National - FFS!

[Bjauck]

Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

I guess it depends on what one wishes to see and the depth to which one dislikes the current government. As this is the National Party Election thread, I would love to see discussion of National Party covid policy. Or maybe they don't one apart from producing a "Keep Calm and Carry On" poster?

It certainly beats me how the covid crisis affecting every sphere of our society - and every society around the World - can be minimised compared to the ChCh quakes.

[Balance]

Remember this from Chris Hipkins?

He said the rumour may have been orchestrated.

“There have always been and will always be rumours, but this one smacked of orchestration [and] of being a deliberate act of misinformation,” Hipkins said.

Well, a journalist tracked down the source of said rumour :

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/progr...utbreak-rumour

And it was a social media spread rather than anything orchestrated.

This government is the one now attempting to tar all and sundry with mud because it has egg all over its face with its failed responses to containing the virus, post lockdown # 1.

[Bjauck]

Shortage of rentals, or landlords doing risk assessment? Several months notice and no private rental indicates an applicant is not at the top of a landlord's list. Why? ...

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

[Balance]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

The problem is lack of affordable houses, not landlords. Landlords are the solution, not the problem.

Not that you will ever know from the systemic attacks on landlords by this government, while it flounders and spins myths on a solution for housing.

Kiwibuild, anyone?

[dobby41]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

[blackcap]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

Owner occupied dwellings have less occupants than rental dwellings or so I have been reliably informed.

[Balance]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

Beneficiaries numbers grow at a much faster pace than the general population.

As long as that is the case, there is always going to be a housing shortage.

Especially when landlords are systemically attacked as enemies of housing, rather than a big part of the solution.

[fungus pudding]

Beneficiaries numbers grow at a much faster pace than the general population.

As long as that is the case, there is alwUs going to be a housing shortage.

Especially when landlords are systemically atta led as enemies of housing, rather than a big part of the solution.

Do beneficiaries require more houses per capita than the rest of the hoi polloi?

[dobby41]

Owner occupied dwellings have less occupants than rental dwellings or so I have been reliably informed.

Statistics show this but statistics can show whatever you want.
I have recently sold several houses and in each case the new family is bigger than those who had rented it.
I suspect that some rentals have a lot of people in them and this skews the result.

[Balance]

Do beneficiaries require more houses per capita than the rest of the hoi polloi?

I do not know the answer but I do know this - their numbers grow each year and the government will never be able to build enough to meet the needs.

At a recent meeting with a major community housing provider, I was informed that the provider is dealing in a state housing area with many instances of three generations of beneficiaries requiring housing - children, parents and great-grandparents.

Whose fault is it?

Always the fault of previous governments - never the fault of the beneficiaries.