PDA

View Full Version : If National wins ...



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61

fungus pudding
19-10-2017, 04:46 PM
Once again Winston demonstrates how he cannot be swayed by baubles.

ratkin
19-10-2017, 05:05 PM
haha was that you. I layed some 1.55 but had plenty of green.

Not me , I closed out yesterday, all green. Was very easy market to make money on. Just lay national on night of election in the 1.20s and gradually feed the money back in. Was always going to be plenty of fluctuations

ratkin
19-10-2017, 05:08 PM
Hope these rumours about Labour are right. Would be very boring with English and Peters, and lets face it most national voters are fine no matter who is in power, but quite a few of the poorer members of society need help that they are less likely to get under national

777
19-10-2017, 05:30 PM
So being left or right depends on your bank balance. A bit of a generalisation.

blackcap
19-10-2017, 05:46 PM
Not me , I closed out yesterday, all green. Was very easy market to make money on. Just lay national on night of election in the 1.20s and gradually feed the money back in. Was always going to be plenty of fluctuations

Yes it was but I was lucky to lay National at 1.07,1.08 and 1.10 for plenty on the Monday after the election. That was a real weird thing. Green all round. About to be announced.

ratkin
19-10-2017, 06:05 PM
Time to open a bottle of red :t_up:

fungus pudding
19-10-2017, 06:08 PM
Time to open a bottle of red :t_up:

Ink.?
.
.

huxley
19-10-2017, 06:10 PM
Steak tonight

elZorro
19-10-2017, 06:21 PM
Steak tonight

Terrific news, should be good for the regions if Winston follows through. Labour are keen to support the regions and SMEs too, of course. This has the potential to be a truly great term of office.

Fatboyj
19-10-2017, 06:25 PM
Ink.?
.
.

Excellent ha ha. Interesting opening on the markets tomorrow.

JBmurc
19-10-2017, 06:28 PM
If there was ever a catalyst for a major NZ property correction this would be it ....the three-headed beast

Jonboyz
19-10-2017, 06:28 PM
Only positive I can see is that the NZ dollar is plummeting and so my foreign shares shoot up.

huxley
19-10-2017, 06:36 PM
Shame the Greens have been shafted yet again.. would be interesting to know if they would've got more influence if they "got" MMP and were prepared to (at least look) like they would work with the NATS

jonu
19-10-2017, 06:36 PM
Terrific news, should be good for the regions if Winston follows through. Labour are keen to support the regions and SMEs too, of course. This has the potential to be a truly great term of office.

Good on you for keeping the faith El Z. I still couldn't see this happening even a few days ago.

Winston has already crapped on the Greens, announcing this before they have even held their meeting and declaring he is in coalition with Labour only. In other words all the Greens are doing is sitting meekly and giving supply and confidence. I'd be gutted if I was a Greens voter.

huxley
19-10-2017, 06:41 PM
Haha, I was drinking a couple of beers with a dude who works in policy for the Greens shortly after the elections.. lets just say it's like talking someone out of their religion... they just don't get it..

craic
19-10-2017, 06:45 PM
It's all positive s far as I'm concerned. It may take a day or two but the poor will remain poor and the homeless will remain homeless. Peters, who can't hold an electorate will be calling the tune and his "ministers" will be running the country.

JBmurc
19-10-2017, 06:56 PM
Only positive I can see is that the NZ dollar is plummeting and so my foreign shares shoot up.

Yes got all my shares in AUS-ASX ....also bringing back good size chunk of change next week to NZD ...looking good for extra $1000NZD for my strenghting AUD by the looks of it...would have been the other way had the Nats stayed in power

Sideshow Bob
19-10-2017, 06:57 PM
Dollar dropping like a stone.....

craic
19-10-2017, 07:02 PM
My shares already all cashed up. Tomorrow should give an indication of where they are going.

elZorro
19-10-2017, 07:09 PM
My shares already all cashed up. Tomorrow should give an indication of where they are going.

And you saved $500 on that bet you didn't make. Craic: smarter than the average bear..:)

tim23
19-10-2017, 07:48 PM
Terrific news, should be good for the regions if Winston follows through. Labour are keen to support the regions and SMEs too, of course. This has the potential to be a truly great term of office. Good on you for keeping the faith I never gave up but stopped posting a few weeks back theres only so much abuse one can take from Gus and 777 but where are they now?

777
19-10-2017, 08:12 PM
Good on you for keeping the faith I never gave up but stopped posting a few weeks back theres only so much abuse one can take from Gus and 777 but where are they now?

I am here timmeee. But you can’t post the way you did and not expect a reaction.

huxley
19-10-2017, 08:30 PM
I am here timmeee. But you can’t post the way you did and not expect a reaction.


Three more years bro

elZorro
19-10-2017, 08:46 PM
I watched James Shaw live just a while ago, I must admit I hope they do make some progress on all their core campaign areas. Particularly climate change. It'll be a great relief to see someone other than Paula Bennett (anyone!) take up that portfolio. They are still gathering 75% consensus I believe.

Bill's conceding speech has been archived, here it is. (https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/watch-full-interview-defeated-bill-english-fronts-media-after-winston-peters-sticks-national)Everyone bravely smiling most of the time and it was quite a gracious speech. I didn't quite agree with all of Bill's comments on how they'd done while in office. He commented that Winston had more say on choosing the next government than National did.

Yes, it must have been galling, but then National tried really hard to squash Winston out of the picture, as he'd noted. In retrospect maybe the implosion of the Greens meant that National's tactic didn't work as well as it could have. And National didn't really have any friends to call on, as it turned out. Maori roll voters really turned cold water on the Maori Party, that was obvious in the polling station results.

Sgt Pepper
19-10-2017, 09:16 PM
Terrific news, should be good for the regions if Winston follows through. Labour are keen to support the regions and SMEs too, of course. This has the potential to be a truly great term of office.

Good news indeed EZ after all these years fighting the good fight on this forum.
Fungus is delighted(not)

elZorro
19-10-2017, 09:27 PM
Good news indeed EZ after all these years fighting the good fight on this forum.
Fungus is delighted(not)

Always good to read your posts too. I'm not sure anyone was converted to vote a different way, but at least we all had our convictions, and could back them up :)

iceman
19-10-2017, 09:37 PM
EZ and SgtP. I think just about every poster here agrees this was the preferred news. The Greens are lower than a doormat and have no guts whatsoever. They and NZF, both of whom can not even win one electorate, will be gone next time we vote. Probably in 2-3 years time

Sgt Pepper
19-10-2017, 09:58 PM
EZ and SgtP. I think just about every poster here agrees this was the preferred news. The Greens are lower than a doormat and have no guts whatsoever. They and NZF, both of whom can not even win one electorate, will be gone next time we vote. Probably in 2-3 years time

Hmm
I would pick there is a high probability they will be in government for 3 terms. Don't believe me?look at our political history. So you may have to become accustomed to social democratic government until 2026

Joshuatree
19-10-2017, 10:04 PM
Great news and i believe a change for the better. Greens are now in and will have an 'apprenticeship" to learn the cut and thrust of being in power.They will be in side later, wisely. The more i see and here Shaw the more i like.
Really impressed with elder statesman Winston Peters, this will be what he will be remembered for and Jacinda will grow into the leadership after leading Labour phenomenally from also rans to "doing this". There will be hiccups and mistakes but i think this country is heading for greener fields for all ,not some. A change for the better. JT over and out of here.

iceman
19-10-2017, 11:13 PM
Haha JT. This post of yours has as much credibility as your comments about English giving everything away to stay in Government. As Tracy Watkins has written on Stuff tonight, Jacinda just wanted it more and was prepared to give 5 ministerial portfolios to the minnow that is Winston First. But of course the baubles of office don’t interest him !! The Greens gave away their soul to become an irrelevant and useless prisoner of a NZF-Labour Government. Their last term in parliament I reckon

SgtP. We will see. My view is that we are highly likely to see a 2 party parliament after next election that will not be later than this time in 2020, possibly earlier !! Just glad I have most of my shares and income in foreign currency earnings so personally quite satisfied with the NZ$ weakening 👍

GTM 3442
20-10-2017, 04:42 AM
. . . glad I have most of my shares and income in foreign currency earnings so personally quite satisfied with the NZ$ weakening 👍

Given what happened with the GBP and the FTSE after the Brexit referendum, It could be quite optimistic for the New Zealand share investor.

RTM
20-10-2017, 07:41 AM
Only positive I can see is that the NZ dollar is plummeting and so my foreign shares shoot up.

Would hardly say the dollar plummeted.....I had hoped for more....< 0.65 sounds good.

Cheers
RTM

Aaron
20-10-2017, 07:54 AM
Dollar dropping like a stone.....

NZ will be the envy of countries around the world. Most countries are trying to debase/devalue their currency to make their exporters more competitive. If the new govt is responsible they have done well even before moving into the beehive. NZ as an exporting/trading nation just got more competitive. Sad about the boomers annual overseas holidays though. Maybe they can visit other parts of NZ, we have a great country.

fungus pudding
20-10-2017, 08:49 AM
NZ will be the envy of countries around the world. Most countries are trying to debase/devalue their currency to make their exporters more competitive. If the new govt is responsible they have done well even before moving into the beehive. NZ as an exporting/trading nation just got more competitive. Sad about the boomers annual overseas holidays though. Maybe they can visit other parts of NZ, we have a great country.

We do have a great country.. But there's a huge price to pay for devaluing the currency - called inflation. We are not an exporting country, we are a trading country and lower currency raises the price of most things. Expect big demands for wage increases. Make sure you're in a position to benefit from inflation. No show of meeting target of 200 houses per week if immagration is cut leading to shortage of tradesmen - and building material costs will rise. Unbelievable to hear Peters preaching doom and gloom on the economy even before the coalition ink is dry.
Good luck to this govt. I'm not sure who, if any, will benefit from this arrangement. Obviously not my cap of tea, and I struggle looking at Peters' track record to believe this will last, especially as so many policies between L and W1st conflict, and with a degree of instability as they are a minority govt. without the Greens. Time will tell.

minimoke
20-10-2017, 09:19 AM
We do have a great country.. But there's a huge price to pay for devaluing the currency - called inflation. And who are the biggest victims of inflation - those in poverty. The few things they can now afford are only going to get more expensive.

Aaron
20-10-2017, 09:28 AM
Minimoke and FP I guess you can put a negative spin on anything. As you may know I have been very unhappy about the unending attempts to raise inflation as I see it as ripping off the savers to help the borrowers. From what I read the whole world is trying to induce inflation to achieve this, so from what your saying before even setting foot into the beehive the new govt. has not only made NZ more competitive with a lower dollar but will help the Reserve bank meet its 2% inflation target without the need to drop interest rates further. I was under the impression this was a left leaning bleeding heart type govt dishing out money to no-hopers while robbing the rich of their hard earned wealth. It turns out they are also financial geniuses who will be the envy of govts and central banks across the western world.

craic
20-10-2017, 09:29 AM
Just a matter of having your investments in another country if the currency rate bothers you. My shares are through a multi- currency with the ANZ bank. Most investors won't be bothered.

Major von Tempsky
20-10-2017, 10:23 AM
It'sthe end of NZF and Winston Peters (see also the LDP Party in the UK and many other cases of the minor coalition party being dragged right down/wiped out in the polls). Interesting thing, will it last 3 years? Ill health/bye-elections, defections by mavericks, fit of pique by Winston, Green Party discover they do have a backbone somewhere....

minimoke
20-10-2017, 10:34 AM
Minimoke and FP I guess you can put a negative spin on anything.
No I just call it as I see it. First thing that will go up is petrol. That means it is going to be more expensive for low paid workers to get to work. It means freight costs will go up so hungry people will pay more for the little bits of food they can afford to pay. Imported housing materials will go up in price so rents may rise as more pressure is put on landlords to make comfy houses. How is inflation good for peopel in poverty.


. has not only made NZ more competitive with a lower dollar NZ, as an exporter will become more competitive for those companies that do not import materials. A prime example is education with about $4b in overseas earnings going to GDP. Trouble with that is lots of those earnings are based on education where you get a work permit which people see as a pathway to residency. Guess what. Cut immigration numbers, cut education, cut overseas earnings.
but will help the Reserve bank meet its 2% inflation target Isn't Winston going to have a hand on this particular tiller - we can expect changes to the Reserve Bank Act.

It turns out they are also financial geniuses who will be the envy of govts and central banks across the western world.Big call!

Sgt Pepper
20-10-2017, 10:39 AM
We do have a great country.. But there's a huge price to pay for devaluing the currency - called inflation. We are not an exporting country, we are a trading country and lower currency raises the price of most things. Expect big demands for wage increases. Make sure you're in a position to benefit from inflation. No show of meeting target of 200 houses per week if immagration is cut leading to shortage of tradesmen - and building material costs will rise. Unbelievable to hear Peters preaching doom and gloom on the economy even before the coalition ink is dry.
Good luck to this govt. I'm not sure who, if any, will benefit from this arrangement. Obviously not my cap of tea, and I struggle looking at Peters' track record to believe this will last, especially as so many policies between L and W1st conflict, and with a degree of instability as they are a minority govt. without the Greens. Time will tell.

Fungus
Drove through the Octagon today. So far no gatherings of peasants with pitchforks .But then again...you never know.

fungus pudding
20-10-2017, 11:01 AM
Fungus
Drove through the Octagon today. So far no gatherings of peasants with pitchforks .But then again...you never know.

Why would there be? This town is a Labour fortress. They even elect the likes old Brian MacDonnel, Bill Fraser and Clare Curren to name a few. Dreadful politicians, but dress thm in red and they'll win a Dunedin seat everytime. The locals rejoice while they're being screwed to death.

Sgt Pepper
20-10-2017, 11:48 AM
Why would there be? This town is a Labour fortress. They even elect the likes old Brian MacDonnel, Bill Fraser and Clare Curren to name a few. Dreadful politicians, but dress thm in red and they'll win a Dunedin seat everytime. The locals rejoice while they're being screwed to death.

My late father was a small business owner who also had a large rental property, He had a very high regard for Brian McDonnell who was very helpful to him particularly navigating the bureaucracy of the ( Keith Holyoake) time

Aaron
20-10-2017, 11:50 AM
Misery Loves Company. It is nice to know you are not alone.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/98084186/how-mike-hosking-handled-the-election-result

It is even funnier if you view the actual "Mikes Minute" quite frankly, a mess.
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/video/mikes-minute-there-is-trouble-ahead/

BlackPeter
20-10-2017, 11:59 AM
Misery Loves Company. It is nice to know you are not alone.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/98084186/how-mike-hosking-handled-the-election-result

It is even funnier if you view the actual "Mikes Minute" quite frankly, a mess.
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/video/mikes-minute-there-is-trouble-ahead/

Well, he has a point, hasn't he?

