Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 232 | 233 | 234 | 235 | 236 | 237 | 238 | 239 | 240 | 241 | 242 | ... | 268

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2049139 4-Jul-2018 16:48

MikeAqua:

MikeB4:

@Pumpedd it has been many moons since I have rented but from what I have seen renting in NZ means a nomadic life style and moving at least yearly. That is not good.

We've been renting our apratment for close to two years. Leaving later this year of our own volition (because we bought our own apartment).

Hope you enjoy it!!

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2049256 4-Jul-2018 21:01

Fred99:
Good lord - to qualify for Kiwibuild, you have to earn under $180,000 per two person household, and under $120,000 per single person household. (Gross income).

From a quick look at some data, that means that only about 6% of the entire population would be earning too much to qualify. And that's actually probably a vast overestimate - income typically peaks at an older age group than the age group looking to buy their first home (I doubt as many as 6% of 30 year olds earn >$120k, but I'd expect more than 6% of 50 year olds may - chances are they'd have been able to afford their own homes anyway.).

This means in practice that *almost everybody* qualifies. So instead of targeting for greatest need - it's going to be rationed out by a lottery/ballot!

The only redeeming feature of this crazy scheme is that in the unlikely event that they could actually build the numbers of houses being suggested, then that would dampen demand and thus improve "affordability" by lowering house prices (and rental returns), but in what looks like coming "interesting times", external factors in the global market will probably outweigh whatever happens here over any realistic timescale to build thousands of new homes.

This government is insane.

It's an ambitious goal. They are looking for opportunities to drive efficiencies in the building industry and provide some output from that. It's not an easy task.

Imo for a country that utilises timber to the extent we do, we are under invested in timber processing technologies.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2049265 4-Jul-2018 21:06

So. What is to stop the buyers of these houses subsidised by the taxpayer from flogging them for a fat profit at the end of the three years?

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2049267 4-Jul-2018 21:07

Geektastic: So. What is to stop the buyers of these houses subsidised by the taxpayer from flogging them for a fat profit at the end of the three years?

Nothing. Welcome to Labour 2018 :)

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2049273 4-Jul-2018 21:17

Geektastic: So. What is to stop the buyers of these houses subsidised by the taxpayer from flogging them for a fat profit at the end of the three years?

Twyford has removed the capital gains requirement and he said today that they doubt capital gains would be of any value during this time. He is incompetent.

National gave a good example in the house today as most politicians earn around that figure of $180k they would all be eligible and the Nats asked how this is going to help low and middle income NZers.

The next question is just how are these people going to raise the deposit?

I cant recall ever seeing such a blatant waste of money and disregard for taxpayers a s this government.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2049275 4-Jul-2018 21:22

Pumpedd:
Geektastic: So. What is to stop the buyers of these houses subsidised by the taxpayer from flogging them for a fat profit at the end of the three years?

Twyford has removed the capital gains requirement and he said today that they doubt capital gains would be of any value during this time. He is incompetent.

Truly. If capital gains weren't of value no one would be unable to afford houses... Because they'd still cost the same as 1945....

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2049372 5-Jul-2018 00:08

Geektastic: So. What is to stop the buyers of these houses subsidised by the taxpayer from flogging them for a fat profit at the end of the three years?

Crazy that there are no restrictions on reselling. Those Kiwibuild houses should have covenants placed on their titles saying that they can be owner occupied only. The owners are not allowed to acquire an interest in other land. And they can only be sold to other first home buyers.

Since the whole point of the scheme is to help more people buy their first homes. And the government will be spending very big money to do so. There should be some changes so the same kiwibuild homes will help lots of people into home ownership.

As for the homes being so expensive. It all comes back to the RMA and silly council rules. For example, friends parents bought their first home in the early 70s. It was brand new, but to save on build costs. It has no landscaping, no carpet or vinyl, the downstairs had no gib board or other interior linings. Pretty sure that the upstairs hadn't been painted either. Original plans for my house that were approved in 1968 state that there must be a working toilet before you move in. Presumably almost everything else was optional back then.

But now, the house must be completely finished, including landscaping before the council will sign it off. So you can't get approval for an empty shell as a way of getting into the property market on the cheap anymore.

