NZ 1st homebuyers are ScReWeD...

[fungus pudding]

Wouldn't that lead us to a NZ version of Georgian Ireland - A poor country with a landowning aristocracy, with many overseas-based absentee landlords, and with company shareholdings and industry being substantially foreign owned?

No. We are outnumbered by SBQs.

[FTG]

Interesting discussion. But a very difficult one due to the fact it is hard to know what numbers are correct. I read an article by Brian Gaynor on Business Desk on 17 July, which discusses this issue amongst others.
It indicates Kiwis hold a far higher proportion of their wealth in property than Americans do.

As an aside you raise an interesting side point Iceman. "The appeal of a particular argument can be strengthened simply by highlighting selected facts and omitting others".

You (and Brian G for that matter) have no argument from me that kiwis have a higher % of their wealth invested in housing than Americans.

I probably need to be clearer. With the small selection of facts I offered in Post 2068 you will note they were ALL USA centric. I was presenting these stats to highlight that, like Kiwis, the Americans still have more of their household wealth invested in residential property than Equities (more than double in their case). This was in response to SBQ's glib assertion that the American's have most of their wealth invested in equities, rather than housing. That is patently incorrect. He then partly uses this falsehood as grounds for why NZ should have a CGT, Land Tax, Wealth Tax or similar. As SBQ correctly states, Aussie has CGT AND Stamp Duty. There is a large inconvenient truth that he omits to refer however. Despite these taxes, each year Sydney & Melbourne battle it out with Auckland to have the most expensive housing in the world. ScReWing the 1st home buyer there just as much as in NZ.

Pulling back a little and looking at the bigger picture, over the last decade the % of investment in equities has been slowly climbing, and has accelerated post-Covid (part of the "everything bubble" phenomenon perhaps). However, the facts clearly show that in most OECD countries (certainly ones where home ownership rates are at 60%) the majority of citizen wealth is still in their respective country's housing assets.

This has been the case since Adam was a Caveman!

[SBQ]

It appears FTG's figures are a bit different to yours.

The other countries (Aus/Can/US) in question all have some form of taxation on the demand side. FTG claims those taxes don't deter making houses affordable - what I would like to believe, those taxes do have an effect on the 'gaming ability' of turning houses into an asset class for financial gain. I mean how many places around the world are at 13 times average annual incomes? More importantly, what % of the population is affected by this high figure. Yes world class cities require high multiple figures but that does not speak for the rest of the country. In Canada, Vancouver and Toronto have hot housing markets but they do not account for the majority of the population. If you look at all over NZ the major regions, they ALL had significant rise in housing prices. Who actually pays for all this?

My close friend living in Vancouver has purchased real estate starting over 20 years ago. What he tells me is that the quick rise in house prices has brought too much attention by the gov't at all levels. As I mentioned before Trudeau sent a special task force to Vancouver to understand why and unlike past NZ gov'ts, they actually do make changes (all around taxation). He tells me hindsight, if chose to invest the same amount of $ into the stock market in a conservative ETF, he would be miles ahead on the basis that houses have become a hassle to own and the gains are not there because of taxation. Not surprisingly, my uncle that lives in the Gold Coast, Australia says the same thing. But you ask any person in NZ ; nope because there are no demand controls in buying houses.

I'll reiterate the following links as I find Bernard Hickey is far better at explaining NZ's housing crisis than I am: - there will be many that will disagree or simply don't care. If you're on 'that side of the fence owning all the houses', why would you?

https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/25...tion-was-lost/

https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/09...f-the-century/

[peetter]

It appears FTG's figures are a bit different to yours.

The other countries (Aus/Can/US) in question all have some form of taxation on the demand side. FTG claims those taxes don't deter making houses affordable - what I would like to believe, those taxes do have an effect on the 'gaming ability' of turning houses into an asset class for financial gain. I mean how many places around the world are at 13 times average annual incomes? More importantly, what % of the population is affected by this high figure. Yes world class cities require high multiple figures but that does not speak for the rest of the country. In Canada, Vancouver and Toronto have hot housing markets but they do not account for the majority of the population. If you look at all over NZ the major regions, they ALL had significant rise in housing prices. Who actually pays for all this?

My close friend living in Vancouver has purchased real estate starting over 20 years ago. What he tells me is that the quick rise in house prices has brought too much attention by the gov't at all levels. As I mentioned before Trudeau sent a special task force to Vancouver to understand why and unlike past NZ gov'ts, they actually do make changes (all around taxation). He tells me hindsight, if chose to invest the same amount of $ into the stock market in a conservative ETF, he would be miles ahead on the basis that houses have become a hassle to own and the gains are not there because of taxation. Not surprisingly, my uncle that lives in the Gold Coast, Australia says the same thing. But you ask any person in NZ ; nope because there are no demand controls in buying houses.

I'll reiterate the following links as I find Bernard Hickey is far better at explaining NZ's housing crisis than I am: - there will be many that will disagree or simply don't care. If you're on 'that side of the fence owning all the houses', why would you?

https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/25...tion-was-lost/

https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/09...f-the-century/

You again show absolute ignorance. In all countries (AUS, US, CAN) you mentioned housing market is growing in unprecedented rate. I just discovered that Canada, which you mention in about 90% of your posts, seems to be even in worse situation than NZ despite having CGT. Problem seems to be generous subsidies and grants to buy a house... go figure, subsidies ruining free market.

BTW. kudos on yet another Bernard Hickey reference

[FTG]

FTG claims those taxes don't deter making houses affordable

SBQ, why do persist to misquote other contributors? Do you do it deliberately, or is it because you just wish to proudly demonstrate your unwillingness and/or inability to look at things objectively?

best you read my post again slowwwwly.

[FTG]

FTG claims those taxes don't deter making houses affordable

SBQ, why do persist to misquote other contributors? Do you do it deliberately, or is it because you just wish to proudly demonstrate your unwillingness and/or inability to look at things objectively?

best you read my post again slowwwwly.

[SBQ]

SBQ, why do persist to misquote other contributors? Do you do it deliberately, or is it because you just wish to proudly demonstrate your unwillingness and/or inability to look at things objectively?

best you read my post again slowwwwly.

It seems FTG again, is blinded at NZ's housing situation. 13 times incomes is a problem. Record # of families waiting for social housing. At least all my posts point to what other countries have done to address housing problems. The UN even knows NZ's housing problem is a unique situation that their rapporteur had to make bold comments again and again. The likes of FTG will never believe it.

So I ask a simple question - what is the NZ gov't going to do? If the whole country has voters like FTG, then nothing is going to happen and NZ will continue on to a path of oligarchy and feudalism.

[ynot]

"So I ask a simple question - what is the NZ gov't going to do?"

Buy more $8mil motels.

[Bjauck]

"So I ask a simple question - what is the NZ gov't going to do?"

Buy more $8mil motels.

Sadly they will apply Elastoplast to fix a problem that requires major surgery.

As long as kiwis have many multiples more invested in housing than in pensions, managed funds or equities then they will not likely vote for a major overhaul. If those who benefit from the status quo, or think they may in the future, or think they may inherit from someone who benefits, then they may be less likely to vote for major change.

[777]

"So I ask a simple question - what is the NZ gov't going to do?"

Buy more $8mil motels.

No. Buy more $4mil hotels but pay $8mil for them.