed and carrying a Cabinet of incompetents, the cracks are showing.

[westerly]

Cindy can twist and turn her words for all she wants - it looks like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck so we all know it is a duck.

Like her plea to all to practise kindness while she stood by and allowed Trevor Mallard to knife a hapless person's career and livelihood down the drain, but she has the hypocrisy to call the outcry against Trevor 'politicking!'.

The original “be kind” message was addressed to those on social media attacking those who had the misfortune to have contracted covid.
Since then it has been twisted into some sort of political attack. You should know with your constant and boring repetition of past topics.

westerly

[artemis]

Well there is a reason - politics. They would be bound by the collective cabinet responsibility and not be able to criticise.
Will never happen, unfortunately.

So have to be politically acceptable, not just "portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to". In case they criticise the government. OK then.

[dobby41]

So have to be politically acceptable, not just "portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to". In case they criticise the government. OK then.

Sounds about right.

[RGR367]

Will the PM apologize to CoVid19 "case L"?

[dobby41]

Will the PM apologize to CoVid19 "case L"?

That has been an interesting argument.
So you have a case in the school and everyone is told to get a test.
Contacts and contacts+ are sent texts etc.
The family get the texts but don't get a test.
2 of them get a sniffle or two but still don't get a test. A few people are saying that lots of people get sniffles - but really, a local case floating around and they can't put 2+2 together.
In the wider picture case L should apologise to the rest of us for being so stupid.

[Balance]

That has been an interesting argument.
So you have a case in the school and everyone is told to get a test.
Contacts and contacts+ are sent texts etc.
The family get the texts but don't get a test.
2 of them get a sniffle or two but still don't get a test. A few people are saying that lots of people get sniffles - but really, a local case floating around and they can't put 2+2 together.
In the wider picture case L should apologise to the rest of us for being so stupid.

The South Auckland type - exactly the sort of voters Cindy loves.

[jonu]

That has been an interesting argument.
So you have a case in the school and everyone is told to get a test.
Contacts and contacts+ are sent texts etc.
The family get the texts but don't get a test.
2 of them get a sniffle or two but still don't get a test. A few people are saying that lots of people get sniffles - but really, a local case floating around and they can't put 2+2 together.
In the wider picture case L should apologise to the rest of us for being so stupid.

The household member of the casual contact claims she was told she didn't have to isolate or get a test, which appears to be the same advice as was up on the Covid website. I can understand why she feels victimised by Cindy.

[dobby41]

The household member of the casual contact claims she was told she didn't have to isolate or get a test, which appears to be the same advice as was up on the Covid website. I can understand why she feels victimised by Cindy.

None of them got a test until a couple of days after they had symptoms.
All a bit silly.

[jonu]

None of them got a test until a couple of days after they had symptoms.
All a bit silly.

You keep covering Cindy's arse all you like. It's still exposed.

[jonu]

First Grant cancels his weekly chat on Magic Talk, now Cindy runs from ZB. As usual Barry Soper, puts it in perspective over his long career.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/barry-soper-jacinda-ardern-is-treading-water-the-master-of-soft-flattering-interviews/4GKJG4UBCLIKKX4POQWHK4EXD4/

[Logen Ninefingers]

First Grant cancels his weekly chat on Magic Talk, now Cindy runs from ZB. As usual Barry Soper, puts it in perspective over his long career.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/barry-soper-jacinda-ardern-is-treading-water-the-master-of-soft-flattering-interviews/4GKJG4UBCLIKKX4POQWHK4EXD4/

This most open and transparent government ever is running away from being confronted about the housing affordability debacle that is happening on their watch. John Campbell asked Robertson a lot of tough questions in an interview about a week ago, and they ‘don’t like the cold still up ‘em’.

[Baa_Baa]

Jacinda getting a roasting in the press, they see through her charade?

[jonu]

Our genius of incompetency Andrew Little front and centre again.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/national-mp-simon-bridges-on-anti-terror-laws-chickens-coming-home-to-roost/ar-BB1espHp?ocid=msedgntp

A person Australia deemed dangerous enough to strip of citizenship will be free to walk among us the minute she arrives.

Good one Andrew.

Oh...and Cindy has his back, even though she publicly tore a strip of Scott Morrison for stripping the woman of citizenship because she didn't want "Australia's problems".

Good one Cindy.

[dobby41]

Our genius of incompetency Andrew Little front and centre again.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/national-mp-simon-bridges-on-anti-terror-laws-chickens-coming-home-to-roost/ar-BB1espHp?ocid=msedgntp

A person Australia deemed dangerous enough to strip of citizenship will be free to walk among us the minute she arrives.

Good one Andrew.

Oh...and Cindy has his back, even though she publicly tore a strip of Scott Morrison for stripping the woman of citizenship because she didn't want "Australia's problems".

Good one Cindy.

What Australia deems is not necessarily right.
I gather you are a person who judges things without looking or knowing the facts.
What do you think we should do with this woman and her children? Lock them up (72hrs wouldn't be enough for anything) or what.
What is her crime and what is the punishment available?

[jonu]

What Australia deems is not necessarily right.
I gather you are a person who judges things without looking or knowing the facts.
What do you think we should do with this woman and her children? Lock them up (72hrs wouldn't be enough for anything) or what.
What is her crime and what is the punishment available?

I didn't say what Australia did was right. I was highlighting the stupidity of Ardern and Little.

The child is an innocent player here. Last I heard (the mother) being a member of a terrorist organisation was illegal. If she's suspected of that, yes lock her up and let her go through the bail/court process, like you and I would have to.

[artemis]

Jacinda getting a roasting in the press, they see through her charade?

Maybe the media have realised that the gloss is wearing off a wee bit, and that the mood of the nation may result in a change of government in 2023. And f they don't look slightly more balanced in their reporting they might not get the taxpayer handouts in the future. So thinking about survival.

[jonu]

Maybe the media have realised that the gloss is wearing off a wee bit, and that the mood of the nation may result in a change of government in 2023. And f they don't look slightly more balanced in their reporting they might not get the taxpayer handouts in the future. So thinking about survival.

Labour's handouts to the Press have gone largely unscrutinised. Surprise, surprise. An extremely unhealthy situation for our democracy....but great for Cindy, using our money to ensure she escapes any rigorous scrutiny.