RMA means that the councils are also restricting the amount of urban land that is available. As they are trying to force high density housing on everyone. Despite high rise apartments being the most expensive form of construction on a $ per m2 rate. And property developers are also able to leverage the lack of supply to charge higher prices.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2049594 5-Jul-2018 10:47

@Aredwood I would love to see some research as to the affect the RMA has had on the housing crisis and to what extent it has exacerbated it. I suspect quite a bit. It was due a complete rewrite the day it passed through the Beehive and got Royal assent

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#2049615 5-Jul-2018 11:09

So (according to stuff) to be eligible for Kiwbuild you have to have proof from a bank that you can borrow the required funds. Firstly, this is another aspect that favour households with more assets and incomes closer to the eligibility thresholds.

Secondly - how will that work?

A bank will say "you would be eligible to borrow up to $X" based on their assessment of your circumstances. But that is by no means a 'bankable' offer. You often don't have a firm offer until your bank has approved both the property and the sale and purchase agreement

If Twyford is smart - or at least listens to smart advisors, he will have Kiwibuild working closely with the banks to smooth over all potential wrinkles well before the first sale

Mike

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2049631 5-Jul-2018 11:25

MikeB4:
@Aredwood I would love to see some research as to the affect the RMA has had on the housing crisis and to what extent it has exacerbated it. I suspect quite a bit. It was due a complete rewrite the day it passed through the Beehive and got Royal assent

On a simple basis, look up what average house prices were when the RMA was passed. As well as the ratio of average house prices to incomes. And compare them to today's values. Also look up the rate of increase in house prices both before and after the RMA was introduced.

Sure, some people will say that that won't be a proper study. But what else changed at the same time as the RMA was passed into law?

Often the effects of major law changes get masked by the state of the economy at the time the law change happened. An example of this is National removing tax breaks for landlords back in 2008. No change to house prices at the time due to the economy being in a recession. It still hurt tenants badly though.

And AFAIK the economy was also in recession when the RMA was passed into law. So the recession would have again masked the immediate effects of the RMA.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2049641 5-Jul-2018 11:30

MikeB4:

@Aredwood I would love to see some research as to the affect the RMA has had on the housing crisis and to what extent it has exacerbated it. I suspect quite a bit. It was due a complete rewrite the day it passed through the Beehive and got Royal assent

The last Government tried to change the RMA but failed due to not having the numbers to do it. It seems the RMA has added significantly to the cost of new builds.

There has to be good sound RMA practices in place, but it seems the RMA is wrong in many ways.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2049648 5-Jul-2018 11:42

What will Little do about DotCom? Personally, I think he is a muppet, but the way the entire thing was handled was crazy, a fault of the National Government. If he had been handled properly in the first place, I'd have no questions over his extradition, but given it was handled poorly, I am unsure where I sit.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2049655 5-Jul-2018 11:53

networkn:

What will Little do about DotCom? Personally, I think he is a muppet, but the way the entire thing was handled was crazy, a fault of the National Government. If he had been handled properly in the first place, I'd have no questions over his extradition, but given it was handled poorly, I am unsure where I sit.

I would like to see him sitting trial in the US.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#2049811 5-Jul-2018 14:03

networkn:

What will Little do about DotCom? Personally, I think he is a muppet, but the way the entire thing was handled was crazy, a fault of the National Government. If he had been handled properly in the first place, I'd have no questions over his extradition, but given it was handled poorly, I am unsure where I sit.

That's an interesting position to explore...

I would assume that if we were talking hypothetically about an alleged rapist/murderer who was arrested under questionable circumstances, and for example got roughed up a bit in the holding cells, that you would still be in favour of the accused standing trial. (Notwithstanding any compensation that they may be awarded for things not happening "by the book")

So if that assumption is true - where does the analogy break down in DotCom's case?

Is it because it's a different type of crime that is alleged?

Is it because extradition is necessary before the trial can occur?

Or am I wrong, and if hypothetically DotCom was accused of murder in a US jurisdiction (but the NZ Police didn't follow the correct arrest procedures) that you would rather he not stand trial?

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#2049812 5-Jul-2018 14:03

Double Post

1 | ... | 232 | 233 | 234 | 235 | 236 | 237 | 238 | 239 | 240 | 241 | 242 | ... | 268