NZ's new Government: NZ First chooses Labour

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

Forums › Politics › NZ's new Government: NZ First chooses Labour

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

2945 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1887260 21-Oct-2017 10:07

Well I for one am pleased we may be seeing less of Nick Smith, Paula Bennet, Judith Collins and Simon Bridges.

Unfortunately we will be seeing more of Kelvin Davies, Chris Hipkins, Stuart Nash, Grant Roberson and Phil Twyford.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1887290 21-Oct-2017 11:23

SJB:

Well I for one am pleased we may be seeing less of Nick Smith, Paula Bennet, Judith Collins and Simon Bridges.

Unfortunately we will be seeing more of Kelvin Davies, Chris Hipkins, Stuart Nash, Grant Roberson and Phil Twyford.

Twyford is the one who gives me the creeps.

I just hope Paula doesnt get top job in opposition as she seems so false.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887463 21-Oct-2017 16:11

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1887491 21-Oct-2017 17:50

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

IIRC some actually have minimum rather than maximum limits per title - to protect citizens from exploitation by foreign landlords and to keep the heat out of the "affordable" residential property market.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887544 21-Oct-2017 19:32

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

Asinine? Why dont you look at buying land in China or other countries as your preferred investment? Or maybe a country where NZ$ buys naff all. When foreigners buy up large here, they pay naff all by their standards and get heaps, thereby locking out locals.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887546 21-Oct-2017 19:35

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

IIRC some actually have minimum rather than maximum limits per title - to protect citizens from exploitation by foreign landlords and to keep the heat out of the "affordable" residential property market.

Yes, imagine if rich Texans came here in droves, "this is so cheap, lets buy more" Then we end up paying rich Texan prices. That might cause a housing crisis on NZ.... Ok, it doesn't affect affordable houses as thats not their marker, but when houses rise x%, it pulls everything up. And here we are today.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887605 21-Oct-2017 21:21

tdgeek:
Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

Asinine? Why dont you look at buying land in China or other countries as your preferred investment? Or maybe a country where NZ$ buys naff all. When foreigners buy up large here, they pay naff all by their standards and get heaps, thereby locking out locals.

Because I'm not a broke parochial person who needs the government to make up for my inadequacy.

elpenguino

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2939

#1887619 21-Oct-2017 23:38

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

IIRC some actually have minimum rather than maximum limits per title - to protect citizens from exploitation by foreign landlords and to keep the heat out of the "affordable" residential property market.

Yes, imagine if rich Texans came here in droves, "this is so cheap, lets buy more" Then we end up paying rich Texan prices. That might cause a housing crisis on NZ.... Ok, it doesn't affect affordable houses as thats not their marker, but when houses rise x%, it pulls everything up. And here we are today.

Actually I would argue every house purchase by a foreigner takes a home away from a kiwi no matter the value. Even if johnny foreigner buys a house for x million it means that the wealthy kiwi who was outbid has to buy another one worth slightly less. Which once again means that slightly less valuable house is not available to buy so the person who would have bought that must buy the next one available - and so on.

It's simple economics. If that house is not 'replaced' with another the supply of houses has just been decreased by one.

If johnny foreigner makes a commitment to NZ in the form of living in that house, that's not so bad but keeping empty houses for speculation should be stamped out.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

elpenguino

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2939

#1887620 21-Oct-2017 23:41

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

Sometimes these countries only allow foreign purchase when the foreigner is partners with a local company.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887630 22-Oct-2017 04:15

elpenguino:
tdgeek:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

IIRC some actually have minimum rather than maximum limits per title - to protect citizens from exploitation by foreign landlords and to keep the heat out of the "affordable" residential property market.

Yes, imagine if rich Texans came here in droves, "this is so cheap, lets buy more" Then we end up paying rich Texan prices. That might cause a housing crisis on NZ.... Ok, it doesn't affect affordable houses as thats not their marker, but when houses rise x%, it pulls everything up. And here we are today.

Actually I would argue every house purchase by a foreigner takes a home away from a kiwi no matter the value. Even if johnny foreigner buys a house for x million it means that the wealthy kiwi who was outbid has to buy another one worth slightly less. Which once again means that slightly less valuable house is not available to buy so the person who would have bought that must buy the next one available - and so on.