The Press are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Hard to see why a second handout was even considered. The economy, we were told, was strong.

[iceman]

Labour's handouts to the Press have gone largely unscrutinised. Surprise, surprise. An extremely unhealthy situation for our democracy....but great for Cindy, using our money to ensure she escapes any rigorous scrutiny.

The Press are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Hard to see why a second handout was even considered. The economy, we were told, was strong.

It is scary if what is being reported is true, that the PM has done a deal with Morning Report on Radio NZ to appear on their program at the time of her choosing and to discuss a topic of her choosing. Putin would be proud to have compliant media like that.

[Balance]

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/438246/housing-affordability-imf-recommends-capital-gains-tax

Some good recommendations/suggestions from IMF on how to make housing affordable and accessible for NZers.

Unfortunately we all should know that Cindy & her team of incompetents are pre-occupied with remaining in power to do nothing than they are to solve real problems with real solutions.

Clueless - that’s the best description of Cindy.

[dobby41]

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/438246/housing-affordability-imf-recommends-capital-gains-tax

Some good recommendations/suggestions from IMF on how to make housing affordable and accessible for NZers.

Unfortunately we all should know that Cindy & her team of incompetents are pre-occupied with remaining in power to do nothing than they are to solve real problems with real solutions.

Clueless - that’s the best description of Cindy.

While I agree that we need a CGT I don't see how it will fix any housing issue.
We already have the brightline test for everyone (except your own home within reason) and traders get taxed on their income.
Even with a CGT at 33% (which it wouldn't be) investment property is still the best game in town for leveraged capital gains.

[SBQ]

While I agree that we need a CGT I don't see how it will fix any housing issue.
We already have the brightline test for everyone (except your own home within reason) and traders get taxed on their income.
Even with a CGT at 33% (which it wouldn't be) investment property is still the best game in town for leveraged capital gains.

I don't think the IMF is looking for a quick fix but rather, a change in direction of how NZ's housing market has been treated as a commodity for profiting. You can fact check this but since 1991, home ownership has been on the decline. I can see this with my own eyes of more and more houses that go for sale, end up in the hands of investment consortium groups (that pool individual incomes in like the same manner way as Robert Kyosaki's (author of Rich Dad Poor Dad) has with his seminar promotions over in N. America).

I've read utter non-sense from the anti-CGT camp saying any such tax will have sellers adding that tax amount to the purchase price of the home. WHAT??? That's not gonna happen.

The primary goal for a CGT on houses is to reduce the demand of these rental consortiums by discouraging the use of houses as a means of profiteering. While not 100% effective, this has been done well in places like Canada and in the US, you can read below for the data:

https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/the-life/looking-back-the-nz-housing-boom-when-and-how-it-all-began

Yes large cities like Vancouver still experienced high housing prices ; no different to NYC and SanFrancisco. But the real measurement of having a non-housing crisis is simply by the % of families and individuals that OWN their home. What i've seen in Vancouver is detached houses continue to be owned by family dwellings, etc. and for those that choose the rental path, they do so by living in high density apartments (something that Auckland has difficulty in achieving due to the restrictive RMA). Anotherwords, individuals simply can't compete with the private investors when it comes to bidding on a house for sale.

As for houses being the best way to profit in NZ? A CGT will certainly reduce that demand making ventures like house flipping less common (note this would not affect those in the business buying and selling houses) ; what we're speaking of is the useless brightline test of 5 years. These investors simply mortgage on multiple houses for retirement in 10 or 30 years later as the capital gains would be tax free.

Now, will the Labour gov't bring in CGT? Not likely. I don't think any form of new taxes will be on the table.

Lastly, can anyone suggest who actually benefits from the rapidly rise in housing prices? The high income earners that are able to leverage so they can own multiple homes ; maybe the top NZ 5%? Shame on you. The 95% left will suffer as future generations pay more for a house. Those that already own and mortgage free would simply pass it on to the next generation. But since home ownership has been on a decline since 1991, it's clear less and less of that will be the case. Also all the major banks in NZ are foreign owned, they too benefit from the rapid rise in housing prices ; as the profits go to their shareholders overseas.

[jonu]

The murky funding arrangement for Cindy's bailout at Ihumatao is starting to emerge. Treasury advised against it, considering it a misuse of the scheme that was used to fund it.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/treasury-warned-government-against-the-way-it-did-ihum%C4%81tao-deal/ar-BB1eAF1j?ocid=msedgntp

But did that concern our Cindy? Not on yer nelly! Another mess of her own making off her plate, with a showering of our money, that was budgeted for other things. Good one Cindy.

[dobby41]

I don't think the IMF is looking for a quick fix but rather, a change in direction of how NZ's housing market has been treated as a commodity for profiting. You can fact check this but since 1991, home ownership has been on the decline. I can see this with my own eyes of more and more houses that go for sale, end up in the hands of investment consortium groups (that pool individual incomes in like the same manner way as Robert Kyosaki's (author of Rich Dad Poor Dad) has with his seminar promotions over in N. America).

I've read utter non-sense from the anti-CGT camp saying any such tax will have sellers adding that tax amount to the purchase price of the home. WHAT??? That's not gonna happen.

The primary goal for a CGT on houses is to reduce the demand of these rental consortiums by discouraging the use of houses as a means of profiteering. While not 100% effective, this has been done well in places like Canada and in the US, you can read below for the data:

https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/the-life/looking-back-the-nz-housing-boom-when-and-how-it-all-began

Yes large cities like Vancouver still experienced high housing prices ; no different to NYC and SanFrancisco. But the real measurement of having a non-housing crisis is simply by the % of families and individuals that OWN their home. What i've seen in Vancouver is detached houses continue to be owned by family dwellings, etc. and for those that choose the rental path, they do so by living in high density apartments (something that Auckland has difficulty in achieving due to the restrictive RMA). Anotherwords, individuals simply can't compete with the private investors when it comes to bidding on a house for sale.

As for houses being the best way to profit in NZ? A CGT will certainly reduce that demand making ventures like house flipping less common (note this would not affect those in the business buying and selling houses) ; what we're speaking of is the useless brightline test of 5 years. These investors simply mortgage on multiple houses for retirement in 10 or 30 years later as the capital gains would be tax free.

