If National wins ...

[777]

For info

https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/monetary-po...ion-calculator

[minimoke]

[QUOTE=Joshuatree;683852]Yes prob inflation adjusted 777./QUOTE]
Inflation has trended down since 1976 while wages have trended up.

[minimoke]

Last i looked National have absolutely no plans or details about their big build of 30,000 let alone affordable ones.

Points of reference are sometimes handy.

I was one of the fortunates who grew up in a brand new 4 bedroom affordable home on a 800sqm section. Mum as i recall got the DPB (but she also worked so not sure how that plays out) and i think it was financed through a state advances loan. One neighbour was a dutch migrant, there was a family of poms, a maori family and one lot that had the police visit from time to time.

Just checked the latest RV and it comes in at $405,000. Seems afforable to me.

[Joshuatree]

THE ISSUE

"The Kiwi Dream of homeownership is slipping away. Only a quarter of adults under 40 own their own home, compared to half in 1991. Too few houses are being built, which is helping to drive up prices beyond the reach of middle New Zealand, and too few of the houses that are built are affordably priced for new home buyers.
In Auckland, despite more than 13,000 new houses being needed to keep up with population growth, just 9,400 new houses were consented in the past year. The trend for new consents is falling when a dramatic increase is needed.
The Government’s estimate that only 5% of new builds are priced in the lowest quartile means fewer than 500 affordable houses will be built in Auckland this year.
LABOUR WILL PARTNER WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO BUILD 100,000 AFFORDABLE HOMES

KiwiBuild will deliver 100,000 affordable houses over ten years for first home buyers. Half of these will be built in Auckland. That is a ten-fold increase in the number of affordable houses being built in Auckland each year, from 500 to 5,000.
The stand-alone KiwiBuild homes in Auckland will be priced at $500,000-$600,000 with apartments and terraced houses under $500,000. Outside of Auckland prices are likely to range from $300,000-$500,000. These will be high-quality homes built to modern standards. Scale and modern offsite manufacturing techniques will enable these homes to be built at low cost.
Currently, 2-3 bedroom houses are being built at Hobsonville and Waimahia and sold for under $550,000. KiwiBuild will enable more homes to be built in this price range.
KiwiBuild homes will only be sold to first home buyers. To avoid buyers reaping windfall gains, a condition of sale will require them to hand back any capital gain if sold on within 5 years.
Construction of the KiwiBuild houses will be financed by an initial $2 billion capital injection, which will be recycled as the houses are sold, and returned to the Crown at the end of the KiwiBuild programme. The Affordable Housing Authority will be the primary delivery mechanism for KiwiBuild homes, building them as part of its development projects"

[xafalcon]

KiwiBuild will deliver 100,000 affordable houses over ten years for first home buyers. Half of these will be built in Auckland. That is a ten-fold increase in the number of affordable houses being built in Auckland each year, from 500 to 5,000.
The stand-alone KiwiBuild homes in Auckland will be priced at $500,000-$600,000 with apartments and terraced houses under $500,000. Outside of Auckland prices are likely to range from $300,000-$500,000. These will be high-quality homes built to modern standards. Scale and modern offsite manufacturing techniques will enable these homes to be built at low cost.
Currently, 2-3 bedroom houses are being built at Hobsonville and Waimahia and sold for under $550,000. KiwiBuild will enable more homes to be built in this price range.
KiwiBuild homes will only be sold to first home buyers. To avoid buyers reaping windfall gains, a condition of sale will require them to hand back any capital gain if sold on within 5 years.
Construction of the KiwiBuild houses will be financed by an initial $2 billion capital injection, which will be recycled as the houses are sold, and returned to the Crown at the end of the KiwiBuild programme. The Affordable Housing Authority will be the primary delivery mechanism for KiwiBuild homes, building them as part of its development projects"

Where will the builders, plumbers, roofers, scaffolders, plasterers, carpet layers, electricians, excavators, inspectors, drain layers, painters, paper hangers, landscapers come from to support this vision/dream?

Training takes years, importing skills hasn't worked, and won't work because wages in NZ are lower than other countries who are trying to encourage the same trades to work in their country

The taxpayer has no business getting involved with building houses, period. Let alone with no reward for the risk (dodgy builders, substandard materials, ghetto creation etc)

The "dream" of owning your own house is achievable if compromises are made - including moving to a different city. Tony Alexander hit the nail on the head a few months back. Adjust your spending to suit your goals. Although stereotyped, the current generation wants far more than previous generations but hasn't realized that they need to pay for it

The "housing crisis" was not created by the government. It can't be "fixed" by the government. Economics 101, supply & demand. For many years after the GFC, supply was very low. We are seeing the effects in the last few years as competition for a limited resource bids up the price

Removing depreciation from rental accommodation had a retarding effect on new builds - what other business can't claim depreciation? Note that depreciation claims were clawed back on sale, so were only really a "loan", which increased affordability

Maybe a significant tax break for new non-owner-occupied dwelling construction would be a solution that would actually work without exposing the taxpayer to yet another Saudi Sheep deal aka KiwiBuild

But still doesn't solve the skilled labour shortage

[minimoke]

I watched most of that housing programme last night. What labour wont do is adress the problem with the couple in the car who had 4 kids.

