Election 2023 - what policies would you like to see?

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

Forums › Politics › Election 2023 - what policies would you like to see?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2977761 5-Oct-2022 13:50

blackjack17:

sir1963:

Huh, so what you are saying is private rentals should not exist.

Thats fine, I can always have a beach batch and have it as a ghost home, or have an apartment in Surfers. Either way its less use than a rental.

Or I buy 2 properties, demolish them both and have a yard with a swimming pool, there is an obvious tax advantage doing it that way.

The we have the problem of where do school leavers go, divorced people , immigrants, students, people who can not afford to buy, etc etc.

The rental housing market is work over $600 Billion , and it is supplying a service people need. 85% of landlords own ONE property, they are not buying more so they are not skewing the market, that is just populist BS right up with with anti-vax BS. Imagine the cost to Tax Payers paying off $600 Billion + subsidies rent + rates +maintenance, insurance, etc etc etc etc.

It was the government who was out bidding first home buyers, not private landlords. That is another "myth" the government has failed to tell the truth about.

It turns out that "income related rents" via Kainga Ora cost the tax payers more than double what the accommodation supplement does per house.

So the entire economics makes sense to have private rentals.

53% of Kainga Ora rentals do NOT meet healthy homes standards

Private rentals PAY tax, so add onto that the loss of tax income.

As for GPs, we have Healthline, the service is already there, and Pharmacists also off that service. We have mental health phone services, youth services, community nurses, school nurses.

You are being disingenuous. No one has said that private rentals should not exist. The reason why capital gains should be attached to investments and not non-investment purchases such as the family home is to make property investment equitable with other forms of investment. If you buy shares (trading)/gold/cryptocurrency and sell them for a higher price you pay tax on that. Hell we already have a capital gains tax on investment property the bright line test.

Equitable with what other investment ?

Which business or people pays capital gains ?

Which other business can not tax deduct interest ?

And NO, you do NOT pay tax on any of those investments UNLESS you are acting as a trader.

https://www.canstar.co.nz/home-loans/does-new-zealand-have-a-capital-gains-tax/

blackjack17

1713 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

#2977769 5-Oct-2022 14:10

Rikkitic:

blackjack17:

Your antidotal story about the lecturer doesn't make sense. Why would annual leave be approved when exams are due to be marked and results published? Why would they even consider taking leave at that time?

Since you are a teacher I assume you meant anecdotal above and were sabotaged by auto-correct. Just thought I would point it out.

Not an English teacher and not auto correct just distracted by kids and marking (and I have very poor spelling). I do know the difference between an antidote and an anecdote (although I have probably never written it out before) :)

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2977781 5-Oct-2022 15:03

sir1963:

Equitable with what other investment ?

Which business or people pays capital gains ?

Which other business can not tax deduct interest ?

And NO, you do NOT pay tax on any of those investments UNLESS you are acting as a trader.

https://www.canstar.co.nz/home-loans/does-new-zealand-have-a-capital-gains-tax/

Not many other investment classes fail to generate profits for years on ends to only suddenly make a sudden but unexpected massive tax-free gain upon the disposal of the main underlying asset either.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2977792 5-Oct-2022 16:03

GV27:

sir1963:

Equitable with what other investment ?

Which business or people pays capital gains ?

Which other business can not tax deduct interest ?

And NO, you do NOT pay tax on any of those investments UNLESS you are acting as a trader.

https://www.canstar.co.nz/home-loans/does-new-zealand-have-a-capital-gains-tax/

Not many other investment classes fail to generate profits for years on ends to only suddenly make a sudden but unexpected massive tax-free gain upon the disposal of the main underlying asset either.

For the vast majority of the last 100 years the sharemarket out performed realestate.

What has happened is that for an unexpectedly long time due to the GFC and COVID we have had unrealistically low interest rates.

This drove people to look at rentals, because just the cash return on a rental was higher than interest in the bank.

We also had things like "healthy homes" which removed a lot of old stock from the rental market.

Equally we had a large number of people return to NZ during COVID for safety.

Other government measure also added to rental costs, they were TOLD that would happen, chose to ignore it, and now fail to tell the truth about who is actually to blame.

NONE of these things was due to landlords

EVERY home owner made the exact same capital gain, landlords were not special in that regard.

I remember when interest rates were 20% and the landlord was heavily subsiding the rent from their own pocket , imagine 20% on a 500k Mortgage, $100k a year, or $2000 a week, the tenants would not be paying that. Even 10% was not that many years ago.

So you are cherry picking data while ignoring the long term reality.

When I got into landlording there was NO KiwiSaver, no employer doubling the weekly contributions, no tax deductions for saving money.

You either did something for yourself, or you ended up like pensioners today who struggle.

AND we paid higher taxes back then, got no free early childhood care, no free under 14 doctors visits, car rego was much higher as was ACC

So do I feel guilty, no way.

And on top of that, if I charged "market rates" for my rentals, I would also be about $40k a year better off or more as I could be paying the non tax deductible interest back faster.

blackjack17

1713 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

#2977795 5-Oct-2022 16:20

sir1963:

I remember when interest rates were 20% and the landlord was heavily subsiding the rent from their own pocket , imagine 20% on a 500k Mortgage, $100k a year, or $2000 a week, the tenants would not be paying that. Even 10% was not that many years ago.

So you are cherry picking data while ignoring the long term reality.

When I got into landlording there was NO KiwiSaver, no employer doubling the weekly contributions, no tax deductions for saving money.

You either did something for yourself, or you ended up like pensioners today who struggle.