Now, will the Labour gov't bring in CGT? Not likely. I don't think any form of new taxes will be on the table.

Lastly, can anyone suggest who actually benefits from the rapidly rise in housing prices? The high income earners that are able to leverage so they can own multiple homes ; maybe the top NZ 5%? Shame on you. The 95% left will suffer as future generations pay more for a house. Those that already own and mortgage free would simply pass it on to the next generation. But since home ownership has been on a decline since 1991, it's clear less and less of that will be the case. Also all the major banks in NZ are foreign owned, they too benefit from the rapid rise in housing prices ; as the profits go to their shareholders overseas.

Yes - the idea that if you have to pay CGT you just add that to the sale price is silly. You are looking for the best price anyway and if you could get 15 or 30% more just by asking you would.

It won't stop traders or flipping because they are caught in the income tax net - any profit is taxed because the house is your product in the same way a dairy sells pies and pays tax on the pie profit.

So housing, with leverage, would still be the best way for capital growth in NZ even with a CGT.

[SBQ]

Yes - the idea that if you have to pay CGT you just add that to the sale price is silly. You are looking for the best price anyway and if you could get 15 or 30% more just by asking you would.

It won't stop traders or flipping because they are caught in the income tax net - any profit is taxed because the house is your product in the same way a dairy sells pies and pays tax on the pie profit.

So housing, with leverage, would still be the best way for capital growth in NZ even with a CGT.

Over 10 years ago (or so) I remember it was popular for people to incorporate a business to be GST registered, then make the purchases for a house under the business name and thus collect the 12.5% GST (ie say on the purchase of the land), then use that GST credit to buy building supplies to build the house. But sooner or later, the house has to be sold and the owner of the company winds up. That meant the sale of the house was price + GST. Of course this 12.5% would not be worn by the bidders of the house at an auction ; highest price is highest price. It mean the seller needs to calculate the 12.5% GST they have to rebate back to IRD. The end result being.... well probably not worth the effort ; but it's clear a tax does not mean you simply add it on to the selling price.

A agree CGT won't stop the leverage / flipping of houses as it 'may' still be the best game in town. This has been the case in Canada too in major cities. However, what is more important is that NZ is on the right path (similar to Canada) where there's more taxes to discourage profiting from selling houses. At a time when the NZ gov't is strapped for tax revenue - it makes sense.

I also do hope if CGT is brought in, they also need to revamp the tax on Kiwi Saver invested in foreign shares. This taxing of paper gains via FIF is a big killer of long term compound gains. I'm all for deferred taxation of gains like they do in the US/Canada as the taxing of capital gains for the elderly / seniors is more tax favourable as pensioners typically have low incomes and thus be taxed at a lower tax bracket.

All levels of gov't in NZ have been slack and done nothing in terms of equitable tax fairness. At the municipal level, it's quite common in Canada for rates based on the individual's position of ownership of houses. For eg. principal resident home gets 1 discount, if the owner is a senior, he can get a further discount on the rates. But if the house is owned in a company or in a trust, they pay the full maximum rate (which is often 40% higher). If the person owns another home, that home will also be assessed at the max rate. All the data is easily checked from the federal tax dept and land registry.

I do applaud what Canada has done to help out low income families in getting into a home through the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive (which is regardless of the LVR that we have in NZ, a 1st time buyer in Canada requires only 5% deposit regardless of the state of the economy of the bank lending requirement etc.). Furthermore the FTHB grant is a loan from the federal gov't of up to 5% of the value of the home. So for those that can't meet the deposit, they can borrow it interest free, though this is only an interest free loan. The criteria is that 5% has to be paid back at time of sale of the house which would be "5% OF THE VALUE of the house" so when prices go up, BOTH the home owner and the gov't benefits as a joint venture.

For other programs Canada has, one can Google about RRSPs (like Kiwi Saver but deferred taxed and up to 18% of individuals income can be contributed, RESP - education fund which grows 100% tax free with no taxes to pay at the end when used for education, RDSP for disabilities, and the best of all, TFSA 'Tax Free Savings Account' which every Cdn over age 18 can have and all investments under the TFSA is 100% tax free - withdrawals are tax free. I don't know why NZ has not considered any of these programs to help those on the lower end?

[dobby41]

I do applaud what Canada has done to help out low income families in getting into a home through the First-Time Home Buyer Incentive (which is regardless of the LVR that we have in NZ, a 1st time buyer in Canada requires only 5% deposit regardless of the state of the economy of the bank lending requirement etc.). Furthermore the FTHB grant is a loan from the federal gov't of up to 5% of the value of the home. So for those that can't meet the deposit, they can borrow it interest free, though this is only an interest free loan. The criteria is that 5% has to be paid back at time of sale of the house which would be "5% OF THE VALUE of the house" so when prices go up, BOTH the home owner and the gov't benefits as a joint venture.

For other programs Canada has, one can Google about RRSPs (like Kiwi Saver but deferred taxed and up to 18% of individuals income can be contributed, RESP - education fund which grows 100% tax free with no taxes to pay at the end when used for education, RDSP for disabilities, and the best of all, TFSA 'Tax Free Savings Account' which every Cdn over age 18 can have and all investments under the TFSA is 100% tax free - withdrawals are tax free. I don't know why NZ has not considered any of these programs to help those on the lower end?

5% deposits don't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
FTHB doesn't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
The issue is supply, not tinkering with the rest (at the moment).

[fungus pudding]

5% deposits don't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
FTHB doesn't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
The issue is supply, not tinkering with the rest (at the moment).

Precisely.

[fungus pudding]

5% deposits don't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
FTHB doesn't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
The issue is supply, not tinkering with the rest (at the moment).

Double posted ???

[SBQ]

5% deposits don't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
FTHB doesn't help if you can't buy a house because everyone is out bidding you.
The issue is supply, not tinkering with the rest (at the moment).

Perhaps you've not read my post closely. We all know the highest price wins but not everyone buys in prime location; we also know individuals have no chance at having the highest bid against 'consortium investment groups' with full intention of renting every room out. NZ home ownership has been on the decline far too long and COVID didn't help young families, as the NZ gov't continues to do nothing. The transfer of Kiwi Saver funds into a 1st home (a scheme Canada since the 90s) does not help one bit when the banks set LVR too high. We have banks in NZ that recently set LVR to 20 or 40% !! REGARDLESS of the person's situation. In Canada, the gov't has stepped in way back in the 90s through the CHMC (you can Google that) which FORCES banks to gives loans to First Time home buyers by limiting a 5% deposit at anytime of the economic cycle.