Quite funny to hear James Shaw this morning praising the agreement - and only seconds later admitting that he had no clue what's in it (when asked for the agreements re immigration). Winston loves incompetent partners - much easier to take for a ride ...

Incompetence has a name ... this is your next NZ Government!

dobby41
20-10-2017, 12:07 PM
Well, he has a point, hasn't he?

And the point was?

BlackPeter
20-10-2017, 12:09 PM
And the point was?

You mean you didn't get it? Just read the header for the link ...

Aaron
20-10-2017, 12:45 PM
Well, he has a point, hasn't he?

Quite funny to hear James Shaw this morning praising the agreement - and only seconds later admitting that he had no clue what's in it (when asked for the agreements re immigration). Winston loves incompetent partners - much easier to take for a ride ...

Incompetence has a name ... this is your next NZ Government!

I actually wanted NZ First to go with National for reasons Winston outlined in his speech. Is it a character flaw that I am enjoying some peoples reaction to Labour's victory on this site. I thinks it is call schadenfreude. Mike Hosking is a classic and Jeremy Wells nailed it with his impersonation.

fungus pudding
20-10-2017, 01:00 PM
My late father was a small business owner who also had a large rental property, He had a very high regard for Brian McDonnell who was very helpful to him particularly navigating the bureaucracy of the ( Keith Holyoake) time

I could say without fear of contradiction that there would be not one human being other than your father, who thought who MacDonnell was anymore than a complete waste of space.

BlackPeter
20-10-2017, 02:49 PM
I actually wanted NZ First to go with National for reasons Winston outlined in his speech. Is it a character flaw that I am enjoying some peoples reaction to Labour's victory on this site. I thinks it is call schadenfreude. Mike Hosking is a classic and Jeremy Wells nailed it with his impersonation.

Nothing wrong with "schadenfreude" (rejoicing about somebody else's damage, mishap or misery) in this situation. I guess we all will have to suffer and pay for the misery - so what's wrong with at least a bit of joy? I am sure the political situation over the next 1 to 2 years (well, until the next election) will be very entertaining and interesting. I am looking forward to that as well.

Personally - while not happy about this government do I think it will do (given the election result) long term the smaller damage to this country than the combination W1st - National would have done.

Latter would have politically killed off National and NZ First for the next decade or so. This way he is killing off Labour, Green and NZ First.

Sgt Pepper
20-10-2017, 03:06 PM
I could say without fear of contradiction that there would be not one human being other than your father, who thought who MacDonnell was anymore than a complete waste of space.

Well he was re-elected 7 times, so he must have been doing something right. If I recall he was also a conservative Roman Catholic who was highly regarded amongst Catholic voters. Just like Bill English

Aaron
20-10-2017, 03:25 PM
We do have a great country.. But there's a huge price to pay for devaluing the currency - called inflation. We are not an exporting country, we are a trading country and lower currency raises the price of most things. Expect big demands for wage increases.

Thinking about it FP glad to see you are concerned about inflation sadly your concern may be too late. If I read correctly house prices have been inflating by close to 10% per annum for a number of years now, also the lower yields offered by sharemarket investments would indicate quite strong inflation in share prices as well. Or are you only concerned about wage inflation not asset prices?

fungus pudding
20-10-2017, 05:31 PM
Well he was re-elected 7 times, so he must have been doing something right. If I recall he was also a conservative Roman Catholic who was highly regarded amongst Catholic voters. Just like Bill English

He never did a thing. Sat in parliament for 20 years and said nothing - did nothing. Don't know about the Catholic thing , but this is a scottish-presbyterian town full of voters who would never consider anything but labour.

fungus pudding
20-10-2017, 05:35 PM
Thinking about it FP glad to see you are concerned about inflation sadly your concern may be too late. If I read correctly house prices have been inflating by close to 10% per annum for a number of years now, also the lower yields offered by sharemarket investments would indicate quite strong inflation in share prices as well. Or are you only concerned about wage inflation not asset prices?

Hlouse prices have beedn rising world wide, but now slowing. NZ will have a higher than normal inflation rate beccuse of Peters' 1960's mentality - which he'll ram down Robertson's throat. Mandated wage increases will set off price rises - always does. Remember the 60s?

minimoke
20-10-2017, 06:25 PM
Mandated wage increases will set off price rises - always does. Remember the 60s?
To be fair National got that ball rolling with the Pay Equity deal. A pay rise with no expectation of an increase in productivity. Go figure!

tim23
20-10-2017, 08:16 PM
I am here timmeee. But you can’t post the way you did and not expect a reaction. I never got personal though and by the way my team won!

777
20-10-2017, 09:23 PM
I never got personal though and by the way my team won!

Odd don’t you think when the losers win?

However ,you are welcome to Winston.

couta1
21-10-2017, 07:44 AM
I never got personal though and by the way my team won! No your team didn't win, you were just handed a get out of jail card from a Narcissist, who doesn't give a toss about your team just the long term survival of NZ First. Let the chaos begin.

fungus pudding
21-10-2017, 07:49 AM
Let the chaos begin.

Don't be so negative. They're bound to last a good six months.

Aaron
21-10-2017, 10:12 AM
Hlouse prices have beedn rising world wide, but now slowing. NZ will have a higher than normal inflation rate beccuse of Peters' 1960's mentality - which he'll ram down Robertson's throat. Mandated wage increases will set off price rises - always does. Remember the 60s?

So that's a "yes" then.

fungus pudding
21-10-2017, 10:48 AM
So that's a "yes" then.

Whatever you mean , it's not a yes or a no. It was a comment.

minimoke
21-10-2017, 11:36 AM
Hlouse prices have beedn rising world wide, but now slowing. NZ will have a higher than normal inflation rate beccuse of Peters' 1960's mentality - which he'll ram down Robertson's throat. Mandated wage increases will set off price rises - always does. Remember the 60s?
There is a problem ahead with house prices. Labour is committed to flooding the market with affordable housing. If they succeed then economics 101 will apply and we will see supply start to exceed demand and that will see a drop in house prices. Yet Labour / NZ First / Greens seem intent on pushing people into costly and potentially depreciating assets. Add in potential increases in interest rates this push into housing appear to be a fast train to poverty for some.

fungus pudding
21-10-2017, 11:48 AM
There is a problem ahead with house prices. Labour is committed to flooding the market with affordable housing. If they succeed then economics 101 will apply and we will see supply start to exceed demand and that will see a drop in house prices. Yet Labour / NZ First / Greens seem intent on pushing people into costly and potentially depreciating assets. Add in potential increases in interest rates this push into housing appear to be a fast train to poverty for some.

It's beyond me when talk turns to building affordable housing. Just build houses. Plenty of establised, second time buyers will purchase and free up older homes quite suited to first home buyers. and the less affluent. I doubt if many posters here started out in an 'affordable' brand new house.

Absolute144
22-10-2017, 03:43 PM
Anyone else think the majority of NZ first supporters, after actual NZ first supporters, were national supporter? I voted National Candidate and NZ first party, coz someone needed to reign in the land sales and lower immigration. I also think National could have gained a lot more support if bill english U turned on Keys ideas they shouldnt go into pike river. Oh well, nationals out - such is arrogance. Gotta hear the voice of the people i guess.

Absolute144
22-10-2017, 03:49 PM
It's beyond me when talk turns to building affordable housing. Just build houses. Plenty of establised, second time buyers will purchase and free up older homes quite suited to first home buyers. and the less affluent. I doubt if many posters here started out in an 'affordable' brand new house.

No foreign ownership of land or houses, Cull immigration back to 1990 levels = Correction in housing market,

Zaphod
23-10-2017, 08:13 PM
No foreign ownership of land or houses, Cull immigration back to 1990 levels = Correction in housing market,

It'll cause more than a correction (a highly subjective term) to just housing, and there in lies the problem.

elZorro
23-10-2017, 09:10 PM
It'll cause more than a correction (a highly subjective term) to just housing, and there in lies the problem.

The coalition isn't talking about negative net immigration, it'll be somewhat lower, but still positive. Since Auckland house price increases look a lot like the net immigration chart, if net immigration goes negative, that would be a worry for Auckland. But it's not going to, is the assumption.

But anyway, if Aucklanders don't mind traffic jams getting worse, we could just leave the status quo. Sales reps and trade workers can just spend 3-4 hours a day trying to get to their next appointments, it's not such a big deal is it? Someone is paying for that.

No-one seems to mention the bonus to the economy with Kiwibuild coming on-line in the next years. That'll mop up thousands of unemployed people, give them good trade training. And there will be heaps of other jobs associated with it.

FP is quite right, people selling older houses will free up theirs for first-home purchasers. Except they might still be too expensive, being closer to Auckland's centre. Here I'm assuming the only really difficult place is Auckland. I suspect the land prices associated with these houses will take them out of reach.

Kiwibuild will use state-owned land in some cases, so the state will choose a suitable price component and house markup to allow the system to work for first-home buyers, I would think. The private sector won't do that.

minimoke
23-10-2017, 09:20 PM
That'll mop up thousands of unemployed people, give them good trade training. And there will be heaps of other jobs associated with it..
Do you know what the unemployed NZ'er looks like. I can tell you it isn't s pretty sight

elZorro
23-10-2017, 09:33 PM
Do you know what the unemployed NZ'er looks like. I can tell you it isn't s pretty sight

I quite agree, but if a business is big enough, they'll all fit in there somewhere. I'm not saying I'd want many of them in a small business operation where I needed some flexibility..

Zaphod
24-10-2017, 07:31 AM
The coalition isn't talking about negative net immigration, it'll be somewhat lower, but still positive. Since Auckland house price increases look a lot like the net immigration chart, if net immigration goes negative, that would be a worry for Auckland. But it's not going to, is the assumption.

I'm certainly not advocating the net immigration will be zero, especially with the vast numbers of New Zealanders returning to the country and seeking jobs in the largest market - Auckland.



But anyway, if Aucklanders don't mind traffic jams getting worse, we could just leave the status quo. Sales reps and trade workers can just spend 3-4 hours a day trying to get to their next appointments, it's not such a big deal is it? Someone is paying for that.

The "status quo" is replicated the world over through the phenomenon of urban drift, as ever increasing numbers of people shift from the country and smaller cities to larger cities seeking opportunities and a more urban lifestyle. Artificially constraining the population is doomed to failure.



No-one seems to mention the bonus to the economy with Kiwibuild coming on-line in the next years. That'll mop up thousands of unemployed people, give them good trade training. And there will be heaps of other jobs associated with it.

The bonus to the economy is increased inflation as the government plough vast sums of cash back into the economy, raising interest rates and causing pain for those high leveraged individuals already in the cooling housing market. That's a major concern.

Trades training won't allow Labour to build even a fraction of their 10,000 houses per annum if immigration is paired back, for at least the first term. The building industry already has full order books, and training people to the point where they are productive enough to assist is a multi-year journey. Perhaps they are being overly ambitious.



Kiwibuild will use state-owned land in some cases, so the state will choose a suitable price component and house markup to allow the system to work for first-home buyers, I would think. The private sector won't do that.

Anything other than an open market based price for new affordable housing, amounts to a subsidy for a select few lucky purchasers. Is that really fair? Building houses in of itself should reduce pressure on the housing market according to Labour's own logic, so therefore shouldn't that be enough? Who knows.

Given we're moving to an era where the measure of economic output is based on feelings (according to JA's recent interview), it will be interesting to see what measures Labour use to determine their success in this field.

Of course I can see this turning back into a debate on the housing market, which is probably better covered elsewhere. Given the size of that conversation, it's pretty obvious there is no simple answer, despite what Labour proclaim.

dobby41
24-10-2017, 08:01 AM
The bonus to the economy is increased inflation as the government plough vast sums of cash back into the economy, raising interest rates and causing pain for those high leveraged individuals already in the cooling housing market. That's a major concern.

I thought National has spent a few years now borrowing and ploughing vast sums back into the economy and inflations is now just lifting its' head.
Yet if Labour spends up pops inflations?

minimoke
24-10-2017, 10:27 AM
I quite agree, but if a business is big enough, they'll all fit in there somewhere. I'm not saying I'd want many of them in a small business operation where I needed some flexibility..
I'm not sure why you think big business is responsible for giving the unemployed work. If many of these people had the attributes employers were looking for they would give them a go under the 90 Day Trial laws.

fungus pudding
24-10-2017, 12:55 PM
I'm not sure why you think big business is responsible for giving the unemployed work. If many of these people had the attributes employers were looking for they would give them a go under the 90 Day Trial laws.

That's too logical for eZ.

Zaphod
24-10-2017, 05:39 PM
I thought National has spent a few years now borrowing and ploughing vast sums back into the economy and inflations is now just lifting its' head.
Yet if Labour spends up pops inflations?

What's the inflation level at the moment, given the National Governments spending? Say 1.9%

Labour's policies are already billions more than Nationals. Add in $20 min wage by 2020 and you're starting down the barrel of much higher figures, without even factoring in other geopolitical events outside of our control.

fungus pudding
24-10-2017, 06:28 PM
What's the inflation level at the moment, given the National Governments spending? Say 1.9%

Labour's policies are already billions more than Nationals. Add in $20 min wage by 2020 and you're starting down the barrel of much higher figures, without even factoring in other geopolitical events outside of our control.

Don't overlook the biggie - lowering the currency which Peters is hell bent on.

winner69
24-10-2017, 06:58 PM
Don't overlook the biggie - lowering the currency which Peters is hell bent on.

he wouldn't go as far as straight out devaluation if he doesn't get his way would he?

New RB Gov with a growth bias along with a building/construction boom (and tight employment) all seem to point to a atrengthening NZD ....and how often has any government / central bank really managed to get their currency lower.

elZorro
24-10-2017, 07:56 PM
I'm certainly not advocating the net immigration will be zero, especially with the vast numbers of New Zealanders returning to the country and seeking jobs in the largest market - Auckland.

The "status quo" is replicated the world over through the phenomenon of urban drift, as ever increasing numbers of people shift from the country and smaller cities to larger cities seeking opportunities and a more urban lifestyle. Artificially constraining the population is doomed to failure.

The bonus to the economy is increased inflation as the government plough vast sums of cash back into the economy, raising interest rates and causing pain for those high leveraged individuals already in the cooling housing market. That's a major concern.

