Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
The headline was different in the printed paper this morning I think it said there would be price rises due to the changes.

Reading the article, it was a bit vague as to why house prices would be rising but I think it was due to an easing of the LVR ratios and the length of time it would take debt to income limits to actually be implemented.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...BM7VYXQZP2SRQ/

Another example of bank economists and the real estate funded media getting wealthy boomers salivating at more gains and FOMO millennials taking out even bigger loans. Maybe it was to offset the inflation story from yesterday.

The following quote by the RBNZ deputy governor was laughable.

RBNZ deputy governor Christian Hawkesby said yesterday it was important to have policies in place to manage boom-bust credit cycles.

The article just explained how the RBNZ drives the property market with policy. The only limiting factor for house prices appears to be how much money is available and the interest rate.

Christian is maybe unaware that it was reckless RBNZ policy over the pandemic that created the current boom and these subsequent polices are to try and put a lid on it as it becomes obvious how wrong these polices are and that trickle down economics is BS.

I assume the people at the RBNZ are stupid but maybe after creating the wealth gap they are now ensuring there will be no social mobility between classes. That would assume they are evil, I prefer stupid as it fits better with the NZ as a caring society narrative I prefer.

At the end of the day the greedy boomers and overindebted millennials (risk takers) will be saved by RBNZ created inflation (cost of living crisis) while all those that missed the boat will find life harder and harder.

I am sounding very conspiratorial this morning.
I was reading your comments with interest and then - apropos to nothing - you came out with this:

and that trickle down economics is BS.

It's surely a truism that the more affluent the society is, the more it is able to support the less forunate members of that society.

Surely it is also a truism that the more successful a business is, the more it will need to hire more workers - creating opportunities for people to accept paid work.

Surely it is a truism that if many businesses in an economy are expanding at the same time, competition for the pool of available workers will increase and wages & salaries will go up.

Surely if everyone feels wealthy and has plenty of disposable cash, then an entrepreneur can capitalise by opening a coffee shop to sell coffees to those who like to buy them.

This is 'trickle down economics'. This is 'a rising tide floating all boats'.

Some out there seems to think that 'trickle down economics' means that if a country is doing well economically then everyone on an unemployment benefit should be rolling around in a vat of money like Scrooge McDuck, or that it means that the worker in the business will be making the same amount as the person who took the risk and started the business. But it doesn't.