With the new FTHB (introduced last year), the 5% basically PAYS for this CHMC 5% deposit!!! The FTHB also applies to those recently divorced too so it's possible the other partner that loses the house can start over in the same manner.

I do think it was amusing how Jacinda placed a foreign buyers ban on houses which did nothing. She would of been better to do what Justin Trudeau did in Vancouver by imposing taxation on all fronts. 20% sales tax on non-residents buying + no rebates in rates + Vacancy tax on ghost houses. How about the supply side? In Canada, fortunately crown land just doesn't go back to the 1st Nations without proof. Yes they need proof to show the land has a significance to their culture and is simply not just 'awarded' back like we do with the Treaty of Waitangi. Also the NZ RMA is way too restrictive. Such a large country like Canada, all the major cities think building UP. For eg. we're seeing a lack of petro stations in downtown Vancouver for the simple reason, VCC reassess the corner lots as prime real estate where 30 or 40 story high rise buildings can be built. It's wasteful. so the trend for EVs in the downtown core has been set at all levels of gov't.

Again, what is NZ doing ? The IMF for years has said on ALL fronts that NZ gov't has pandered to only the rich (who get a tax free ride on higher housing prices) and done nothing at increasing the housing stock and release more land for sale and reducing regulations in the building side.

[jonu]

The murky funding arrangement for Cindy's bailout at Ihumatao is starting to emerge. Treasury advised against it, considering it a misuse of the scheme that was used to fund it.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/treasury-warned-government-against-the-way-it-did-ihum%C4%81tao-deal/ar-BB1eAF1j?ocid=msedgntp

But did that concern our Cindy? Not on yer nelly! Another mess of her own making off her plate, with a showering of our money, that was budgeted for other things. Good one Cindy.

Oh Dear. Has Minister Woods just misled the House?

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/ihum%C4%81tao-deal-under-scrutiny-as-housing-minister-accused-of-using-kiwibuild-as-slush-fund/ar-BB1eFhxH?ocid=msedgntp

This government's arrogance was always going to catch up with it. Not even Team Player Mallard will be able to save her from this one!

[jonu]

The murky funding arrangement for Cindy's bailout at Ihumatao is starting to emerge. Treasury advised against it, considering it a misuse of the scheme that was used to fund it.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/treasury-warned-government-against-the-way-it-did-ihum%C4%81tao-deal/ar-BB1eAF1j?ocid=msedgntp

But did that concern our Cindy? Not on yer nelly! Another mess of her own making off her plate, with a showering of our money, that was budgeted for other things. Good one Cindy.

Oh Dear. Has Minister Woods just misled the House?

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/ihum%C4%81tao-deal-under-scrutiny-as-housing-minister-accused-of-using-kiwibuild-as-slush-fund/ar-BB1eFhxH?ocid=msedgntp

This government's arrogance was always going to catch up with it. Not even Team Player Mallard will be able to save her from this one!

[jonu]

Marama Davidson reverts to Identity Politics....because that what the Left does.

Meanwhile she runs as soon as she's asked what she has actually done. Good one Marama. Good one Cindy. She's your Minister.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/124585071/national-mp-nicola-willis-confronts-green-mp-marama-davidson-over-racist-accusation

[artemis]

Marama Davidson reverts to Identity Politics....because that what the Left does.

Meanwhile she runs as soon as she's asked what she has actually done. Good one Marama. Good one Cindy. She's your Minister. ....

Might be a reason for Ms Davidson's opinion. Most recent social housing list reports 62% of main applicants identify as Maori or Pacific Peoples. (Quite a few others decline to say.) Occupants of emergency motels and similar are not the same as those on the social housing waiting list, but good chance not too different.

Our small business gave a chance to one of them, actually in the place in the article, not long out of prison. Won't be doing that again. Didn't end well, had to get the police involved.

[jonu]

Might be a reason for Ms Davidson's opinion. Most recent social housing list reports 62% of main applicants identify as Maori or Pacific Peoples. (Quite a few others decline to say.) Occupants of emergency motels and similar are not the same as those on the social housing waiting list, but good chance not too different.

Our small business gave a chance to one of them, actually in the place in the article, not long out of prison. Won't be doing that again. Didn't end well, had to get the police involved.


The last few sentences would appear to back Ms Willis' position.

[winner69]

Bright line test extended to 10 years

Property investors can't deduct interest from rental income anymore

Suppose that isn't really increasing taxes

Those dastardly investors getting their comeuppance

[SBQ]

Bright line test extended to 10 years

Property investors can't deduct interest from rental income anymore

Suppose that isn't really increasing taxes

Those dastardly investors getting their comeuppance

Personally I think Labour is heading into the right direction. In Jacinda's 40 min speech yesterday morning, some real startling stats on who the buyers were and how houses are rocketing up with low LVR deposits in 2020. I applaud the upcoming changes as I mentioned before ; NZ past gov'ts has done nothing until now.

Is moving the Brightline test a new form of tax? I don't believe so as the purpose of this test is to determine the individual's intent. The guideline just makes it more clear that when people are buying a house to invest in, they better think twice about holding it for 10+ years if they want to be exempt from taxes on the capital gain. At 5 years, ok many would hold out and simply buy the house - as a common sales pitch by these property investment groups that invite people to attend free seminars throughout NZ. Consider elsewhere around the world - what has the UK done ? what i'm seeing is NZ is just catching up to the same tax policies as we see abroad.

Now i'm eagerly awaiting to see what changes in the RMA will come? I think it would be welcoming if houses can be built closer so there's 'better use' of the land as section sizes are much smaller than they were some years ago. We need to think like abroad and build UP, not the boring single story builds we see blanketed all over NZ in new sub-divisions. Increase the density!

[iceman]

I don't have any problems with extending of the Brightline test except for the fact that the Finance Minister stated DEFINITIVELY prior to the election that this would not happen. Both him and the PM are now openly lying about that statement, despite it being very clear.
Repeatedly using the words "speculators" for people that invest in residential property for up to 10 years is simply wrong and repeatedly using the word "loophole" both for interest deductibility and David Parker using it to justify stopping interest only loans, is disingenuous.