Trades training won't allow Labour to build even a fraction of their 10,000 houses per annum if immigration is paired back, for at least the first term. The building industry already has full order books, and training people to the point where they are productive enough to assist is a multi-year journey. Perhaps they are being overly ambitious.

Anything other than an open market based price for new affordable housing, amounts to a subsidy for a select few lucky purchasers. Is that really fair? Building houses in of itself should reduce pressure on the housing market according to Labour's own logic, so therefore shouldn't that be enough? Who knows.

Given we're moving to an era where the measure of economic output is based on feelings (according to JA's recent interview), it will be interesting to see what measures Labour use to determine their success in this field.

Of course I can see this turning back into a debate on the housing market, which is probably better covered elsewhere. Given the size of that conversation, it's pretty obvious there is no simple answer, despite what Labour proclaim.

I think Labour have done a lot more research into the implications of KiwiBuild than you would have done, Zaphod. There will be economies of scale in purchasing, and a chance to back Kiwi businesses. I assume they're thinking of prefabricated components, not the site-intensive style most current houses are built with. The prefab factories will easily train employees for some of these jobs, quite quickly. Assembly on site will be a quicker job than usual, also needing less training and oversight. Each person on the job instead of on the dole will cycle funds into the economy, not be a cost to the govt. NZ has had periods when over 10,000 houses were built in a year, just not recently with the current spate of McMansions, that allow good profits for builders, but don't suit first time homebuyers. It's a different market needing different solutions.

Just let Labour get started, this alone will build the economy in a very real way.

fungus pudding
24-10-2017, 07:59 PM
he wouldn't go as far as straight out devaluation if he doesn't get his way would he?

New RB Gov with a growth bias along with a building/construction boom (and tight employment) all seem to point to a atrengthening NZD ....and how often has any government / central bank really managed to get their currency lower.

We don't know how he will do it, but he knows. Certainly started with gloomy negative comments about the impending economic crash, but he's always been a pessimist. And he won't be content to have Robertson as finance minister - no siree. Winston will have his say whenever he likes.

winner69
24-10-2017, 08:01 PM
I think Labour have done a lot more research into the implications of KiwiBuild than you would have done, Zaphod. There will be economies of scale in purchasing, and a chance to back Kiwi businesses. I assume they're thinking of prefabricated components, not the site-intensive style most current houses are built with. The prefab factories will easily train employees for some of these jobs, quite quickly. Assembly on site will be a quicker job than usual, also needing less training and oversight. Each person on the job instead of on the dole will cycle funds into the economy, not be a cost to the govt. NZ has had periods when over 10,000 houses were built in a year, just not recently with the current spate of McMansions, that allow good profits for builders, but don't suit first time homebuyers. It's a different market needing different solutions.

Just let Labour get started, this alone will build the economy in a very real way.

Marama Fox already on the case - wonder if her 60,000 is part of the Labour 100,000 or are going to have a race

elZorro
24-10-2017, 08:32 PM
Marama Fox already on the case - wonder if her 60,000 is part of the Labour 100,000 or are going to have a race

I guess the more the merrier? https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97325688/mori-partys-marama-fox-to-build-60k-affordable-houses

I hadn't seen that, W69. Sounds useful, although there is the issue of reticulation and there being suitable work nearby. This new govt needs to start asking the big questions - like what population level is NZ looking for, in the next decade or 50 years?

Labour-Green confidence and supply agreement out today.

https://www.scribd.com/document/362434657/Labour-and-Green-Party-Confidence-and-Supply-Agreement-1#from_embed

Labour-NZFirst Coalition agreement basics. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11936301

minimoke
24-10-2017, 08:54 PM
just not recently with the current spate of McMansions, that allow good profits for builders, but don't suit first time homebuyers. It's a different market needing different solutions.

Just let Labour get started, this alone will build the economy in a very real way.
Can you just remind me when it was that first home buyers got to buy a brand new house

fungus pudding
24-10-2017, 09:04 PM
I guess the more the merrier? https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97325688/mori-partys-marama-fox-to-build-60k-affordable-houses

I hadn't seen that, W69. Sounds useful, although there is the issue of reticulation and there being suitable work nearby. This new govt needs to start asking the big questions - like what population level is NZ looking for, in the next decade or 50 years?

A bigger question is, will the new govt become known as The NZ First led government, or simply The Winston led government?

777
24-10-2017, 10:26 PM
You would think from some of the posts that there had been no building being done at all and that the builders and other tradies have been sitting around doing nothing. Odd that they will now be fully employed.

elZorro
25-10-2017, 06:28 AM
Can you just remind me when it was that first home buyers got to buy a brand new house

It might be an apartment style property, and it might not be huge. A generation ago, first-home buyers were getting into new cost-effective homes, with a small amount of state assistance if they needed it.

elZorro
25-10-2017, 06:35 AM
You would think from some of the posts that there had been no building being done at all and that the builders and other tradies have been sitting around doing nothing. Odd that they will now be fully employed.

You are implying that the current home building methods are super efficient - I can't see how that would be the case when they are predominantly built on site, with unique plans. The building sector experiences peaks and troughs - not that long ago new building firms sprang up and within a few short years were gone again - those people are now working in other areas. Any business sector needs a reliable level of forward orders to plan around. The private sector won't provide that sort of surety, but the government can.

dobby41
25-10-2017, 06:55 AM
Can you just remind me when it was that first home buyers got to buy a brand new house

1957 my parents brought their first house - new.
People did back then when they were more affordable. More basic too but it was a good roof over their heads.

blackcap
25-10-2017, 07:22 AM
1957 my parents brought their first house - new.
People did back then when they were more affordable. More basic too but it was a good roof over their heads.

I think an apt description would be "a lot more basic". My first home was a rough 3 bedroom bought for $73,500, mortgage of $53 per week, needed a lot of work though and was not in the best area of town. But that is the best way to get started.
NZ does have a lot of new build that is "not basic" for some reason. Is there just no demand for simple and effective?

dobby41
25-10-2017, 07:34 AM
I think an apt description would be "a lot more basic". My first home was a rough 3 bedroom bought for $73,500, mortgage of $53 per week, needed a lot of work though and was not in the best area of town. But that is the best way to get started.
NZ does have a lot of new build that is "not basic" for some reason. Is there just no demand for simple and effective?

Is there no demand for basic?
There would be, I think, if they were built.
One of the biggest issues is the cost of a section. It used to be that the section was about 1/3 of the finished product but now is over half.
Someone needs to design a good modular house.
Buy with 1 bedroom, add another couple when kids come along.

craic
25-10-2017, 09:36 AM
OK. In the early sixties I was a carpenter working for a large timber and milling company here in Hawkes Bay. In those day the powers that be produced a hard cover book "Carpentry in New Zealand" and it was the bible for all apprentices. It contained everything you needed to know from buying your first hammer to building a three-bedroom bungalow. It finished with a full set of plans for the three-bedroom bungalow. There were companion volumes of "Electricity in NZ'' and 'Plumbing in NZ" Any person reasonably handy with tools could follow the instruction and erect a perfectly good house that would last many generations. My job was largely fixing up balls ups by Builders who bought pre-cut houses from us and then stuffed up.I moved on to be a Timber Inspector and then into the Justice department where I remained till my retirement. I could still build a nice bungalow on my land BUT there are so many stupid conditions and rules that it would be a waste of time. There are a lot of fellows like me out there who might be convinced to get together in two's and three's to knock up a house here and there. My first house cost me $8,000 with no deposit and a State Advances loan on a leasehold section with a lease of $75 per year. It was brand new and yesterday I drove past it to show it to my grandson.

westerly
25-10-2017, 10:42 AM
Can you just remind me when it was that first home buyers got to buy a brand new house

Up untill the late 1980's it was quite easy. Along came Douglas, Richardson , and others with their free market ideology and that was the end of State Advances. There were loan limits and consequently builders and developers built basic 2-3 bedroom houses with one bathroom, no garage and built on an unfenced section with no landscaping.
Now developers land bank, build 3-4 bedroom, 2 bathroom houses with built in garage ,fenced and landscaped with so many covenants you cannot even have a non conventional letter box.
Why ? Because they can make more money that way and the banks will lend if you qualify.
Consequently only the wealthy can afford a new house.

westerly

minimoke
25-10-2017, 12:08 PM
Up untill the late 1980's it was quite easy.

westerly
I dont remember it being easy. 1989 mortgage rates were 16%.

Maybe it was easy because interest rates were trending down from 18.8 in 1987 and 17% in 1983. Not as easy when Craic was in housing. 5.5% in the mid 60's

1957 interest rates were around 5%

winner69
25-10-2017, 03:43 PM
I dont remember it being easy. 1989 mortgage rates were 16%.

Maybe it was easy because interest rates were trending down from 18.8 in 1987 and 17% in 1983. Not as easy when Craic was in housing. 5.5% in the mid 60's

1957 interest rates were around 5%

I had a 2nd mortgage at 26% in the mid 70’s

craic
25-10-2017, 04:43 PM
Early seventies we had the "oil shocks". I remember starting as a timber inspector at the handsome salary of $1,750 per annum and public servants had several salary jumps in two or three years. I remember remarking to a fellow inspector "If this keeps up we'll be on $5,000 in no time". I went to State advances to increase my mortgage payment but they wouldn't hear of it and told me to save my money and pay off lump sums. I advertised for a model C Valiant that I could afford and finished up with a VG Hemi for less from a disgruntled rural bread and paper delivery contractor who was offered little or nothing on a one year old trade in - he gave it to me for what the dealer was offering. Those were the days.

Snow Leopard
25-10-2017, 04:56 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKHFZBUTA4k

minimoke
25-10-2017, 05:04 PM
I had a 2nd mortgage at 26% in the mid 70’s
Jeez we are showing our age. But weren't they the days. I remember them well. At that time I was in my second property but first "home". Sold the love of my life (an immaculate Holden Torana GTR XU1), moved the girlfriend in for a bit of cash, not enough so bought the flatmate in for more cash. Still not enough so got the second job. Even worked Saturdays. Sunday was the day off to work on the house as it was a doer-upper. New furniture - no chance. all second hand though managed to get a sharp deal on a TV somehow. Not a new home. 26% had me totally maxed out. 26.5% would have tipped me out onto the streets.

winner69
25-10-2017, 05:57 PM
Jeez we are showing our age. But weren't they the days. I remember them well. At that time I was in my second property but first "home". Sold the love of my life (an immaculate Holden Torana GTR XU1), moved the girlfriend in for a bit of cash, not enough so bought the flatmate in for more cash. Still not enough so got the second job. Even worked Saturdays. Sunday was the day off to work on the house as it was a doer-upper. New furniture - no chance. all second hand though managed to get a sharp deal on a TV somehow. Not a new home. 26% had me totally maxed out. 26.5% would have tipped me out onto the streets.

Well done mini. Yes sacrifices were made in those days eh

Better not mention that these days - though I’m sure some are doing much the same these days and getting into their homes ....but too many expect it to just happen.

elZorro
25-10-2017, 07:16 PM
The National Party got off lightly with the Eminem 'Lose Yourself' copyright infringement court case result, announced today. It could have been US$1.4mill plus interest, instead it was NZ$600,000 plus interest.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/music/95132686/national-party-loses-court-decision-on-use-of-eminemesque-song

So I guess, Mr Joyce, it wasn't "pretty legal". He really should have known better, he owned radio stations at one stage. I would be a bit upset if I'd been donating funds to the National Party, that's going to make a bit of a dent in their bank balance.

Sgt Pepper
25-10-2017, 07:24 PM
Jeez we are showing our age. But weren't they the days. I remember them well. At that time I was in my second property but first "home". Sold the love of my life (an immaculate Holden Torana GTR XU1), moved the girlfriend in for a bit of cash, not enough so bought the flatmate in for more cash. Still not enough so got the second job. Even worked Saturdays. Sunday was the day off to work on the house as it was a doer-upper. New furniture - no chance. all second hand though managed to get a sharp deal on a TV somehow. Not a new home. 26% had me totally maxed out. 26.5% would have tipped me out onto the streets.

My first house.
It was 1981. A nice 1930s bungalow in Opoho Dunedin. On the market for $28000. Nervously I made an appointment with the Mornington branch of the Otago Saving Bank. I had $10000 saved for the deposit, was employed and had a good credit history.
My application was declined. The manager said they had cut back on mortgage finance, and blamed it on Rob Muldoon. My then girlfriend mother told me to go to her lawyer and got a temporary bridging mortgage, at 12%. Eventually refinanced through the United Building Society. By 1986 my mortgage was 21%p.a.

minimoke
25-10-2017, 08:30 PM
. My then girlfriend mother told me to go to her lawyer and got a temporary bridging mortgage, at 12%. Eventually refinanced through the United Building Society. By 1986 my mortgage was 21%p.a.
And that's my concern with this whole affordable housing thing. If people cant get into a house now with super low interest rates and low unemployment how are they going to cope when they have been levered into a house only to find interest rates escalate, property values fall and the job market doesn't look that great. All inevitabilities in the lifetime of a mortgage. We've lived through the high rate times - that's a bit different from knowing only low rates.

Aaron
26-10-2017, 08:01 AM
And that's my concern with this whole affordable housing thing. If people cant get into a house now with super low interest rates and low unemployment how are they going to cope when they have been levered into a house only to find interest rates escalate, property values fall and the job market doesn't look that great. All inevitabilities in the lifetime of a mortgage. We've lived through the high rate times - that's a bit different from knowing only low rates.

It is a concern but as more debt and lower interest rates are the answer to every economic crisis you might be able to have faith in economic theories and economists. We know central banks have got borrowers backs. I suspect we are following Japan. Look at their interest rates in Japan for the last 24 years.
https://tradingeconomics.com/japan/interest-rate
Provided you only have a 25 year loan you should be sweet.
It would only be if we had genuine, across the board economic growth that interest rates might rise, which would immediately cause a housing and financial market crash which would require rates to come down again. As Janet Yellen has said we are unlikely to experience another financial market crash in our lifetimes.

minimoke
26-10-2017, 08:45 AM
As Janet Yellen has said we are unlikely to experience another financial market crash in our lifetimes.
I was in Christchurch on 4 September 2010 and the experts all said after that was the worst over and there wouldn't be a similar event again. Consequently I do not believe the word of any expert in any field - and that will remain my view in my lifetime

Major von Tempsky
26-10-2017, 09:11 AM
And that's my concern with this whole affordable housing thing. If people cant get into a house now with super low interest rates and low unemployment how are they going to cope when they have been levered into a house only to find interest rates escalate, property values fall and the job market doesn't look that great. All inevitabilities in the lifetime of a mortgage. We've lived through the high rate times - that's a bit different from knowing only low rates.