It's simple economics. If that house is not 'replaced' with another the supply of houses has just been decreased by one.

If johnny foreigner makes a commitment to NZ in the form of living in that house, that's not so bad but keeping empty houses for speculation should be stamped out.

Conversely it also means the Kiwi selling now has more money to spend.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887631 22-Oct-2017 04:18

elpenguino:
Fred99:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

I'm not sure how countries that don't allow direct property ownership by foreigners deal with foreign ownership of public companies owning property.

Sometimes these countries only allow foreign purchase when the foreigner is partners with a local company.

I know this is the case in Vietnam and Cambodia. Several friends with wives from those places own houses an businesses that way..

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887642 22-Oct-2017 07:47

Geektastic:
tdgeek:

Geektastic:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

It will be interesting to see whether legal challenges to enforce rights under free trade agreements which purportedly give many other nationalities property rights cause the whole thing to fade away.

It will be interesting all right.

From what I can see, with the exception of Chile and Aus, every other FTA partner has restrictions on foreigners - including NZers - owning and/or or profiting from the ownership of property.

I don't think FTA NZ is signed up with give special privilege to citizens from partner countries to own property here - because NZ is a free for all - at least for properties worth less than $10 million. Over $10 million and you need a rubber stamp from the OIO, or even better, if you've got the right connections and make a small donation, you get given a passport anyway.

It's also related to the land size. Our property is (sadly) not worth $10 million or even close but because it is over 5ha foreign buyers require OIO approval.

In the end we subdivided partly to get round the rule but this asinine idea of not selling to foreigners may further reduce our options unless we can find a reasonably remunerated NZ buyer.

It will also be interesting to see how they deal with public companies, whose shares may be held by thousands of foreigners and foreign funds....

Asinine? Why dont you look at buying land in China or other countries as your preferred investment? Or maybe a country where NZ$ buys naff all. When foreigners buy up large here, they pay naff all by their standards and get heaps, thereby locking out locals.

Because I'm not a broke parochial person who needs the government to make up for my inadequacy.

Neither am I, but they pay naff all by their standards and get heaps, thereby locking out locals. still applies. That inability to buy a house is an imported inadequacy.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1887644 22-Oct-2017 07:51

elpenguino:

Actually I would argue every house purchase by a foreigner takes a home away from a kiwi no matter the value. Even if johnny foreigner buys a house for x million it means that the wealthy kiwi who was outbid has to buy another one worth slightly less. Which once again means that slightly less valuable house is not available to buy so the person who would have bought that must buy the next one available - and so on.

It's simple economics. If that house is not 'replaced' with another the supply of houses has just been decreased by one.

If johnny foreigner makes a commitment to NZ in the form of living in that house, that's not so bad but keeping empty houses for speculation should be stamped out.

I agree. What I meant was a house that a foreigner wont buy, still rises, i.e.a more bottom range house. I feel that an immigrant should only be allowed to build. Maybe after 5 years they can buy, perhaps.

elpenguino

3577 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2939

#1887676 22-Oct-2017 10:29

I also agree, the whole market gets pulled up.

My friend who is a mortgage broker told me years ago the aussies had such a restriction (nationwide or state only? dont know).

Perhaps we could also check they lived here continuously too (hello peter thiel i am looking at you).

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#1887751 22-Oct-2017 14:31

tdgeek:

elpenguino:

Actually I would argue every house purchase by a foreigner takes a home away from a kiwi no matter the value. Even if johnny foreigner buys a house for x million it means that the wealthy kiwi who was outbid has to buy another one worth slightly less. Which once again means that slightly less valuable house is not available to buy so the person who would have bought that must buy the next one available - and so on.

It's simple economics. If that house is not 'replaced' with another the supply of houses has just been decreased by one.

If johnny foreigner makes a commitment to NZ in the form of living in that house, that's not so bad but keeping empty houses for speculation should be stamped out.

I agree. What I meant was a house that a foreigner wont buy, still rises, i.e.a more bottom range house. I feel that an immigrant should only be allowed to build. Maybe after 5 years they can buy, perhaps.

If Immigration is such a huge issue, then what will focusing the entire immigration housing spend on new builds do to land prices?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4