I think stopping or reducing the use of interest only mortgages is a tool they can use to cool the demand but I'm totally opposed to removing interest as a genuine business cost on residential property investment only. Meanwhile we can borrow and buy shares or any business and claim interest costs as a genuine business expense, as it should be.
I think Jacinda has just signed her own death warrant with this and I have no doubt that we will see large rent increases over the next 4 years, ironically probably most of it paid for by the Government through accommodation supplements.

The $ 3.8 Billion promised for speeding up housing infrastructure without any explanation on how or where it will be spent, looks like so many of their big promises (Kiwibuild, all the trees, light rail, Auckland skypath etc etc etc) that have come to absolutely nothing. I suspect this will be the same. In any case, the amount is a drop in the bucket.

[winner69]

Robertson was pushing for a Muldoon style rent freeze in 2012 and been ‘discussed’ in labour circles every now and again since

Could stick the boot into these dastardly speculators good and proper by doing that ...you never know

[winner69]

Probably take away interest deductibility for tax purposes from everybody and all businesses ......no loophole then

Even the BusinessNZ guy is worried about that according to Herald report

[Zaphod]

Is it a loophole? It was a deliberate design of the tax system to allow mortgage interest to be deducted for tax purposes. The term 'loophole' is of course a more politically expedient nomenclature for a government to use.

[fungus pudding]

Is it a loophole? It was a deliberate design of the tax system to allow mortgage interest to be deducted for tax purposes. The term 'loophole' is of course a more politically expedient nomenclature for a government to use.

In spite of all the fancy descriptions used over the years, it is simply that we used to tax profit, but now they want to base the tax on the turnover. Not just weird but unworkable. Only the naive Labour govt. could think of applying income tax to the outgoings. Brilliant!

[Zaphod]

In spite of all the fancy descriptions used over the years, it is simply that we used to tax profit, but now they want to base the tax on the turnover. Not just weird but unworkable. Only the naive Labour govt. could think of applying income tax to the outgoings. Brilliant!

LOL

Well, a previously stated goal was to broaden the tax base wasn't it! ;) Please don't send your suggestion to them though.

[GTM 3442]

Is it a loophole? It was a deliberate design of the tax system to allow mortgage interest to be deducted for tax purposes. The term 'loophole' is of course a more politically expedient nomenclature for a government to use.

The"loophole" seems to be that you can deduct interest payments from income if you're an investor, but not for the family home.

Yes, it's nuts, but it is what it is.

The principle of taxing profit has just gone out the window.

From here it's government by expediency, taxation by inspiration, and a further step on the slippery slope.

Now - how about leveling the playing field by scrapping tax on interest earned?

[dobby41]

The"loophole" seems to be that you can deduct interest payments from income if you're an investor, but not for the family home.

Yes, it's nuts, but it is what it is.

The principle of taxing profit has just gone out the window.

From here it's government by expediency, taxation by inspiration, and a further step on the slippery slope.

Now - how about leveling the playing field by scrapping tax on interest earned?

Another way to have dealt with the supposed loophole would have been to allow a tax deduction for mortgages paid on a private home, I believe some countries do this.
Another way to have dealt with the 'too many investors pushing up prices' would have been to have limited the number of additional homes anyone could own.

[GTM 3442]

Another way to have dealt with the supposed loophole would have been to allow a tax deduction for mortgages paid on a private home, I believe some countries do this.
Another way to have dealt with the 'too many investors pushing up prices' would have been to have limited the number of additional homes anyone could own.

It's not actually a loophole.

It would have been much, much, better not to have done it.

Still, I suppose that New Zealand governments have a long proud record of ignoring principles.

[dobby41]

It's not actually a loophole.

It would have been much, much, better not to have done it.

Still, I suppose that New Zealand governments have a long proud record of ignoring principles.

That's why I said 'supposed' - just following others language. I fully understand that it isn't a loophole but a normal deduction in common with all other businesses.

[Balance]

That's why I said 'supposed' - just following others language. I fully understand that it isn't a loophole but a normal deduction in common with all other businesses.

Cynical Cindy attempting to frame the narrative to hide the fact that her government and her have broken election promises & undertakings.

Nasty & grubby woman.

[t.rexjr]

Ironically FHBs will fit the bill.

Rent's will increase to cover the additional tax expense, resulting in decreased ability to save for that first house.

Bare land prices will also increase as there's a loophole to avoid the tax if you build new...

Which increases land values in general...

Because the rental stock is now flowing toward new built houses landlords can now charge a premium... Which in turn increase market rental values of older houses...

Unfortunately because they aren't privy to builders terms on sections FHBs are now having to fork out more for the old s**tboxes while battling in an environment that increases the difficulty to save for a deposit in the first instance

[SBQ]

It's not actually a loophole.

It would have been much, much, better not to have done it.

Still, I suppose that New Zealand governments have a long proud record of ignoring principles.

I think it's a loop hole. ANY time you can deduct 1 source of income from an unrelated expense like mortgage interest is a loophole.

As for allowing mortgage interest expense to apply on the personal primary resident home? In the USA, there are limited on how much one can deduct this expense off their personal 'taxable income'. HOWEVER, like Australia & Canada, the USA has Capital Gains Tax on the sale of any home including their primary residence home. How is this fair in the NZ perspective when landlords after 5 years, can sell their asset (the house) for 100% tax free capital gain?

Again I applaud what Jacinda is doing. Ever since I came to NZ, it didn't seem fair how the majority of wealth in NZ has come from the backs of rising house prices. The term 'Negative Gearing' too was something I had to learn as it's never allowed in Canada and as I mentioned in other threads, the issue of leveraging is a problem.

Let me explain the distinction of other business ventures. When a company or small business closes up, ANY assets that have appreciated in value is taxed on the gain. Likewise with disposing depreciated assets like vehicles. The residual value too is taxed. On the asset side of the balance sheet, such as inventory is also taxed. So tell my why is it that an individual can own multiple homes rented out, can end up paying NO tax on the capital gain after 5 or 10 or 20 years??? Because this certainly is not the case in a small business.