Which are all inevitabilities with the current Green/Labour/NZF coalition.

Blakie
26-10-2017, 09:31 AM
As Janet Yellen has said we are unlikely to experience another financial market crash in our lifetimes.

I'll remind you that in 2007 the federal reserve was blind to the looming GFC.
In Jan 2007, the then chairman of the Fed Ben Bernanke's said "one of the biggest risks is that the economy might grow stronger than expected". In March of the same year, they said the worst of the housing crisis is over.
They had absolutely no idea of what was happening then, and they don't today.

tick, tick tick......

westerly
26-10-2017, 10:36 AM
I dont remember it being easy. 1989 mortgage rates were 16%.

Maybe it was easy because interest rates were trending down from 18.8 in 1987 and 17% in 1983. Not as easy when Craic was in housing. 5.5% in the mid 60's

1957 interest rates were around 5%

My mistake, probably nearer the mid sixties as Craic has intimated.

westerly

minimoke
26-10-2017, 11:09 AM
My mistake, probably nearer the mid sixties as Craic has intimated.

westerly
Ah the 1960's. An excellent decade if I may say so myself. Heres a bit of what was happening around then:

“To increase the flow of suburban housing, the government introduced the Group Building Scheme. Builders constructed houses in groups of six or more and those that were unsold two months after they were completed were purchased by the state at a prearranged price. Plans and builders were vetted to maintain high standards. Some 20,000 homes were built under the scheme, which helped 1960s mass-housing firms such as Neill Housing get started.

The Labour government of 1957–60 continued support for home ownership, and in 1959 gave low-income families the right to capitalise their family benefit (have it paid in advance) to provide a deposit on a house. Together with low-interest state mortgages, this enabled many low-income families to become homeowners. Between 1951 and 1966 the national rate of home ownership rose from 61% to 69%.”

Sgt Pepper
26-10-2017, 12:44 PM
And that's my concern with this whole affordable housing thing. If people cant get into a house now with super low interest rates and low unemployment how are they going to cope when they have been levered into a house only to find interest rates escalate, property values fall and the job market doesn't look that great. All inevitabilities in the lifetime of a mortgage. We've lived through the high rate times - that's a bit different from knowing only low rates.

Reasonable observation MM

We have a generation, including bank CEOs who have no institutional memory of interest rates in double figures. Rob Muldoon, Roger Douglas, 87 share crash, 20% interest rates, all ancient history to them. There is a danger, as the saying goes, if you don't study history and you are bound to repeat the mistakes of the past

fungus pudding
26-10-2017, 01:47 PM
And that's my concern with this whole affordable housing thing. If people cant get into a house now with super low interest rates and low unemployment how are they going to cope when they have been levered into a house only to find interest rates escalate, property values fall and the job market doesn't look that great. All inevitabilities in the lifetime of a mortgage. We've lived through the high rate times - that's a bit different from knowing only low rates.

Not so sure about that. Interest rates and commodity prices are opposite ends of a see-saw. I'd far rather buy a house when interest rates are sky high. Prices settle depending on affordability - 400,000 @ 5% is the same as 200,000 @ 10%. And houses will settle to that general level of affordability. That's a fair chunk of the reason for escalating prices throughout the western world in the last few years. Safe to buy when interest is expensive - risky when rates are low.

elZorro
29-10-2017, 09:36 PM
Well, so far, Jacinda hasn't put a foot wrong.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11937552

777
29-10-2017, 09:47 PM
Who reads anything Audrey Young writes? She is as one eyed as you eZ. She should be relegated to that left wing epistle you quoted so often.

elZorro
30-10-2017, 05:57 AM
Who reads anything Audrey Young writes? She is as one eyed as you eZ. She should be relegated to that left wing epistle you quoted so often.

That's not right, for years I didn't record much she'd written because it was fairly anti-Labour. But her attitude seemed to change before the elections.

Bill says goodbye from the PM's office. She's a 'great little country' now after National has run the ship for nine years. Bill didn't mention the mountain of debt and overstretched resources he's left behind for someone else to tidy up.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/10/bill-english-says-goodbye-from-prime-minister-s-office.html

777
30-10-2017, 07:29 AM
That's not right, for years I didn't record much she'd written because it was fairly anti-Labour. But her attitude seemed to change before the elections.

Bill says goodbye from the PM's office. She's a 'great little country' now after National has run the ship for nine years. Bill didn't mention the mountain of debt and overstretched resources he's left behind for someone else to tidy up.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/10/bill-english-says-goodbye-from-prime-minister-s-office.html

Well watch carefully the mountain of debt. Your beloved Labour have already stated they will not be paying it down as fast as National was going to. The amount they plan to spend appears unlimited. Joyce could prove to be right in the end.

fungus pudding
30-10-2017, 07:46 AM
That's not right, for years I didn't record much she'd written because it was fairly anti-Labour. But her attitude seemed to change before the elections.

Bill says goodbye from the PM's office. She's a 'great little country' now after National has run the ship for nine years. Bill didn't mention the mountain of debt and overstretched resources he's left behind for someone else to tidy up.

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/10/bill-english-says-goodbye-from-prime-minister-s-office.html

Even Labour have openly admitted the country is in great shape financally.

dobby41
30-10-2017, 07:52 AM
Well watch carefully the mountain of debt. Your beloved Labour have already stated they will not be paying it down as fast as National was going to. The amount they plan to spend appears unlimited. Joyce could prove to be right in the end.

They did state that but the difference was marginal.
Joyce could also be wrong again.
I still don't get why people bag Labour as big spenders when they left the country, after 9 years, is a great shape. If it wasn't for Labours careful financial management National would not have had the balance sheet to borrow against in the last 9 years.

iceman
30-10-2017, 08:59 AM
Well watch carefully the mountain of debt. Your beloved Labour have already stated they will not be paying it down as fast as National was going to. The amount they plan to spend appears unlimited. Joyce could prove to be right in the end.

Central and local Governments may get a bit of spare cash from sugar tax and petrol tax and we're only in week one !! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11938339

777
30-10-2017, 09:10 AM
Yes sugar tax will raise revenue but won't reduce the amount of sugar that is consumed. The uneducated will just spend the extra required to consume and then bleat poverty(the in word) again.

iceman
30-10-2017, 09:27 AM
Yes sugar tax will raise revenue but won't reduce the amount of sugar that is consumed. The uneducated will just spend the extra required to consume and then bleat poverty(the in word) again.

Of course it won't. It never has where it has been introduced. Just taxing the poor, but they can afford it now with the increase in minimum wage and no doubt upcoming increases in benefits.

elZorro
30-10-2017, 10:48 AM
Of course it won't. It never has where it has been introduced. Just taxing the poor, but they can afford it now with the increase in minimum wage and no doubt upcoming increases in benefits.

Increased tarrifs seemed to work on smokers, by and large. It has caused dairies to be burglary targets, though.

I would like to see the argument that the NZ economy is in better shape than Labour left it in, all things being considered. Especially if you average the situations over 9 years. One govt paid off historical crown debt, the other one borrowed all that back plus a lot more. One govt sacked a lot of public sector staff and so dropped the tax take for many years, stagnating the economy. The same govt 'fixed' that with lax immigration policy. But it was a temporary fix that cannot, and should not, be sustained.

iceman
31-10-2017, 08:20 AM
Increased tarrifs seemed to work on smokers, by and large. It has caused dairies to be burglary targets, though.

I would like to see the argument that the NZ economy is in better shape than Labour left it in, all things being considered. Especially if you average the situations over 9 years. One govt paid off historical crown debt, the other one borrowed all that back plus a lot more. One govt sacked a lot of public sector staff and so dropped the tax take for many years, stagnating the economy. The same govt 'fixed' that with lax immigration policy. But it was a temporary fix that cannot, and should not, be sustained.

Yes smoking has definitely reduced, no doubt at least partly due to a combination of increased prices and less social acceptance. Sadly though, many of the poorest people in society still smoke and are heavily penalised for it. Some say this results in increased child poverty ! Richard Prebble says he often takes bags of goodies to families in need in his neighbourhood. He claims almost all the parents in this situation smoke and he reckons child poverty can be all but eliminated by reducing prices of cigarettes :-) It would be interesting to see a good study of this relationship. Sugar tax could easily do the same. So Labour wants to punish the poor ?

elZorro
01-11-2017, 06:34 AM
Yes smoking has definitely reduced, no doubt at least partly due to a combination of increased prices and less social acceptance. Sadly though, many of the poorest people in society still smoke and are heavily penalised for it. Some say this results in increased child poverty ! Richard Prebble says he often takes bags of goodies to families in need in his neighbourhood. He claims almost all the parents in this situation smoke and he reckons child poverty can be all but eliminated by reducing prices of cigarettes :-) It would be interesting to see a good study of this relationship. Sugar tax could easily do the same. So Labour wants to punish the poor ?

I'm not that keen on Prebble's advice. The price disincentive will make its mark over the years, and hopefully there are smaller proportions of youths taking up smoking now. Working on the sugar issue will be much harder.


Labour moves to ban foreign buyers bidding on existing homes. Virtually no issues about that, but they have to work fast before the TPP-II talks.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/98413964/foreign-buyers-ban-in-labour-points-finger-at-nats-for-misleading-over-free-trade-clash

dobby41
01-11-2017, 07:04 AM
Labour moves to ban foreign buyers bidding on existing homes. Virtually no issues about that, but they have to work fast before the TPP-II talks.

I heard Jacinda on the radio call it TPP eleven. Had a laugh at that.

There is a line of thinking that TPP2 would allow the act to change anyway but why not get it done now - so long as it isn't shonky rushed legislation.

fungus pudding
01-11-2017, 07:39 AM
I'm not that keen on Prebble's advice. The price disincentive will make its mark over the years, and hopefully there are smaller proportions of youths taking up smoking now. Working on the sugar issue will be much harder.



Prebble didn't give any advice. He simply made an observation.

iceman
01-11-2017, 08:48 AM
I'm not that keen on Prebble's advice. The price disincentive will make its mark over the years, and hopefully there are smaller proportions of youths taking up smoking now. Working on the sugar issue will be much harder.


Labour moves to ban foreign buyers bidding on existing homes. Virtually no issues about that, but they have to work fast before the TPP-II talks.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/98413964/foreign-buyers-ban-in-labour-points-finger-at-nats-for-misleading-over-free-trade-clash

Yes they have quickly found what appears to be a legitimate way to do this. It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference whatsoever on house prices, that are already slowing significantly in Auckland. I don't know how we will ever know if this works or not but good on them for doing what they said they would

Agree FP. Prebble simply made an observation about the negative effect of taxes. Quite an astute and real life observation.

dobby41
01-11-2017, 10:31 AM
Yes they have quickly found what appears to be a legitimate way to do this. It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference whatsoever on house prices, that are already slowing significantly in Auckland. I don't know how we will ever know if this works or not but good on them for doing what they said they would

It won't make a measurable difference to house prices.
That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done to to fix a 'fundamental issue'.

westerly
01-11-2017, 12:34 PM
Agree FP. Prebble simply made an observation about the negative effect of taxes. Quite an astute and real life observation.

You pay taxes to ensure a fair an just society.
Prebble is well past his use by date along with Anderton an Burdon and other retired MPs who try to influence public opinion. Prebble with his policies probably caused more poverty than he would care to admit.

A tax on sugar at source, ie on sugar itself would be all that is required
.
westerly

macduffy
01-11-2017, 01:29 PM
It won't make a measurable difference to house prices.
That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done to to fix a 'fundamental issue'.

It may or may not make a measurable difference to house prices but confining overseas buyers to building new houses will almost certainly tighten the supply of building capacity across the industry - that is, if overseas buyers are the problem that some maintain. An unintended consequence to slow the desired increased supply of affordable housing in NZ?

dobby41
01-11-2017, 01:42 PM
It may or may not make a measurable difference to house prices but confining overseas buyers to building new houses will almost certainly tighten the supply of building capacity across the industry - that is, if overseas buyers are the problem that some maintain. An unintended consequence to slow the desired increased supply of affordable housing in NZ?

We need more houses built so any building capacity issues were going to happen no matter who purchases them.
It will also stop overseas people selling to each other at inflated prices which happens to some extent.

macduffy
01-11-2017, 02:12 PM
We need more houses built so any building capacity issues were going to happen no matter who purchases them.
It will also stop overseas people selling to each other at inflated prices which happens to some extent.

That's true, but isn't the big push to be on affordable homes, not diverting resources to the supposed investment/trophy houses that overseas absentee owners favour?

;)

dobby41
01-11-2017, 02:41 PM
That's true, but isn't the big push to be on affordable homes, not diverting resources to the supposed investment/trophy houses that overseas absentee owners favour?

;)

We'll have to see if it does rather than assume now that it will.

craic
01-11-2017, 03:03 PM
A funny thing about sugar. If I buy a small packet of the round sugar lumps that you drop into beer bottles as you fill them, a supervisor has to be called to approve the purchase because they are alcohol related. In the same trolley I have ten one kilo bags of sugar that I intend to convert into alcohol but that is ignored. And if you are rolling down the road behind a Fonterra tanker and you are having nice thoughts about milk and cows and the richness of our nation - It may be a tank full of ethanol made from unwanted lactose on its way to a facility to be mixed with essence (from the UK) which will make into Jamaican Rum or someother

winner69
01-11-2017, 03:33 PM
Encouraging home ownership was the cause of the GFC ..... so is nz heading to recessionary times.

Rep
02-11-2017, 10:18 AM
A funny thing about sugar. If I buy a small packet of the round sugar lumps that you drop into beer bottles as you fill them, a supervisor has to be called to approve the purchase because they are alcohol related. In the same trolley I have ten one kilo bags of sugar that I intend to convert into alcohol but that is ignored. And if you are rolling down the road behind a Fonterra tanker and you are having nice thoughts about milk and cows and the richness of our nation - It may be a tank full of ethanol made from unwanted lactose on its way to a facility to be mixed with essence (from the UK) which will make into Jamaican Rum or someother

More likely to be Broken Shed or VDK6100 Vodka, potentially a local Gin or indeed an RTD and the ethanol is usually made from deproteinated whey a byproduct from making casein.

