Not all asset classes are the same in terms of social impact or it's benefit to society. What is the cost to society when the gov't does nothing to control house prices to a reasonable level? Note I use the term 'massive' financial gains because the NZ gov't has essentially left that asset class untaxed. Certainly a joke when you compare to what the gov't offers instead, Kiwi Saver. This is not to say that house prices abroad, like Aus or Canada have not gone crazy too. However, there's a massive difference. The low income people living in those countries aren't as poor as the ones we see living in cars in S. Auckland (or at least they are able to have social housing at WHO living standards for the past many decades). How may are on the social housing waiting list in NZ per capita vs those in other countries? To me this is the social cost when this asset class houses, has been incentivised in the most abhorrent way.
[/I]We own our home. To be more specific, I have never taken a mortgage out. I don't see how this is relevant to how much house prices have gone up. My view is every working person, or young family, SHOULD BE able to get into their own home. It does not have to be a 3 or 4 bedroom house, but it should be at least 'obtainable'. The NZ gov't has done nothing. Canada on the other hand has done a hell of a lot more this area. Here's a recent proposed project in ritzy West Vancouver:
https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/pr...earing-4334938
We do not see much of this in Auckland, if any. That's because in NZ, there's a huge movement called the NIMBY. A shame because at prime locations where the demand is highest, the only option is simply to those that have the most money.
Again, I say "massive" in a return that exceeds all other asset classes for
the given level of risk and net of any taxation. The incentives in NZ are wrong. All previous gov'ts in NZ are weak in addressing this issue. Our politicians are deaf when it comes to critics abroad such as delegates from the UN. I'm saying this because the losers aren't you and I that already own a house. The losers are future generations that PAY for all these massive gains when they try to buy a house (because if you have more than 1 child, your house that you live in is only a portion towards their mortgage deposit).
Where as investments in equities, you are taking shareholder ownership in a business which multiplies it's profits. Creates employment, multiplies the $ from hand to hand, without the banks siphoning the profits abroad in a mortgage.