But above all, here are the startling stats that got me off the chair in Jacinda's announcement:

1) by year end of 2020, 40% of ALL houses purchases was made by those who already owned multiple properties. (meaning, there's no way a 1st home buyer can compete. Buyers of houses for the sole purpose of renting out and investing will always pay more)


2) and from June to Nov 2020, the level of mortgage borrowing by these 'property investors' had increased by 116%. (no surprise here with record low mortgage rates, I saw as low as 2% last year)


3) From 1991 to 2019, NZ experienced the HIGHEST real growth of housing prices in the OECD !!! (Yes higher than places like Vancouver Canada and my friends are crying there)


4) Since last year, 15,000 houses were purchased by people who ALREADY owned 5 (FIVE) or more houses !!!



If you ask me, all these people owning multiple houses deserve it. They pushed up house prices so fast to unprecedented levels that any current gov't had to pull the levers.

and if you think the 'use' of house is complex in NZ. Look at Canada. If you rent a portion of your primary resident home out (ie basement, spare bedroom etc). Then the tax laws states THAT % proportion of the home is no longer counted towards tax free capital gain from that time onward. So people rent the whole basement out which can account to 50% of the proportion size of the home which means at time of sale in the long term future ; 50% of the capital gain becomes income taxable (off your principle resident home). What i'm saying is that the gov't of NZ has many options to do and can go down the path like Canada has done.

[Panda-NZ-]

Interesting contrast:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96687322/national-to-double-home-start-grant-for-existing-houses

National wanted to give 20k to 30k in taxpayer money for a first home ownership grant (!)

While this promise seems to have been kept:


Ardern took further aim at people with multiple properties, meanwhile, saying Labour would "remove speculators' unfair tax advantages."

[fungus pudding]

I think it's a loop hole. ANY time you can deduct 1 source of income from an unrelated expense like mortgage interest is a loophole.

Income tax is applied to profit on rental properties, just as any other enterprise. That is hardly a loophole. I think you've muddled your words. Applying income tax to the outgoings is loopy.

As for your claim that assets sold on the sale of a business are taxed on any gain, that is simply incorrect. Tax will only be applied to the depreciation recovered. Gains beyond that are normally tax free.

[jonu]

Income tax is applied to profit on rental properties, just as any other enterprise. That is hardly a loophole. I think you've muddled your words. Applying income tax to the outgoings is loopy.

As for your claim that assets sold on the sale of a business are taxed on any gain, that is simply incorrect. Tax will only be applied to the depreciation recovered. Gains beyond that are normally tax free.

Robertson has been disingenuous in the extreme, describing using interest payments as a loophole. This is a whole new tax on its own, aside from the Capital Gains 10 year brightline. Removing a business expense that applies to all other businesses is a new tax!

Three lies for the price of one from Labour. 1. No Capital Gains tax
2. No new taxes
3. No movement of the brightline test.

[Panda-NZ-]

How is removing a tax deduction a new tax?

[stoploss]

I think it's a loop hole. ANY time you can deduct 1 source of income from an unrelated expense like mortgage interest is a loophole.

As for allowing mortgage interest expense to apply on the personal primary resident home? In the USA, there are limited on how much one can deduct this expense off their personal 'taxable income'. HOWEVER, like Australia & Canada, the USA has Capital Gains Tax on the sale of any home including their primary residence home. How is this fair in the NZ perspective when landlords after 5 years, can sell their asset (the house) for 100% tax free capital gain?

Again I applaud what Jacinda is doing. Ever since I came to NZ, it didn't seem fair how the majority of wealth in NZ has come from the backs of rising house prices. The term 'Negative Gearing' too was something I had to learn as it's never allowed in Canada and as I mentioned in other threads, the issue of leveraging is a problem.

Let me explain the distinction of other business ventures. When a company or small business closes up, ANY assets that have appreciated in value is taxed on the gain. Likewise with disposing depreciated assets like vehicles. The residual value too is taxed. On the asset side of the balance sheet, such as inventory is also taxed. So tell my why is it that an individual can own multiple homes rented out, can end up paying NO tax on the capital gain after 5 or 10 or 20 years??? Because this certainly is not the case in a small business.

But above all, here are the startling stats that got me off the chair in Jacinda's announcement:

1) by year end of 2020, 40% of ALL houses purchases was made by those who already owned multiple properties. (meaning, there's no way a 1st home buyer can compete. Buyers of houses for the sole purpose of renting out and investing will always pay more)


2) and from June to Nov 2020, the level of mortgage borrowing by these 'property investors' had increased by 116%. (no surprise here with record low mortgage rates, I saw as low as 2% last year)


3) From 1991 to 2019, NZ experienced the HIGHEST real growth of housing prices in the OECD !!! (Yes higher than places like Vancouver Canada and my friends are crying there)


4) Since last year, 15,000 houses were purchased by people who ALREADY owned 5 (FIVE) or more houses !!!



If you ask me, all these people owning multiple houses deserve it. They pushed up house prices so fast to unprecedented levels that any current gov't had to pull the levers.

and if you think the 'use' of house is complex in NZ. Look at Canada. If you rent a portion of your primary resident home out (ie basement, spare bedroom etc). Then the tax laws states THAT % proportion of the home is no longer counted towards tax free capital gain from that time onward. So people rent the whole basement out which can account to 50% of the proportion size of the home which means at time of sale in the long term future ; 50% of the capital gain becomes income taxable (off your principle resident home). What i'm saying is that the gov't of NZ has many options to do and can go down the path like Canada has done.

SBQ maybe read this yet again you are wrong
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/no-tax-for-trade-me-millionaire/AKW6GEETFDSUUBZ36DU2GMOBUI/

[jonu]

How is removing a tax deduction a new tax?

Um....because you are paying tax on something you didn't have to before....and don't have to in any other business.

[SBQ]

SBQ maybe read this yet again you are wrong
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/no-tax-for-trade-me-millionaire/AKW6GEETFDSUUBZ36DU2GMOBUI/

You are referencing the very guy that was part of the Tax Working Group that advised Jacinda that NZ needed some form of CGT. But if you think the sale of shares equates to the same as the sale of residential houses? I tend to disagree. The NZ housing market has turned into a meme investment for the past 40 years where the losers are those that can't save enough to own one one and the winners are the wealthy that could own more than one. This is a major difference than those that have lost on share investments.