Source:
https://moorewilsons.co.nz/broken-shed-premium-new-zealand-vodka.html
http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/food-beverage/documents-image-library/Investment%20opportunities%20in%20the%20alcoholic% 20spirits%20industry%20-PDF%201.6%20MB.pdf

elZorro
02-11-2017, 06:17 PM
More likely to be Broken Shed or VDK6100 Vodka, potentially a local Gin or indeed an RTD and the ethanol is usually made from deproteinated whey a byproduct from making casein.

Source:
https://moorewilsons.co.nz/broken-shed-premium-new-zealand-vodka.html
http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/food-beverage/documents-image-library/Investment%20opportunities%20in%20the%20alcoholic% 20spirits%20industry%20-PDF%201.6%20MB.pdf

Very interesting. All the big spirit manufacturers are already bought out by overseas companies. 42 Below, for example. Good game to get into if you want a big payout at the end.

What does it have to do with the political thread though? You have to watch out for Craic, he's always trying to derail it with a common theme of alcohol consumption. Ok, maybe it has a tenuous link to the economy. But as one university academic (Philosophy) said, "Has anyone ever seen the economy?" He then postulated - it therefore doesn't exist.

fungus pudding
02-11-2017, 06:31 PM
Very interesting. All the big spirit manufacturers are already bought out by overseas companies. 42 Below, for example. Good game to get into if you want a big payout at the end.

What does it have to do with the political thread though? You have to watch out for Craic, he's always trying to derail it with a common theme of alcohol consumption. Ok, maybe it has a tenuous link to the economy. But as one university academic (Philosophy) said, "Has anyone ever seen the economy?" He then postulated - it therefore doesn't exist.

It won't soon.

minimoke
02-11-2017, 06:35 PM
It won't soon.
It will, but not as we know it

minimoke
02-11-2017, 06:39 PM
. Ok, maybe it has a tenuous link to the economy. But as one university academic (Philosophy) said, "Has anyone ever seen the economy?" He then postulated - it therefore doesn't exist.This is why we need free education. In my philosophy class it was "
"
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around
to hear it, does it make a sound?" Obviously must have had it wrong in the past and we need this new un-neoliberal thinking.

elZorro
02-11-2017, 09:55 PM
This is why we need free education. In my philosophy class it was "
"
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around
to hear it, does it make a sound?" Obviously must have had it wrong in the past and we need this new un-neoliberal thinking.


MM, you are mixed up there. My wife is keen to remind me of the actual expression, by keeping a prominent fridge magnet adorned with the message, placed at about head height:

"If a man speaks in the middle of a forest and there is no woman around to hear him, is he still wrong?"

iceman
02-11-2017, 10:10 PM
So you´re all drunk in the forest now ! Thought you said back to politics EZ :-)

elZorro
03-11-2017, 06:54 AM
So you´re all drunk in the forest now ! Thought you said back to politics EZ :-)

You'll note I have cheered up a fair bit since the change of government, and I like the look of most of the changes coming through.

National have installed themselves in opposition, with an 'interesting' lineup.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98487666/national-makes-minor-tweaks-to-front-bench-lineup-as-it-moves-to-opposition

Judith Collins has moved up seven places on the list to be at No. 9, she's on the front bench again.

Thankfully the Climate Change shadow job has been removed from an incompetent Paula Bennett, but it was given to Todd Muller, who is no. 46 on the National list. I guess Climate Change isn't at all important to the caucus, then.

blackcap
03-11-2017, 07:09 AM
Thankfully the Climate Change shadow job has been removed from an incompetent Paula Bennett, but it was given to Todd Muller, who is no. 46 on the National list. I guess Climate Change isn't at all important to the caucus, then.

And nor should it be in my opinion. Good to see Judith back higher up and with Transport. This opposition could yet create some problems for the govt.

minimoke
03-11-2017, 07:44 AM
Thankfully the Climate Change shadow job has been removed from an incompetent Paula Bennett, but it was given to Todd Muller, who is no. 46 on the National list. I guess Climate Change isn't at all important to the caucus, then.
Also backing the "and it shouldn't be" opinion. No-one has yet given me one piece of information that shows anything NZ does will make one smidge of difference to climate change.

Judith is in an excellent place. Front bench in opposition. I couldn't have asked for better!

elZorro
03-11-2017, 08:04 AM
Also backing the "and it shouldn't be" opinion. No-one has yet given me one piece of information that shows anything NZ does will make one smidge of difference to climate change.

Judith is in an excellent place. Front bench in opposition. I couldn't have asked for better!

I'm worried about the sanity of you two.. I guess we have a difference of opinion there.

Here's one aspect of coalition policy that is great, more public service broadcasting funds. RNZ will get a fair chunk of it, since the culture at TVNZ is fairly commercial now.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/2018619322/new-government-new-plans-for-broadcasting

Maybe we'll get something that is even better than TVNZ 7, the channel National scrapped.

Coincidentally, John Campbell has just won a big overseas award for Presenter of the Year, with Checkpoint.

fungus pudding
03-11-2017, 08:13 AM
I'm worried about the sanity of you two.. I guess we have a difference of opinion there.

Here's one aspect of coalition policy that is great, more public service broadcasting funds. RNZ will get a fair chunk of it, since the culture at TVNZ is fairly commercial now.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/2018619322/new-government-new-plans-for-broadcasting

Maybe we'll get something that is even better than TVNZ 7, the channel National scrapped.

Coincidentally, John Campbell has just won a big overseas award for Presenter of the Year, with Checkpoint.


Obviously I'm hoping for the best from this govt. as I do with every NZ govt. But making Clare Curran the minister of anything at all is not a good indication of the 'talent' that Jacinda says she has in bucketsfull.

minimoke
03-11-2017, 08:32 AM
I'm worried about the sanity of you two.. I guess we have a difference of opinion there. No problems with my sanity and no differenc iof opiion. Its simpley I'm right and you're not


Here's one aspect of coalition policy that is great, more public service broadcasting funds. RNZ will get a fair chunk of it, since the culture at TVNZ is fairly commercial now.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/2018619322/new-government-new-plans-for-broadcasting

Maybe we'll get something that is even better than TVNZ 7, the channel National scrapped.

Coincidentally, John Campbell has just won a big overseas award for Presenter of the Year, with Checkpoint.
While I agree TVNZ7 was a good channel the world has moved on from the 50's - 70's when public service broadcasting had its place. Since then broadcasting is not the issue - there is no shortage of news services / wires and sources of current information. The major issue is an individuals ability to discern the truth free from bias.

Given the increase in mindless media (I'm pointing at TVone, 2 3 and Bravo etc here) I think it is safe to assume the general population is failing at any sort of critical thinking.

Which is excellent for public service broadcasting who can feed that empty head with whatever the state wants to fill it with. And that's a dangerous place to be.

dobby41
03-11-2017, 08:48 AM
I think it is safe to assume the general population is failing at any sort of critical thinking.

and a lot of them voted National - just proves your point.

minimoke
03-11-2017, 08:57 AM
and a lot of them votes National - just proves your point.
I think your post is a better example of proving my point.

elZorro
04-11-2017, 10:52 AM
It's hard to miss these figures, a ballooning shortfall in housing supply under National's rein, particularly in Auckland.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98519361/weve-inherited-a-disaster-official-figures-show-45000-home-shortfall-in-auckland

Of course National MPs refused to admit this while they were in office. The data doesn't lie.

777
04-11-2017, 10:54 AM
It's hard to miss these figures, a ballooning shortfall in housing supply under National's rein, particularly in Auckland.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/98519361/weve-inherited-a-disaster-official-figures-show-45000-home-shortfall-in-auckland

Of course National MPs refused to admit this while they were in office. The data doesn't lie.

Just imagine how bad it will be in 3 years time with Twyford's input.

elZorro
04-11-2017, 11:15 AM
Just imagine how bad it will be in 3 years time with Twyford's input.

Yep, we'll have to look at this graph again each year. Like NZ's Crown debt under Labour in their last term, I'm sure it'll be trending in the right direction for once.

winner69
04-11-2017, 11:26 AM
Yep, we'll have to look at this graph again each year. Like NZ's Crown debt under Labour in their last term, I'm sure it'll be trending in the right direction for once.


probably need to change the assumptions around average number of people per dwelling to make it look better

the number they are using now is a bit low I reckon

elZorro
04-11-2017, 12:28 PM
probably need to change the assumptions around average number of people per dwelling to make it look better

the number they are using now is a bit low I reckon

Do I detect a bit of cynicism W69? I suppose they could preside over a period of net emigration, that would help too. But there was no jiggery-pokey of the net debt figures surely, under the Clark government. They paid the debt down, substantially. At the same time the economy was growing robustly.

If anyone is to be accused of juggling figures, it could be the National government, who picked up the benefit of new Stats NZ rules which changed the terms on what 'unemployment' means. This took effect nicely before the 2017 elections.

https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2016/07/stats_nz_changes_definition_of_unemployed.html

Also, now, employment means one hour or more worked per week, and in some cases it doesn't have to be paid either. Two part-timers (work less than 30 hours per week) are classed as the equivalent of one full-timer in Stats NZ figures.

justakiwi
04-11-2017, 06:21 PM
Regardless of which party is in power the Government of the day needs to start thinking outside the square as other countries have done. Not everybody needing a house needs a 2 or 3 bedroom traditional style house. There are plenty of single people (both young and old) who would be very happy with a “tiny house.” We need to be looking at some of the initiatives from the UK and even the US, and establishing tiny house villages. They do not need to look like “little boxes on the hillside.” There are many many different styles and sizes of tiny house. These could be built for a mere fraction of the cost of traditional houses and would be ideal for people like me (57, divorced, living in my caravan full time as a way of escaping the rent trap I’ve been stuck in for 13 years). Perfect for the homeless, young singles or couples and in many cases even single older folk.

I am not saying this would solve the entire housing problem but it would sure be a quick and efficient way of providing effective and attractive/pleasant homes for a great many people. Imagine how many tiny homes could be built for the cost of a traditional Auckland house? Think how many could be built in one week.

We need to think smarter.

artemis
04-11-2017, 06:38 PM
Regardless of which party is in power the Government of the day needs to start thinking outside the square as other countries have done. Not everybody needing a house needs a 2 or 3 bedroom traditional style house. There are plenty of single people (both young and old) who would be very happy with a “tiny house.” .........

What is stopping people building or buying a small place right now? Like a studio apartment. Why does the government need to be involved? If people don't have a deposit or cannot afford repayments, would you expect the government to step in? How? (Why?)

fungus pudding
04-11-2017, 07:04 PM
What is stopping people building or buying a small place right now? Like a studio apartment. Why does the government need to be involved? If people don't have a deposit or cannot afford repayments, would you expect the government to step in? How? (Why?)
The gummint shouldn't have anything to do with it as you say.

justakiwi
04-11-2017, 07:30 PM
What is stopping people building or buying a small place right now? Like a studio apartment. Why does the government need to be involved? If people don't have a deposit or cannot afford repayments, would you expect the government to step in? How? (Why?)

The government is the one saying they will commit to building x number of new houses over x number of years. I’m just proposing that some of that new house build could be tiny houses rather than traditional (larger than some people need), expensive houses. They could be purchased or rented by potential occupiers. It really doesn’t matter. The point is they are an alternative housing option for some people, than traditional 3-4 bedroom houses. If space in Auckland or wherever else in the North Island is at a premium, surely building 4 or 5 tiny houses on the same land area as one traditional house, makes sense. Maybe these would be council houses - I don’t know. I’m just saying there are alternative options to trying to squeeze more and more houses into cities that are apparently already full to bursting.

Am I the only one who can see the logic in this as an option? Maybe this is just the wrong forum.

ratkin
05-11-2017, 05:44 AM
The government is the one saying they will commit to building x number of new houses over x number of years. I’m just proposing that some of that new house build could be tiny houses rather than traditional (larger than some people need), expensive houses. They could be purchased or rented by potential occupiers. It really doesn’t matter. The point is they are an alternative housing option for some people, than traditional 3-4 bedroom houses. If space in Auckland or wherever else in the North Island is at a premium, surely building 4 or 5 tiny houses on the same land area as one traditional house, makes sense. Maybe these would be council houses - I don’t know. I’m just saying there are alternative options to trying to squeeze more and more houses into cities that are apparently already full to bursting.

Am I the only one who can see the logic in this as an option? Maybe this is just the wrong forum.

Most big cities around the world build up, rather than out. Plenty of those "tower blocks" have one bedroom flats. Many have a bad image of them, lifts not working, junkies in the stairwells etc, however they do not have to be like that. Some work very well when done properly.

artemis
05-11-2017, 07:31 AM
Most big cities around the world build up, rather than out. Plenty of those "tower blocks" have one bedroom flats. Many have a bad image of them, lifts not working, junkies in the stairwells etc, however they do not have to be like that. Some work very well when done properly.

There is high demand for 1 bedroom social housing, which will be medium to high rise flats in Auckland. In the social housing register - June 2017 - 2408 of the 5353 on the register are for 1 bedrooms. So single adults or couples and actually nearly all singles. Many singles / couples who are accepted for social housing will have issues, some complex and some intractable. That will not work in a mixed environment - say an apartment block with social / affordable / market properties - which is what is being promised.

Joshuatree
05-11-2017, 08:16 AM
One person houses are the answer
Baby, where are the fine things you promised me? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVxF_l-BPnk)

justakiwi
05-11-2017, 08:52 AM
There is high demand for 1 bedroom social housing, which will be medium to high rise flats in Auckland. In the social housing register - June 2017 - 2408 of the 5353 on the register are for 1 bedrooms. So single adults or couples and actually nearly all singles. Many singles / couples who are accepted for social housing will have issues, some complex and some intractable. That will not work in a mixed environment - say an apartment block with social / affordable / market properties - which is what is being promised.

So set up tiny house villages instead. Low cost, fast build option that can give these people a “home” with enough space for a small garden so they can actually have a life outside of the four walls they would get in a high rise apartment. Because there are many tiny house designs people can retain their individuality and independence while at the same time they can be part of their tiny house village “community.”

I read an article recently about a local council in the US doing exactly this. Residents went into their tiny house and paid rent (rent varied according to the size of their house as some were bigger than others) and after x number of years the house became theirs. These houses were valued at around $40,000. In this particular case the houses were for homeless people but it could work equally as well for anyone.