I have no problem with them having four kids. But why does it now become my problem when they figure out a roof over their heads might be handy.

[Bjauck]

...
The "dream" of owning your own house is achievable if compromises are made - including moving to a different city. Tony Alexander hit the nail on the head a few months back. Adjust your spending to suit your goals. Although stereotyped, the current generation wants far more than previous generations but hasn't realized that they need to pay for it

Presumably the new city would have to have employment opportunities and a social network to replace family and friends left behind.

House prices have outstipped the growth in incomes and consequently the amount for a deposit needed to be raised has become more unaffordable over the years. So the current generation wants the same but it is now more unaffordable to get into! Yet the older generations tell them they should settle for less (a small apartment in a block of flats) that is more unaffordable than the stand alone house that older generations were able to get into!

The "housing crisis" was not created by the government. It can't be "fixed" by the government. Economics 101, supply & demand. For many years after the GFC, supply was very low. We are seeing the effects in the last few years as competition for a limited resource bids up the price

Disagree. Tax policy, Lack of restrictions on overseas foreign ownership and inability to supply sufficient new residential land for dwellings is the responsibility of government both local and national.

Removing depreciation from rental accommodation had a retarding effect on new builds - what other business can't claim depreciation? Note that depreciation claims were clawed back on sale, so were only really a "loan", which increased affordability

I agree. It may have encouraged more people to landbank rather than develop and improve. (another government failure?)

Maybe a significant tax break for new non-owner-occupied dwelling construction would be a solution that would actually work without exposing the taxpayer to yet another Saudi Sheep deal aka KiwiBuild

If you encourege Landlord building, then that is accepting that a significant number of people will be tenants. In that scenario, tenancy laws need to be overhauled to provide good tenants with greater security of tenure and ability to personalise their tenanted houses.

But still doesn't solve the skilled labour shortage

NZ should aim to be a high income, high productivity economy.

[xafalcon]

And to focus on farmers being dragged into the ETS, I say this is 100% fair game, and they should pay 100% of their liability back-dated a decade

The situation that exists now is the famers don't pay their emission's costs, the taxpayer does. Yet we taxpayers are constantly told (again this morning), that prices for the goods produced by those same farmers we are subsidizing are rising due to NZ's export driven market. (Stats NZ press release)

Joe public pays twice, Freddy farmer doesn't pay at all. Enough is enough

If NZ taxpayer covers ETS costs for farmers, those same primary products cant be sold to NZ taxpayers at full export value (I would argue well above full export price if French butter at Countdown is cheaper than NZ butter)

Better still, scrap the ETS entirely. It doesn't actually do anything to improve emissions anyway, just another tax. But that's not on the agenda

[minimoke]

Better still, scrap the ETS entirely. It doesn't actually do anything to improve emissions anyway, just another tax. But that's not on the agenda

Exactly. There is not a single shred of evidence that the ETS will make the slightest difference to climate change. Its a tax that should never have been implemented and should be immediately binned.

[xafalcon]

Presumably the new city would have to have employment opportunities and a social network to replace family and friends left behind.

Labour statistics show better employment prospects outside Auckland. Skype allows me to stay in close contact with people on the otherside of the world

House prices have outstipped the growth in incomes and consequently the amount for a deposit needed to be raised has become more unaffordable over the years. So the current generation wants the same but it is now more unaffordable to get into! Yet the older generations tell them they should settle for less (a small apartment in a block of flats) that is more unaffordable than the stand alone house that older generations were able to get into!

Has been the situation for several generations now. My parents first house was much more lavish than mine. I'm 50

Disagree. Tax policy, Lack of restrictions on overseas foreign ownership and inability to supply sufficient new residential land for dwellings is the responsibility of government both local and national.

I suggest MMP may be the cause of 1 & 3, but disagree that any changes palatable to Joe Public could have been enacted (eg tax breaks, compulsory acquisition). But foreign ownership has been shown to have almost zero bearing

If you encourege Landlord building, then that is accepting that a significant number of people will be tenants. In that scenario, tenancy laws need to be overhauled to provide good tenants with greater security of tenure and ability to personalise their tenanted houses.

I am a landlord with 1 rental. Owned since 1993. Had 2 separate tenancies that lasted over 10 years each. I resisted raising the rent so they wouldn't consider move out. They respected my house, I respected their privacy. Good tenants are worth gold, more than an extra $30 per week IMO. I'm sure I'm not alone with these thoughts. But when I did get a bad tenant (mid 90's) it was incredibly frustrating going through the process to get them out.

Have you ever had to pick broken glass beer bottles out of the lawn by hand, so that future tenants don't get cut to bits? I spent half a day doing jus that, getting abandoned (and locked up) car towed away, removing candle wax from carpet, repairing holes in walls. The bond didn't cover it all

Tenancy laws are just fine where they are now

NZ should aim to be a high income, high productivity economy.

Agree with high income, but we aren't there yet and won't be for years.

Productivity reflects the economic base of a country. NZ is heavily agricultural and services. Productivity gains are almost impossible to achieve (can't produce more output with less labour input as mechanization/automation options just don't exist as they do for manufacturing). Productivity comparisons with other countries are therefore meaningless