Yes I stand corrected that NZ does not have a CGT on the sale of appreciated assets. However, when everyone knows that an asset like homes always go up in value ; this is certainty not the same as believing investments in NZ shares also go up in value (it's an entirely different risk level and not a necessity like a roof over your head). Too many landlords have gamed the system, exploited houses for their benefit to profit for retirement.

Got to be a special kind of person to believe houses are investment tools to profiting.

[jonu]

You raise an interesting point SBQ. The assumption that house prices always go up....which is probably true in the long term. However if there is a correction to a bubble (perhaps debt default contagion in Europe....remember PIGS anyone?) and the government could be on the wrong side of the equation.

Post GFC through to about 2012/13 prices in provincial and coastal NZ took a mighty tumble.

[fungus pudding]

You raise an interesting point SBQ. The assumption that house prices always go up....which is probably true in the long term.



It is not true in the long term, or in the short term. While there is generally a nominal gain, houses and buildings definitely depreciate in real terms- always.

[artemis]

It is not true in the long term, or in the short term. While there is generally a nominal gain, houses and buildings definitely depreciate in real terms- always.

Good point, and a key reason land prices increase is local government decisions. Change those decisions and see land prices fall.

[SBQ]

It is not true in the long term, or in the short term. While there is generally a nominal gain, houses and buildings definitely depreciate in real terms- always.

As our family lawyer once told us long ago, "You can't separate the house from the land it sits on" meaning, property titles and rates bills include the land + capital improvements. No one that buys a piece of property goes under the assumption that their purchase will decrease in price ; you can take that to the bank.

Would it be fair to say since last year, house prices that went up over 20% is well in excess of the CPI / inflation rate in this short term period?

I should thank all those property investors that jumped into buying houses. If the house price rise was only a meager 5%, then the Labour Party would of just let it go.

[fungus pudding]

As our family lawyer once told us long ago, "You can't separate the house from the land it sits on" meaning, property titles and rates bills include the land + capital improvements. No one that buys a piece of property goes under the assumption that their purchase will decrease in price ; you can take that to the bank.

Would it be fair to say since last year, house prices that went up over 20% is well in excess of the CPI / inflation rate in this short term period?

I should thank all those property investors that jumped into buying houses. If the house price rise was only a meager 5%, then the Labour Party would of just let it go.

It won't decrease in price (nominal) but it will decrease in value (real).
If it were possible to buy a block of land - split in two, and build a house on one - leaving the other half vacant. Fifty years later pull out the plans and build a brand new carbon copy of the first house. The new one will be worth considerably more. That is because the first one will have depreciated.
But it's not just at 50 years. It happens throughout the life of the building. The reason recent price rises went up in excess of 20% is because they were too cheap - the market was caught sleeping. New homes sell on a cost plus basis, whereas existing homes sell on a comparative basis, which is often lagging. The real estate market is largely a second hand market so will always have fits and starts.

[Zaphod]

As our family lawyer once told us long ago, "You can't separate the house from the land it sits on" meaning, property titles and rates bills include the land + capital improvements. No one that buys a piece of property goes under the assumption that their purchase will decrease in price ; you can take that to the bank.


One of our more distant relatives owns a house under the scenario you outline above; they own the dwelling, but not the property which is leasehold. They receive two rates notices, one for the capital improvements (dwelling) and one via the land owner for the land itself. They are currently concerned about the depreciation of value on the house, as it is quite old, and people are actively avoiding purchasing properties under leasehold situations.

[SBQ]

It won't decrease in price (nominal) but it will decrease in value (real).
If it were possible to buy a block of land - split in two, and build a house on one - leaving the other half vacant. Fifty years later pull out the plans and build a brand new carbon copy of the first house. The new one will be worth considerably more. That is because the first one will have depreciated.
But it's not just at 50 years. It happens throughout the life of the building. The reason recent price rises went up in excess of 20% is because they were too cheap - the market was caught sleeping. New homes sell on a cost plus basis, whereas existing homes sell on a comparative basis, which is often lagging. The real estate market is largely a second hand market so will always have fits and starts.

Don't forget inflation ; cost of building materials and increasing standards & regulations.

Houses too cheap in NZ? I'll reiterate this :
https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/the-life/looking-back-the-nz-housing-boom-when-and-how-it-all-began

This mess was not started by the 1st time home owners. It was started because of market speculation (you say too cheap is the same as someone saying Gamestock shares were too cheap at @ $300 and it went on to $400).

I want to add that comparing a house in NZ to one in say America or Canada is like comparing apples with oranges. Canada for most part of the country does have affordable housing but there are hot spots like Toronto and Vancouver. If you really want to compare apples with apples, then when I take a $2M house in Vancouver of similar age to a $2M house in Auckland ; there is no contest. The Vancouver house would be in every way, better built, more comfortable / central heating, LARGER IN SIZE due to 'livable area is what realators use to measure house size', and while many may say larger is not better ; you will find the women tend to prefer larger kitchens & bedrooms. How can NZ compete when building materials are x 3 times the cost one can buy at Home Depot?

@ Zaphod: Indeed not an ideal situation to have separate titles with leaseholds. When I was looking at a house few years ago, I came across "cross lease" titles but if I recall correctly, the house and land were together under 1 rate bill ; but the cross lease meant permission required by the other lease holder too (in party with the other title). Permission such as if 1 day the house had to be brought down and how / where the new build could be.

[fungus pudding]

Don't forget inflation ; cost of building materials and increasing standards & regulations.

Houses too cheap in NZ? I'll reiterate this :
https://businessdesk.co.nz/article/the-life/looking-back-the-nz-housing-boom-when-and-how-it-all-began

This mess was not started by the 1st time home owners. It was started because of market speculation (you say too cheap is the same as someone saying Gamestock shares were too cheap at @ $300 and it went on to $400).

I want to add that comparing a house in NZ to one in say America or Canada is like comparing apples with oranges. Canada for most part of the country does have affordable housing but there are hot spots like Toronto and Vancouver. If you really want to compare apples with apples, then when I take a $2M house in Vancouver of similar age to a $2M house in Auckland ; there is no contest. The Vancouver house would be in every way, better built, more comfortable / central heating, LARGER IN SIZE due to 'livable area is what realators use to measure house size', and while many may say larger is not better ; you will find the women tend to prefer larger kitchens & bedrooms. How can NZ compete when building materials are x 3 times the cost one can buy at Home Depot?