What we have been doing in terms of housing, hasn’t worked. It’s not working now. I struggle to understand why people are so “anti” suggestions for alternative ways to improve the situation. I’m out suggesting we only build tiny houses. Of course there will always be a need for traditional housing but this idea could be a practical, workable solution for a significant number of people in a very short time frame.

elZorro
05-11-2017, 09:36 AM
So set up tiny house villages instead. Low cost, fast build option that can give these people a “home” with enough space for a small garden so they can actually have a life outside of the four walls they would get in a high rise apartment. Because there are many tiny house designs people can retain their individuality and independence while at the same time they can be part of their tiny house village “community.”

I read an article recently about a local council in the US doing exactly this. Residents went into their tiny house and paid rent (rent varied according to the size of their house as some were bigger than others) and after x number of years the house became theirs. These houses were valued at around $40,000. In this particular case the houses were for homeless people but it could work equally as well for anyone.

What we have been doing in terms of housing, hasn’t worked. It’s not working now. I struggle to understand why people are so “anti” suggestions for alternative ways to improve the situation. I’m out suggesting we only build tiny houses. Of course there will always be a need for traditional housing but this idea could be a practical, workable solution for a significant number of people in a very short time frame.

It does sound feasible, quite similar to holiday cabins that are popping up around marinas. I know of a couple living in a motorhome while completing degrees as returning students, and a full-time employed person living in a station wagon. For them, the rent trap is something they either cannot afford, or want to avoid. Tiny homes should be a useful option. Maybe Labour will fit something like this into their KiwiBuild plans.

craic
05-11-2017, 09:55 AM
A number of people have built tiny houses on truck chassis. Such small buildings come within the regulations as they are moveable. They can be registered as trailers and moved on the roads. I have seen costs of around $20,000 quoted.

justakiwi
05-11-2017, 11:51 AM
A number of people have built tiny houses on truck chassis. Such small buildings come within the regulations as they are moveable. They can be registered as trailers and moved on the roads. I have seen costs of around $20,000 quoted.

Exactly. The problem is for many people, me included, we need somewhere to “park” our tiny home. The kind of community I’m proposing could also cater for people with existing mobile tiny houses who need somewhere to call home (they would pay rent for their serviced site). There are so many ways of doing this.

I belong to a number of NZ motorhome/caravan forums/online groups. You would probably not believe how many retired couples and singles are selling up their homes and buying motor homes or building tiny houses. There needs to be places established around the country for people with homes on wheels to park up. Aside from anything this category of people is freeing up traditional housing for someone else.

If I ever win lotto I will do exactly that. Buy some land in a decent location, set up individual sites large enough for the biggest tiny home design, put services in to each site. Provide a community building where residents can (if they wish) socialise with each other, hold community BBQs or whatever. People would pay a minimal rent for the long term use of their site. Maybe they actually buy it - who knows. The problem is I’m not likely to win lotto, but that doesn’t mean its a bad idea.

Dreams are free ;)

artemis
05-11-2017, 05:44 PM
Couple of Australian companies have set up locations for retirement communities in great locations, like beaches. People rent a plot and this includes access to amenities and utilities. They own their own home, usually a trailer or caravan. And when they move on it is either removed or sold on.

Could happen here, but the retirement village companies are making bigger bucks with their current model so are unlikely to go for a cheaper model. Local associations here could get together and do it.

justakiwi
05-11-2017, 08:01 PM
There are several viable scenarios for my tiny housing village concept.

1. Social housing for singles or couples ( govt/local Council initiative)
2. Tiny village “parks” set up for people living full time in their motorhomes, caravans, tiny houses. Similar to Council run/owned holiday parks but specifically for these people. Purpose built individual park up sites with water, power and possibly individual black/grey water drain. Sites levelled and shingled for parking on without having to worry about how to mow the grass underneath the vehicle/tiny house. With the usual shower/toilet/kitchen facilities and green and communal areas for BBQs etc. Police check everyone who comes in a long term/permanent resident. Not as difficult as it sounds. The holiday park I am currently living in does just that and it is one of the reasons I came here (as a woman on her own).
3. Tiny house only villages, set up as above but for tiny houses only. Similar to some of the retirement villages we have now but not operating under the same money hungry exploitative principles. There is plenty of opportunity to make this idea profitable without taking advantage of/ripping people off.

I am probably speaking to the wrong demographic here as no doubt plenty of you hold shares in the likes of Ryman etc, but what I’m suggesting is not for private enterprise to make bucketloads of money. Mostly its about proposing a possible solution to some of our current housing/homelessness/rising elderly populations. Building high rise apartment blocks for some of our most vulnerable people is a recipe for disaster and has the potential (as someone else alluded to earlier) of creating more problems of physical and emotional isolation. People need homes they enjoy being in where they can grow a few veggies or have a pet if they want.

Better go go buy a lotto ticket ;)

elZorro
07-11-2017, 06:52 AM
Paradise Papers leak: this will set of another round of fact-finding on tax avoidance, the IRD are already getting interested.
John Key mentioned by an Appleby employee as a leading proponent of NZ being a tax-dodging hub in the Pacific.

https://www.interest.co.nz/news/90746/ird-gets-involved-paradise-papers-probe-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-seek-more?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Tuesday+7+N ovember+2017

elZorro
10-11-2017, 06:23 AM
The economy is predicted to grow some more under the impact of Labour's policies, in particular raising of the minimum wage, and KiwiBuild.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/98702380/reserve-bank-says-impact-of-new-government-initiatives-is-very-uncertain

minimoke
10-11-2017, 07:57 AM
The economy is predicted to grow some more under the impact of Labour's policies, in particular raising of the minimum wage, and KiwiBuild.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/98702380/reserve-bank-says-impact-of-new-government-initiatives-is-very-uncertain
First thing to understand that raising the minimum wage is not new government spending. It is the private sector that will be bearing this increase cost. In reality it lessens government spending as there is less coming out of the Working for Families vote. Remember some local bodies and some of government have already moved to this ridiculous "Living Wage" thing which has already driven up costs with no increase in productivity.

Secondly a higher minimum wage pushes companies closer to that "new technology" break even point or the "going bust" tipping point. Neither is good for workers as they (particular the low skilled) will be the first to be be made redundant. Which does increase government spending as there are now more beneficiaries.

Relying on kiwibuild is relying on hot air. It will not happen. Main reason is we should today have an oversupply of construction industry labour. This is because after the christchurch earthquakes there was an ideal "once in a life time" opportunity to get NEET's and others into industry training. It didn't happen. Pair that with reducing the number of immigrants there simply will not be enough labor to build at the promised rates.

Also noted in the article is an increase in government debt. This is acceptable if it is used to power production - but not if its going to pay beneficiaries or fund projects doomed to failure.

artemis
10-11-2017, 08:11 AM
.... Remember some local bodies and some of government have already moved to this ridiculous "Living Wag e" thing which has already driven up costs with no increase in productivity.

The Treasury has said that the main beneficiaries of the "Living Wage" are the government (reduced transfers, increased tax) and young single workers. Also that only 6% of affected households match the criteria on which the LW calculation was based.



.Relying on kiwibuild is relying on hot air. It will not happen.

The Opposition was very focussed on this in the first Question Time for the new government. Basically - where's the plan. Answer - wait and see. And does building 100,000 new properties mean 'build', ie constructed new. Answer - we stand by our commitments.

I get it is a new government but they have a hundred day plan and the clock is ticking. Fluffy and woolly will have to come to an end pretty soon. There are many stakeholders waiting on Kiwibuild detail.

The media has already painted Ms Ardern and Mr Hipkins as liars and shambolic. They can't afford much more of that.

minimoke
10-11-2017, 08:23 AM
The Treasury has said that the main beneficiaries of the "Living Wage" are the government (reduced transfers, increased tax)
Which is exactly I suspect why National stayed as silent as it did on this "movement". National should have been much more vocal advocating higher skill and higher contribution to business (ie increased productivity) is the path to higher wages not some arbitrary "poverty" line.

dobby41
10-11-2017, 08:33 AM
The Opposition was very focussed on this in the first Question Time for the new government. Basically - where's the plan. Answer - wait and see. And does building 100,000 new properties mean 'build', ie constructed new. Answer - we stand by our commitments.

I get it is a new government but they have a hundred day plan and the clock is ticking. Fluffy and woolly will have to come to an end pretty soon. There are many stakeholders waiting on Kiwibuild detail.
I thought the 'wait and see' was just giving National back what they did when they were asked questions.

artemis
10-11-2017, 09:00 AM
I thought the 'wait and see' was just giving National back what they did when they were asked questions.

Ministers are required to give accurate answers to Questions in the House. Are you suggesting Ministers lied for political reasons?

It is more likely they really don't know, which will get them through but only temporarily as Kiwibuild (and housing generally) was the main election promise. They have to actually deliver on that or the fallout will be major.

dobby41
10-11-2017, 11:24 AM
Ministers are required to give accurate answers to Questions in the House. Are you suggesting Ministers lied for political reasons?

It is more likely they really don't know, which will get them through but only temporarily as Kiwibuild (and housing generally) was the main election promise. They have to actually deliver on that or the fallout will be major.

I'm not suggesting they lied.
The answer may not be as complete as you'd like but that seems to be the way it is done.
In reality question time is about theatre and politics and has no real meaning.
Committies is where all the real work is done.

minimoke
10-11-2017, 11:48 AM
In reality question time is about theatre and politics and has no real meaning.
.
You are kind. I just see Question Time as a job creation programme.

All it achieves (other than the entertainment) is work for public servants who get to run around every week pulling out information, drawing a wage and achieving nothing. At least Minsters from time to time get an opportunity to answer a patsy question: from own benches - "Minister do you believe you Ministry of {insert whatever you like} is doing a good Job" "yes it is blah blah blah" saving the public servants a fair bit of effort which is good since we wouldn't want to tire them out.

dobby41
10-11-2017, 12:47 PM
You are kind. I just see Question Time as a job creation programme.

All it achieves (other than the entertainment) is work for public servants who get to run around every week pulling out information, drawing a wage and achieving nothing. At least Minsters from time to time get an opportunity to answer a patsy question: from own benches - "Minister do you believe you Ministry of {insert whatever you like} is doing a good Job" "yes it is blah blah blah" saving the public servants a fair bit of effort which is good since we wouldn't want to tire them out.
I was told on a school visit by an MP that they have question time because the people expect it.
I don't and I wonder if anyone really does.
As a back bencher his job was to fill a few seats and cheer for his side a bit.

minimoke
10-11-2017, 01:50 PM
As a back bencher his job was to fill a few seats and cheer for his side a bit.
That would have been Gerry in the early days? Not a bad job for $160,000 + perks

dobby41
10-11-2017, 02:16 PM
That would have been Gerry in the early days? Not a bad job for $160,000 + perks

Actually someone much closer to Hamilton (one of the 2 blue ones in Hamilton and has never been in cabinet).

artemis
10-11-2017, 02:24 PM
I was told on a school visit by an MP that they have question time because the people expect it.
I don't and I wonder if anyone really does.
As a back bencher his job was to fill a few seats and cheer for his side a bit.

The Opposition does not have access to the same resources and information that the Government does. In QT yesterday, for example, the Opposition asked for a BIM to be tabled. This was denied by the Speaker as info from it was only referred to by Mr Twyford, not quoted. QT is one way to get official answers.

And there is a complete record of the Q & A in Hansard.

Ministers will not be able to continue to give vague answers. I imagine Mr Joyce will continue to ask his very specific budget questions until they are answered.

Did the MP visiting your school say that people expect QT is the ONLY reason for it? Seems very unlikely.

dobby41
10-11-2017, 02:41 PM
Ministers will not be able to continue to give vague answers. I imagine Mr Joyce will continue to ask his very specific budget questions until they are answered.

Did the MP visiting your school say that people expect QT is the ONLY reason for it? Seems very unlikely.

National got away with less than complete answers for all their time in govt.

ONLY reason - sort of implied it really. It was a few years ago now.
It stacks up with what I have observed - often you just wish they'd answer the question rather than beat about the bush - but that's politics really.

minimoke
10-11-2017, 03:19 PM
Ministers will not be able to continue to give vague answers.
Memory is getting a bit hazy but as I recall there is a requirement for the question to be answered. But there is no standard to measure if the answer was full and adequate. Guess that why they have supplementaries.

elZorro
12-11-2017, 12:54 PM
Actually someone much closer to Hamilton (one of the 2 blue ones in Hamilton and has never been in cabinet).

Interesting, Dobby. I wonder if it was MP David Bennett. I hear that he in particular doesn't deal with the hoi polloi too much, leaves it to staff. He's really good at going door-door though, these are taxpayer-funded highly paid walks, designed to keep himself in office primarily.

If you want any other proof of his level of effort, listen to this rant in parliament recently, from the opposition back-benches. He had only in late 2016 been given some low-level portfolio work, after more than 11 years as an MP. Not too many people down in Wellington trust him, would be my take on that.

https://youtu.be/f58IprRx8vk

winner69
12-11-2017, 03:42 PM
Heather says the new lot are just like the old lo ...espnthe questionable truthfulness bit.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11942657

Well that didn't take long. Two weeks and the paint has started to chip off the new Government. After a couple of moments of questionable truthfulness over the last week, the new mob are starting to look a lot more like the last lot, where truthfulness wasn't a high priority.

winner69
12-11-2017, 03:45 PM
Good that we are going to get more favourable trade deals now that TPP has hit some roadblocks.....even better than we would have expected under TTP

Well done Jacinda ...and David of course

Joshuatree
12-11-2017, 04:28 PM
Trump will be so proud of him
How many times can a National MP say 'socialism' in one short parliamentary speech? (WATCH) (https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/10-11-2017/how-many-times-can-a-national-mp-say-socialism-in-one-short-parliamentary-speech-watch/)

minimoke
12-11-2017, 05:09 PM
Trump will be so proud of him
How many times can a National MP say 'socialism' in one short parliamentary speech? (WATCH) (https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/10-11-2017/how-many-times-can-a-national-mp-say-socialism-in-one-short-parliamentary-speech-watch/)
Tag teaming with Elzorro on the same video? But most of it is worth watching for the truisms that come out.

The number of times socialism is mentioned isn't the issues.

What is, is how his predictions will pan out.

Howabout reporting back to us on that in 3 years, assuming the coalition last that long

artemis
12-11-2017, 06:53 PM
Memory is getting a bit hazy but as I recall there is a requirement for the question to be answered. But there is no standard to measure if the answer was full and adequate. Guess that why they have supplementaries.

Eventually there will be decisions made and then answers to questions will need to be accurate. Meantime, the same or similar questions will be asked in QT. If waffle answers continue, then Ministers will look indecisive or worse. I expect 100,000 builds to be raised every single QT. Specifically how many new builds to date and how many are 'affordable', social, market priced. And the status of the $2billion budget.

It is the most high profile election undertaking made, and 'ín due course' will not cut it for long.

elZorro
12-11-2017, 08:39 PM
Eventually there will be decisions made and then answers to questions will need to be accurate. Meantime, the same or similar questions will be asked in QT. If waffle answers continue, then Ministers will look indecisive or worse. I expect 100,000 builds to be raised every single QT. Specifically how many new builds to date and how many are 'affordable', social, market priced. And the status of the $2billion budget.

It is the most high profile election undertaking made, and 'ín due course' will not cut it for long.

Labour never said that they'd build 10,000 houses a year in the first year. But by supporting developers with firm orders they should be able to get out of the blocks fairly quickly. And I would assume 1-2 years of training time will bring a lot of new tradespeople through. Home component manufacturing in dedicated factories would take less setup time.

winner69
12-11-2017, 08:41 PM
Bad move by government. Disappointing

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/11/conservationists-slam-new-labour-govt.amp.html

Extract
"The National Government was no friend of conservation, but the new Labour Government has shown itself in this move, to be no friend of science, or conservation either", Mrs Rose said.

winner69
13-11-2017, 07:15 AM
Labour never said that they'd build 10,000 houses a year in the first year. But by supporting developers with firm orders they should be able to get out of the blocks fairly quickly. And I would assume 1-2 years of training time will bring a lot of new tradespeople through. Home component manufacturing in dedicated factories would take less setup time.

EZ - Whose going to buy these tens of thiousands of houses?

But I suppose if the government is going to 'finance' or even subdise many lucky punters into them there should be some takers, beggars can't be choosey eh.

artemis
13-11-2017, 08:06 AM
EZ - Whose going to buy these tens of thiousands of houses?

But I suppose if the government is going to 'finance' punters into them there should be some takers, beggars can't be choosey eh.

There is only $2 billion in the pot for this initiative, to be recycled as properties are sold. That is not a lot of dough when talking houses, even 'affordable' ones, especially if there is government money remaining in the financing. A plan is needed, open and transparent please. So far we have only 'in due course'.

westerly
13-11-2017, 10:32 AM
Bad move by government. Disappointing

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/11/conservationists-slam-new-labour-govt.amp.html

Extract
"The National Government was no friend of conservation, but the new Labour Government has shown itself in this move, to be no friend of science, or conservation either", Mrs Rose said.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11943252

This gives a more balanced view.

westerly

winner69
14-11-2017, 07:22 PM
I get the feeling that Chris and Winston aren't or will never be friends

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11943985

"I have absolutely no regard for the Right Honourable Winston Peters, and have had no regard for him from the time I acted for the National Party caucus in the early 1990s, when he was removed from the caucus for disloyalty.
"And old habits don't change very quickly, and he has made absolutely no contribution to New Zealand in my view."

Joshuatree
16-11-2017, 09:57 PM
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm… (https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nzherald.co.nz%2Fnz%2Fnew s%2Farticle.cfm%3Fc_id%3D1%26objectid%3D11154765&h=ATM-dMHPf7fK3HUpZUEnytPFA-x-A67QMFHJwmtU6JOOATQhYnoemDzETU2CuczwAboJSmO7puuRrh HE9qjUUQVXQsDc8vsb31DcN1pQZk9Kq2uNdleXfbzbq9M8gxzN y5rhDzsmgAgwUyOe_o7jF4maeSNu0XD0qo1AiphF7HAfP1KfHo hRNJQsCaoHIen8d9BSI4RecCbEs3e43BIFrdeToeD-58or1FNF5NPaZwm6qj4ujIMnVRpedlRrCFtbjRqVnTc8VjzHME GJBHnxzTPfUgOaKGY)
6 national MP's(natch) rorting the system

dobby41
17-11-2017, 06:55 AM
6 national MP's(natch) rorting the system

2013 article?

elZorro
22-11-2017, 07:04 AM
Dr Tim Mackle (DairyNZ) had a light treatment from Jack Tame on TV this morning. He certainly has a smiling, agreeable face. But DairyNZ is under the control of Fonterra, and I think that's where Tim Mackle came from.

I'm hoping this new govt will help bring the nation's dairy farmers around to looking much harder at water quality in our waterways. These are the people who own vast tracts of the countryside (them and the banks), running an inefficient process that turns the sun's energy into milkfat and water, that is then trucked laboriously to factories for energy-intensive processing. It's a huge industry, rivalling tourism, but has byproducts that damage waterways. The landowners are good at paying low taxes and relatively low wages, so I always wonder if that commercial effort could go somewhere else that would benefit wider NZ more.

Rachel Stewart (not a popular person with dairy farmers) is watching the latest PR efforts by Fonterra.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11946230&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+2 2+November+2017

minimoke
22-11-2017, 08:23 AM
Dr Tim Mackle (DairyNZ) had a light treatment from Jack Tame on TV this morning. He certainly has a smiling, agreeable face. But DairyNZ is under the control of Fonterra, and I think that's where Tim Mackle came from.

I'm hoping this new govt will help bring the nation's dairy farmers around to looking much harder at water quality in our waterways. These are the people who own vast tracts of the countryside (them and the banks), running an inefficient process that turns the sun's energy into milkfat and water, that is then trucked laboriously to factories for energy-intensive processing. It's a huge industry, rivalling tourism, but has byproducts that damage waterways. The landowners are good at paying low taxes and relatively low wages, so I always wonder if that commercial effort could go somewhere else that would benefit wider NZ more.

Rachel Stewart (not a popular person with dairy farmers) is watching the latest PR efforts by Fonterra.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11946230&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+2 2+November+2017
Wrong target Elzoro. Dairy farmers already have 96% or 24,000 km's of waterways fenced off. You need to be aiming at beef and pig farms followed by sheep and deer.

westerly
22-11-2017, 10:37 AM
Wrong target Elzoro. Dairy farmers already have 96% or 24,000 km's of waterways fenced off. You need to be aiming at beef and pig farms followed by sheep and deer.

A fence doesn't stop run off from mob stocked cows.

westerly

elZorro
22-11-2017, 05:28 PM
Wrong target Elzoro. Dairy farmers already have 96% or 24,000 km's of waterways fenced off. You need to be aiming at beef and pig farms followed by sheep and deer.

You didn't read the article, Minimoke.

minimoke
23-11-2017, 03:11 PM
Please Labour, Can I have GST off razor blades

fungus pudding
23-11-2017, 03:49 PM
Please Labour, Can I have GST off razor blades

No you can't. Use tampons.

Joshuatree
23-11-2017, 04:31 PM
Just so that FP doesn't go in a bin heres the link to his weirdo post
Tampon tax break on the table (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/99174262/government-to-explore-option-of-cutting-tax-on-female-products)

minimoke
23-11-2017, 04:57 PM
Just so that FP doesn't go in a bin heres the link to his weirdo post
Tampon tax break on the table (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/99174262/government-to-explore-option-of-cutting-tax-on-female-products)
It wasnt weird - i understood it.

fungus pudding
23-11-2017, 05:57 PM
It wasnt weird - i understood it.

The weird thing is Jacinda's gummint are going to consider it.

minimoke
23-11-2017, 07:17 PM
The weird thing is Jacinda's gummint are going to consider it.But they aren't going to consider the home or inheritance tax - two excellent places for hiding and distributing wealth (and clogging up the housing market)

fungus pudding
23-11-2017, 07:21 PM
But they aren't going to consider the home or inheritance tax - two excellent places for hiding and distributing wealth (and clogging up the housing market)

And they still believe taking GST off fruit and vegetables will make them cheaper.

Baa_Baa
23-11-2017, 07:34 PM
And they still believe taking GST off fruit and vegetables will make them cheaper.

Wouldn't they have to take GST out of the whole value chain for it to be "cheaper"?

i.e. the grower charges GST to the wholesaler who charges GST to the distributor who charges GST to the supermarket, who suddenly won't be able to charge GST to the consumer? So the retail price will go up 15% to compensate for the loss of GST and the Tax equation is out of whack on the cash flow and balance sheet which adds another complicated dimension, i.e. pay GST to the distributer but get no GST from the consumer, GST owing goes up.

If it was easy and carried no political risk it would have been done years ago. It isn't easy and Labour's in-the-pocket tax advisory committee are going to have their work cut out coming up with something that doesn't get Labour chucked out of government at the next election, or earlier.

Labour sure do seem determined to crack open every chestnut. Can't see it working out well for them.

westerly
23-11-2017, 08:14 PM
It wasnt weird - i understood it.

It was weird.

westerly

minimoke
23-11-2017, 08:45 PM
It was weird.

westerlyIts been said I'm not the sharpest knife in the cabbage patch but I got it. Its a bit like a joke - if you don't get it, it looses its sense if you have to explain it.

elZorro
23-11-2017, 09:16 PM
Its been said I'm not the sharpest knife in the cabbage patch but I got it. Its a bit like a joke - if you don't get it, it looses its sense if you have to explain it.

FP's right, no-one should tamper with GST. (Not my line, BTW).

winner69
03-12-2017, 04:35 PM
Doublethink is an interesting concept (Orwell)

Labour Government doublethinking?

iceman
04-12-2017, 03:44 PM
National's good record for wage and salary earners confirmed https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/99492649/how-much-are-nz-households-earning-from-wages-and-salaries

"Labour and income statistics manager Sean Broughton said in October that the ratio of housing costs to household income had not changed significantly."

elZorro
05-12-2017, 09:23 PM
National's good record for wage and salary earners confirmed https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/99492649/how-much-are-nz-households-earning-from-wages-and-salaries

"Labour and income statistics manager Sean Broughton said in October that the ratio of housing costs to household income had not changed significantly." Maybe not for those who have already paid off most of their homes, with interest rates being low. I'd be interested to see the Auckland situation, compared to nationwide.

Anyway, the new free tertiary education policy is formally launched, starting with one year fulltime or two years part-time. That's good going from the new coalition. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11953327

dobby41
06-12-2017, 06:39 AM
Anyway, the new free tertiary education policy is formally launched, starting with one year fulltime or two years part-time. That's good going from the new coalition. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11953327

I'm not against free education but do you think people will go to Uni rather than be on the dole? After all they would earn more.
Seems to me that there should be some sort of incentive to pass.
With my kids I paid for their Uni IF they passed - my pass, no money.

777
06-12-2017, 07:05 AM
Totally wrong is this free tertiary policy in the way it is implemented. It should have been 50% of costs each year starting from next year. It is amazing how more appreciative a student will be of their education if they have to pay out of their own pocket.

Give a kid a car and see how they treat it as against a kid that has scrimped and saved to buy one for them self.

minimoke
06-12-2017, 07:12 AM
Totally wrong is this free tertiary policy in the way it is implemented. .I agree. If it is to be implemented it should have been on the final year (not the first) and on the basis of passing, rather than attending. Also should be targeted at qualifications / skills that are in short supply.

That said, given its free and I'm paying for it Im looking at Scuba Diving, Sky Diving, Mixology and Scuba courses to fill my time next year. Cant decide which!

winner69
06-12-2017, 07:19 AM
I agree. If it is to be implemented it should have been on the final year (not the first) and on the basis of passing, rather than attending. Also should be targeted at qualifications / skills that are in short supply.

That said, given its free and I'm paying for it Im looking at Scuba Diving, Sky Diving, Mixology and Scuba courses to fill my time next year. Cant decide which!

Polytec course on crypto mining sounds attractive

minimoke
06-12-2017, 07:31 AM
Polytec course on crypto mining sounds attractive
I'd be up for that as well - I wouldn't even need to use my Authorship tokens as payment.

elZorro
11-12-2017, 07:18 AM
Of course a lot of the value of any tertiary course is that someone starts it, does well in it and completes it. No matter what the subject. How many of us have been forced to enrol in maths courses that we'll never use in our work. I rely mostly on stuff I learnt in my School Cert year. Maybe there should be more of these alternative courses instead, the principle is the same.

Colmar Brunton has finally moved its polling methodology to a mix of mobile phones to landlines. It's a 50/50 mix, and they got the numbers by using a random number generator. They did manage to find more young voters with this method, as expected, easier. Of course they are now talking to individual voters they'd never have reached before.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/mobiles-included-in-1-news-colmar-brunton-poll-first-time-bid-reach-more-young-voters

Labour is now polling at 39%, National not much higher.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11956854

BlackPeter
11-12-2017, 07:25 AM
...

They did manage to find more young voters with this method, as expected, easier. Of course they are now talking to individual voters they'd never have reached before.



Just curious - how do you know they reached more younger voters? I guess I might be able to follow your argumentation that they reached more younger people, given that they probably have in proportion less landline connections ... but what makes you think that these young people are voters?

777
11-12-2017, 07:38 AM
Labour is now polling at 39%, National not much higher.



Well National got 46%. That is 17.95% more than Labour got.

But screw the results to reflect what you want.

minimoke
11-12-2017, 07:49 AM
Of course a lot of the value of any tertiary course is that someone starts it, does well in it and completes it. Completion is not a measure of value.

At best it is just a short term indication of how successful a training educations organization is in helping students to compete course.

I guess where there might be value is determining which organisations are successful and which aren't. Universities don't do too badly 2014 = 86% completion rates, still stable in 2016 with 86%. But waananga. That's a different story. 80% in 2014 and drops 77% in 2016. And if you look at Youth Guarantee students the Waanaga started at 70% in 2104 falling to 61% in 2016. Lets see how these figures change with free first year education (I intend passing my courses - though I hope my Mixology course doesn't slow me down in my sky diving one)

iceman
13-12-2017, 02:28 AM
Well National got 46%. That is 17.95% more than Labour got.

But screw the results to reflect what you want.

NAtional bigger than the 2 parties that make up the Cabinet combined. EZ doesn't let facts stand in the way of a good story :-)

dobby41
13-12-2017, 07:07 AM
NAtional bigger than the 2 parties that make up the Cabinet combined. EZ doesn't let facts stand in the way of a good story :-)

But Labour and their coalition partners are the GOVERNMENT!

winner69
13-12-2017, 07:36 AM
NAtional bigger than the 2 parties that make up the Cabinet combined. EZ doesn't let facts stand in the way of a good story :-)

But don’t forget Labour still in ‘honeymoon’ mode so this helps their polling

iceman
13-12-2017, 08:43 AM
But Labour and their coalition partners are the GOVERNMENT!