@ Zaphod: Indeed not an ideal situation to have separate titles with leaseholds. When I was looking at a house few years ago, I came across "cross lease" titles but if I recall correctly, the house and land were together under 1 rate bill ; but the cross lease meant permission required by the other lease holder too (in party with the other title). Permission such as if 1 day the house had to be brought down and how / where the new build could be.

A crosslease is an undivided share of the freehold. Ownership flats are an example. Leasehold is when another party owns the freehold.*
Second hand houses can become too cheap when the market is ignoring (unaware) of repacement costs. Such periods often precede a sudden price jump as the buyers catch on to the replacement cost.

*Almost all NZ homes are freehold. Residential leasehold is not common. Several churches, councils and other institutions are the typical owners of leased land.

[Bjauck]

Something had to be done to try to fix the NZ residential property market, high prices and supply. However the manner in which Labour is attempting to do this should be questioned.

Tova O'Brien: Jacinda Ardern and the mother of all broken promises
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2021/03/tova-o-brien-jacinda-ardern-and-the-mother-of-all-broken-promises.html

[fungus pudding]

Something had to be done to try to fix the NZ residential property market, high prices and supply. However the manner in which Labour is attempting to do this should be questioned.

Tova O'Brien: Jacinda Ardern and the mother of all broken promises
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2021/03/tova-o-brien-jacinda-ardern-and-the-mother-of-all-broken-promises.html

The bright line test at 10 years isn't all bad. it seems to have buried the intention rule we have had since the dinosaurs began trading their caves, but the IRD had never managed to enforce, and largely gave up on in the late 1960s. (They used to send out silly letters to anyone who had sold a property that they had rented out. It was just a matter of ticking boxes or telling them that you had not sold the property just to pocket the property - but because you discovered it was haunted, or some equally stupid excuse.)
The same cannot be said of applying income tax to outgoings. That is bizarre and simply wrong. It is not how commerce works. I'm waiting to see the effect on residential rental property. E.g. what change will there be to a block of ten purpose built flats now that tax is to be applied not just to the profit - but also to the mtge. interest, usually the largest outgoing? It reminds me of Labour's nonsense in the 70s - when the pathetic Rowling dreamt up something he called 'spec tax'. Like Rowling himself - it was a disaster.

[artemis]

The bright line test at 10 years isn't all bad. it seems to have buried the intention rule we have had since the dinosaurs began trading their caves, but the IRD had never managed to enforce, and largely gave up on in the late 1960s. (They used to send out silly letters to anyone who had sold a property that they had rented out. It was just a matter of ticking boxes or telling them that you had not sold the property just to pocket the property - but because you discovered it was haunted, or some equally stupid excuse.)

governments with a majority do what they do. But to double the bright-line test with a few days notice ain't right. Unfair to change the rules with pretty much no notice when settlements are under way.


The same cannot be said of applying income tax to outgoings. That is bizarre and simply wrong. It is not how commerce works. I'm waiting to see the effect on residential rental property. E.g. what change will there be to a block of ten purpose built flats now that tax is to be applied not just to the profit - but also to the mtge. interest, usually the largest outgoing? It reminds me of Labour's nonsense in the 70s - when the pathetic Rowling dreamt up something he called 'spec tax'. Like Rowling himself - it was a disaster.

A very strange decision, stinks of panic and gotta be seen to be doing something. Anything.

The social housing waiting list and transitional housing (motel) numbers are reported monthly and will quickly reflect any rental trend. (Up 51% and 30% respectively in 2020.)

[RTM]

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/national-needs-to-know-what-it-stands-for?utm_source=Friends+of+the+Newsroom&utm_campaign=3ccbb43ed8-Daily+Briefing+26.03.2021&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71de5c4b35-3ccbb43ed8-97906431

Worth reading, not sure where it should go, but this might be close enough.

[jonu]

The reality of how Euthanasia will be implemented is beginning to emerge. Sadly, for those of us called scaremongers, being proved right is no consolation. No surprise when Andrew "Brains Trust" Little is in the thick of it.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/fears-euthanasia-training-will-just-be-online-course/ar-BB1f3x4k?ocid=msedgntp

Euthanasia will be much like abortion, whereby the vast majority of health practitioners, who fully understand what is happening in practice, don't want anything to do with it.

[fungus pudding]

The reality of how Euthanasia will be implemented is beginning to emerge. Sadly, for those of us called scaremongers, being proved right is no consolation. No surprise when Andrew "Brains Trust" Little is in the thick of it.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/fears-euthanasia-training-will-just-be-online-course/ar-BB1f3x4k?ocid=msedgntp

Euthanasia will be much like abortion, whereby the vast majority of health practitioners, who fully understand what is happening in practice, don't want anything to do with it.

No point in worrying about it. Until they make it compulsory :scared: you will be free to go as you please.

[dobby41]

The same cannot be said of applying income tax to outgoings. That is bizarre and simply wrong. It is not how commerce works. I'm waiting to see the effect on residential rental property. E.g. what change will there be to a block of ten purpose built flats now that tax is to be applied not just to the profit - but also to the mtge. interest, usually the largest outgoing? It reminds me of Labour's nonsense in the 70s - when the pathetic Rowling dreamt up something he called 'spec tax'. Like Rowling himself - it was a disaster.

Brian Fallow's opinion piece in the Herald (premium) had an interesting perspective.
He postulated that capital gain made up a larger part of the expected return for someone buying an investment property.
As the capital gain isn't taxable then neither should the interest be deductible.
Under the bright line test the gain is taxable so the interest paid is taken into account for that.

He, and Liam Dann, pointed out that in a normal business a 50% gain in value (of the business) would have meant that the business produced more but a 50% rise in house prices doesn't mean anything else in the business has changed (it doesn't house 50% more people).
Property investment isn't a 'normal' business.

When thinking that interest costs are deductible for every other business have a look at the 'thin capitalisation' rules.

[jonu]

No point in worrying about it. Until they make it compulsory :scared: you will be free to go as you please.

It's the uninformed decision making and coercion that is the saddest thing. There is already a sad tendency toward subtle elder abuse in our society. It is about to get a lot worse.