That's right dobby41 and as winner69 points out, they're basking in the honeymoon glory ;)

Joshuatree
13-12-2017, 09:17 AM
I dont see any basking that is incorrect. Hard out getting up to speed is the new govt , it takes a while getting all the logistics, office, passwords staff, protocols etc etc up to full speed after 9 years out . And national doing everything to divide and conquer. A good robust opposition they are not sadly. Many are living in the past(first past the post) and being bitter and revengeful will ultimately be self destructive. The fact that they tried to politically assassinate Winston Peters was their biggest blunder. And Bill English as a role model of how to behave badly, permanently damaged goods imo no credibility left. .And following on when he's gone,Bridges? The strong arm bully will cause too much damage to his own party imo.
Thank goodness we now have a positive govt that seeks collaboration

westerly
13-12-2017, 10:46 AM
Well National got 46%. That is 17.95% more than Labour got.

But screw the results to reflect what you want.

17.95% more?

westerly

blackcap
13-12-2017, 10:49 AM
17.95% more?

westerly

(46-39)/39 is 17.95% more

Joshuatree
13-12-2017, 11:28 AM
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11958265 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11958265)

According to House observer Graeme Edgeler, the same thing happened to a new minister in 2008 who was unfamiliar with how to move a first reading. That minister was Gerry Brownlee – but leave was moved by Labour to let him do it anyway and it was granted.

A great example showing national slowly heading down the gurgler with their ambush at all costs tactics, a less credible weaker party will be result. give em enough rope.

dobby41
13-12-2017, 12:38 PM
According to House observer Graeme Edgeler, the same thing happened to a new minister in 2008 who was unfamiliar with how to move a first reading. That minister was Gerry Brownlee – but leave was moved by Labour to let him do it anyway and it was granted.

A great example showing national slowly heading down the gurgler with their ambush at all costs tactics, a less credible weaker party will be result. give em enough rope.

Though these games are interesting, as a tax payer, I find it to be a big waste of time.
I know National would like to see Labour fail but a fail for Labour means a fail for us all.
Let them play their games on their own dime - not mine.

westerly
13-12-2017, 01:01 PM
(46-39)/39 is 17.95% more

Only if 46 is 100% Which it ain"t

westerly

777
13-12-2017, 01:06 PM
Only if 46 is 100% Which it ain"t

westerly


I can see why you voted to the left.

ie West on the compass.

fungus pudding
13-12-2017, 01:24 PM
17.95% more?

westerly

46 is 17.95% more than 39. It's not that hard.

winner69
13-12-2017, 01:30 PM
46 is 17.95% more than 39. It's not that hard.

But 7% points sound so much closer

dobby41
13-12-2017, 01:33 PM
46 is 17.95% more than 39. It's not that hard.
A percentage of a percentage?
46% is 7% higher than 39%

blackcap
13-12-2017, 01:36 PM
A percentage of a percentage?
46% is 7% higher than 39%

No 46% is 17.95% higher than 39%. There fixed it for you.

Joshuatree
13-12-2017, 02:25 PM
Though these games are interesting, as a tax payer, I find it to be a big waste of time.
I know National would like to see Labour fail but a fail for Labour means a fail for us all.
Let them play their games on their own dime - not mine.

They dont give a stuff about us taxpayers, wasting time or uniting or collaborating its all negative . Its combat to them, anything to take down the govt with no thought to the country but getting the power back. Old school, showing their true selfish colours will weaken them further long term.

westerly
13-12-2017, 02:40 PM
46 is 17.95% more than 39. It's not that hard.

Thought you would show up :)
But who is screwing the result of the poll ?

westerly

BlackPeter
13-12-2017, 03:13 PM
They dont give a stuff about us taxpayers, wasting time or uniting or collaborating its all negative . Its combat to them, anything to take down the govt with no thought to the country but getting the power back. Old school, showing their true selfish colours will weaken them further long term.

I know - that's how Labour Green used to behave for 9 long years - what money wasters they have been if you think e.g. about their brain dead approach to sabotage the Gentailer listings.

But still - in case you missed it - Winston brought the Left into government. Time to stop complaining and do something positive ... otherwise your time in power might be severely constrained ;)

elZorro
13-12-2017, 05:47 PM
Well National got 46%. That is 17.95% more than Labour got.

But screw the results to reflect what you want.


Technically National achieved 17.95% more votes than Labour. But you have to add the Green and NZ First votes in, 777. That's how the left-wing coalition won the election. National ended up with no friends.

Plus, in all situations where votes are being considered, the results are expressed in terms of percentage of the nationwide vote. The difference between the parties is always expressed in terms of a percentage nationwide vote difference.

In this case, if just 3.5% of voters change their mind from theoretically voting for National to voting for Labour, they're neck and neck. Coincidentally the percentage error in the polls is usually +/- 3% for a sample size of 1000 voters.

Joshuatree
13-12-2017, 06:00 PM
I know - that's how Labour Green used to behave for 9 long years - what money wasters they have been if you think e.g. about their brain dead approach to sabotage the Gentailer listings.

But still - in case you missed it - Winston brought the Left into government. Time to stop complaining and do something positive ... otherwise your time in power might be severely constrained ;)

Where have you been , theres a lot going on despite the spiteful. Looking forward to tomorrows details .

777
13-12-2017, 07:02 PM
Technically National achieved 17.95% more votes than Labour. But you have to add the Green and NZ First votes in, 777. That's how the left-wing coalition won the election. National ended up with no friends.

Plus, in all situations where votes are being considered, the results are expressed in terms of percentage of the nationwide vote. The difference between the parties is always expressed in terms of a percentage nationwide vote difference.

In this case, if just 3.5% of voters change their mind from theoretically voting for National to voting for Labour, they're neck and neck. Coincidentally the percentage error in the polls is usually +/- 3% for a sample size of 1000 voters.

I didn't need a lesson on how a government is formed. My post was simply a reply to your Labour v National figures to show you how much more support National has compared with Labour when you were trying to indicate how close they are.

.

elZorro
14-12-2017, 09:38 PM
I didn't need a lesson on how a government is formed. My post was simply a reply to your Labour v National figures to show you how much more support National has compared with Labour when you were trying to indicate how close they are.


In view of the media help for National, it's a wonder there was a change of government. I happened to be watching 7 Sharp tonight, when Mike Hosking announced he and Toni Street are ending their time on the show from tomorrow.

I will really miss his right-wing pro-National rants on prime TV, free adverts while National was in power and leading up to the election. Where else will the nation get their political compass from now?

Actually, it made my week :t_up:

Joshuatree
14-12-2017, 09:54 PM
"Where else will the nation get their political compass from now?" lol this is wonderful stuff; get ye gone hosings who needs your political bias, brainwashing and pet peeves in a nation wide programme. Just hope and pray you dont pop up on another channel although Aussie tv would be the perfect place for you.:t_up:

777
15-12-2017, 08:06 AM
In view of the media help for National, it's a wonder there was a change of government. I happened to be watching 7 Sharp tonight, when Mike Hosking announced he and Toni Street are ending their time on the show from tomorrow.

I will really miss his right-wing pro-National rants on prime TV, free adverts while National was in power and leading up to the election. Where else will the nation get their political compass from now?

Actually, it made my week :t_up:

Once again you come up with same old, same old. To say that people voted National because they were influenced by what's on the media is an insult to those voters. It must be how easily you are influenced by those left leaning commentators that you assume they are as well.

minimoke
15-12-2017, 10:11 AM
Once again you come up with same old, same old. To say that people voted National because they were influenced by what's on the media is an insult to those voters. It must be how easily you are influenced by those left leaning commentators that you assume they are as well.Paddy Gower leaving Political correspondent role but staying with Media works for national correspondent role. JayJay Harvey leaving the Edge but staying in Media Works for undisclosed role. Political Commentator?

elZorro
16-12-2017, 09:50 AM
Paddy Gower leaving Political correspondent role but staying with Media works for national correspondent role. JayJay Harvey leaving the Edge but staying in Media Works for undisclosed role. Political Commentator?

Thanks for pointing that out about Paddy Gower. Some older Labour people are convinced he's a rat favouring right-wing policies, and more recently the Nats haven't been too pleased with his comments, where he tends to over-dramatise and sounded more left-leaning. I think maybe he became a bit more aware of what nine years of National being in power meant, and was signalling a required change. Like most reporters, he couldn't help but comment on the rising star, Jacinda Ardern.

Regardless, the next few years should be less adversarial and more progressive in the political arena, maybe less exciting for the likes of Gower and Hosking.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/99733262/patrick-gower-steps-down-as-political-edtior-after-getting-sparkly-new-job

Joshuatree
16-12-2017, 11:31 AM
Nationals divisive and confrontational combat behaviour continues , including attempted bullying and insulting the speaker all in an attempt to delay passing a bill. What great role model this party is for its country, not.

Tempers fray in the House (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99897754/long-days-and-busy-schedules-start-to-get-to-mps)

winner69
16-12-2017, 11:36 AM
Nationals divisive and confrontational combat behaviour continues , including attempted bullying and insulting the speaker all in an attempt to delay passing a bill. What great role model this party is for its country, not.

Tempers fray in the House (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99897754/long-days-and-busy-schedules-start-to-get-to-mps)

Thought you were talking about Labour's behaviour over the last nine years

Joshuatree
16-12-2017, 11:40 AM
Keep thinking.

elZorro
16-12-2017, 08:50 PM
Thought you were talking about Labour's behaviour over the last nine years

I don't think they behaved like Jami Lee Ross and co, see about 14-15 minutes in, for the fireworks. They didn't get their way.

https://youtu.be/wK1EgVtUq_c

dobby41
18-12-2017, 11:24 AM
I don't think they behaved like Jami Lee Ross and co, see about 14-15 minutes in, for the fireworks. They didn't get their way.

https://youtu.be/wK1EgVtUq_c
They wanted to go to lunch and had it delayed even longer by silly, time wasting theatrics.

elZorro
20-12-2017, 07:18 AM
Here's another political commentator who is semi-retiring at the end of the year, Colin James. I wish him well in his retirement, he's been an astute observer.

Colin James's Otago Daily Timescolumn, 19 December 2017


A lifetimelearning. There comes a time.

Around the time I returned from London in 1978 a businessman punched a young journalist called Colin James. People in politics sympathised with me, some barely suppressing schadenfreude. That other, punched, Colin James went offshore soon after. No one punched this Colin James (me), at least not physically. The incident reinforced for me the merit for a journalist of humility.

Journalists live two lives: theinner and the craft. When David Lange died and the Greens stood in his memory opening their 2005 election campaign, I the journalist stayed sitting while I the inner person behind the journalist secretly stood. There was the same wrench when the Council of Trade Unions conference in 2015 stood in memory of the fine Peter Conway. Journalists are close in to events but never part of them. They meet the powerful and the celebrated. Some are seduced into thinking themselves their equals. They are then lost to journalism.

Journalists make no momentous decisions. Celebrity ill-becomes them. They are a channel through which the powerful and celebrated talk to the people and the people talk back. To others, the journalist seems greatly privileged to be alongside power and stardust. And the journalist is privileged. But not in the way most non-journalists think. The privilege is to spend a lifetime learning.

A journalist can ask questions of almost everyone and almost all will answer: the powerful and celebrated, the knowing and skilled, the repositories of arcane science or ways of thinking and the "ordinary" guardians of understanding of a community or of a simple truth or of a good way to live an "ordinary" life. They are all at the journalist's call. They all teach a journalist who listens.

Yet the journalist need not be expert or knowing or complete. The journalist needs understand only so much of a topic as readers-viewers-listeners want or need to know. The journalist has only to light on and illuminate an idea or project or nation or technology. No other occupation offers that intense opportunity -- to learn but not to have to know, to learn a little and move to the next learning.

For a half-century I have had that deeply enriching privilege. The utu is to listen with respect.

A journalist is sceptical, alert to lies, deceit, backside-covering and charlatanism. But not cynical. A cynic has stopped listening and learning. A journalist is open. If not, the communication channel that is the journalist will choke. The utu is also to write down or talk about the learning so that others can know what the journalist has learnt. For some, expression is journalism's pleasure. They are would-be writers and journalism is as close as they can get.

For me, writing it down was the grind. Words shuffled off the keyboard or sat stuttering. They often said to readers different things from what I thought I had said. Words, I found, are wilful and wayward. Nevertheless, for five decades generous editors and readers encouraged me in my attempts at this exacting craft. They privileged me to go on learning. So I have had a working life beyond any of my youthful imaginings. It usually scarcely felt like work. I often pinched myself: surely I can't be here doing this.

My beat was politics and policy, a high privilege. Since politics is power, I met those in power and their advisers and came to understand and respect them, even those I could not admire. Many I the inner person came quietly to like. Almost all in politics mean well. I learned they are different: they see, or affect to see, only one side of each many-sided story the journalist sees. And since politics seeps into almost every corner of a nation's life, I met thousands of interesting people from nearly every walk of life.

I met many more when I could put my email address under what I wrote and readers could write to me easily. Almost all were thoughtful and courteous. The tiny few who were angry or abusive almost all recovered the courtesy and decency that is in everyone when I replied with courtesy and respect. Most offered a fact I didn't know or an insight or way of thinking I hadn't come across or pointed to a source I hadn't tapped. Again, I learned. I met in this way many wise "ordinary" folk, who are, of course, not ordinary at all. Meeting them -- you -- through those emails was a big bonus, a validation of humility and respect.

There were others who never wrote. They -- you -- kept me in business by persisting with my tangled prose and thereby awarded me a lifetime's inestimable privilege of charting my -- our --nation-in-the-making. The Otago Daily Times set me on this path when young and in my twilight took me in again. It is 50 years since I first left the ODT, shortly afterwards to perch, perchance, in the parliamentary press gallery.

Now, as politics takes a fresh turn,into the post-baby-boom era, it has come time for this baby-boom fellow-traveller to take leave of his relentless weekly scribblings.

Thank you for having me.
......

PS.If you have read this far you will know that this is my last regular weekly column. I may write an article or two in future and the odd working paper and give the odd talk and so on. If you would like to be notified of these please email me. I will still put most of what I write on my website. It has been encouraging to have had nearly 1000 on this email list, so thank you.

Colin James, (64)-21-438 434, PO Box 9494, Marion Square, Wellington 6141, NewZealand ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz), www.ColinJames.co.nz (https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ColinJames.co.nz&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7d581d3ab28d4b3009e008d54638bef8 %7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C6364 92131903655029&sdata=SreOrIhH6xrXr43qDgCrLglaVzrLI%2BxvQOjDUYVGaK o%3D&reserved=0)