AND we paid higher taxes back then, got no free early childhood care, no free under 14 doctors visits, car rego was much higher as was ACC

So do I feel guilty, no way.

And on top of that, if I charged "market rates" for my rentals, I would also be about $40k a year better off or more as I could be paying the non tax deductible interest back faster.

Was this also when losses were not ring fenced?

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2977800 5-Oct-2022 16:25

sir1963:

I remember when interest rates were 20% and the landlord was heavily subsiding the rent from their own pocket , imagine 20% on a 500k Mortgage, $100k a year, or $2000 a week, the tenants would not be paying that. Even 10% was not that many years ago.

So you are cherry picking data while ignoring the long term reality.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that a small percentage of a massive number can be much bigger.

Interest rates were at 20% for a very finite period of time and mortgages were smaller because house prices cost a fraction of what they did today. It was also a time of rapid wage inflation so the value of your debt was dropping all the time relative to what people were getting paid.

sir1963:

AND we paid higher taxes back then, got no free early childhood care, no free under 14 doctors visits, car rego was much higher as was ACC

Now who's cherry-picking. It used to be common to capitalise a child benefit into a house deposit - actually a thing that was possible to do.

You could also service a mortgage on a modest family home on one income and it meant people could stay home and actually look after kids, which they could have at a younger age instead of putting it off for years. Banks didn't even count women's income towards their servicing calculations because that was what was expected.

You seem determined to argue against basic things that so easily disproven by objective statistics like housing affordability getting worse and ownership rates dropping. Instead of asking yourself whether the goonrush of property investors chasing piss-taking levels of tax-free gains to feather their own nest and whether you're part of the problem, you offer out played-out talkback talking points that don't add up or pass basic scrutiny.

I'm not sure what you're after. No one is going to throw you a parade for being alive when houses were much much cheaper than they are today and no one owes you anything because you contributed to the supply-squeeze that pushed prices out of reach for younger Kiwis.

And you haven't addressed my point about a 'business' that makes ongoing losses underwritten by the taxpayer and only generates positive cashflow when it makes an 'incidental' tax-free gain selling the main asset.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#2977804 5-Oct-2022 16:34

When interest rates were 20% a $500k mortgage would have been on a $6-700k house (I can't remember what bank lending rules were back then, but lets assume 20% minimum) and 20% rates were during the 80s

A $6-700k house back then, I suspect you'd be talking the likes of Vicky Ave in Remmers, Paratai Drive or even waterfront St Marys bay. Hardly rental market locations for mom and pop investors.......

Lets not mix figures of today with figures from the past to try and push a point

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2977812 5-Oct-2022 16:46

blackjack17:

sir1963:

I remember when interest rates were 20% and the landlord was heavily subsiding the rent from their own pocket , imagine 20% on a 500k Mortgage, $100k a year, or $2000 a week, the tenants would not be paying that. Even 10% was not that many years ago.

So you are cherry picking data while ignoring the long term reality.

When I got into landlording there was NO KiwiSaver, no employer doubling the weekly contributions, no tax deductions for saving money.

You either did something for yourself, or you ended up like pensioners today who struggle.

AND we paid higher taxes back then, got no free early childhood care, no free under 14 doctors visits, car rego was much higher as was ACC

So do I feel guilty, no way.

And on top of that, if I charged "market rates" for my rentals, I would also be about $40k a year better off or more as I could be paying the non tax deductible interest back faster.

Was this also when losses were not ring fenced?

Yeah, what other business has everything ring fenced. Big business regularly moves losses from one business to another.

Interest is however not longer deductible. All the "ring fencing" has done is that each property is taxed individually, you can no longer combine them.

Other losses instead of being paid out instantly are simply put away and deducted from future profits.

But don't give the the BS about "tax losses", I will take 70% of the profits over 70% of the losses any day, so NO landlord deliberately runs their business at a loss.

And as for the 40K I am not charging tenants, that is NOW.

Even without ring fencing, ion a landlord had to pay out $1000 a week in interest over the top of what the tenants were paying, that would STILL have mean he was $700 a week out of pocket.

Peoples understanding of Tax, tax deductions, etc etc etc is complete garbage.

so lets now do some maths

$1M home, with a $500k, mortgage @5% = 25K ($500 a week) in interest. Now add on rates, insurance, repairs and maintenance, accountants fees, etc etc etc and the cost for the landlord is about $700 a week and thats with making nothing on the 500k deposit , nor paying off any of the capital.

If that 500k hd been in the bank they could have made 3% and had 15K a year or $200 a week after tax income.

Landlords are not speculators, they are not playing the futures market, 85% own just ONE property.

So no, there is no short term goldmine.

I got into land lording because my current partner and I joined households (both of us with 2 teens each), if things did not work out we could go back to where we were, no harm, no foul.

We have been together for 18 years.

This was NEVER a get rich quick scheme, never a let's deny anyone else a house scam, never "greed" or anything else, this was us making sensible financial decisions for ourselves and our kids.

We look after our good tenants, and they look after us. We ALL benefit.

And now we have a home with a big back yard, with a pool, where the grandkids can come and play safely, and I feel no guilt about that either.

Will the kids benefit from us when we go, yes, why shouldn't they.

The ONLY way you will make everyone "equal" is when everyone equally has nothing.

try to punish those who do well, they will leave to where they can succeed and all you have done is removed the people you need in a healthy economy, lowered the tax take, and made life much harder for everyone. You in effect have punished the poor.

As those in (Rhodesia) Zimbabwe, they were the food basket of Africa , but people wanted their share NOW, their rights, etc etc etc now they are a basket case with everyone worse off.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2978020 6-Oct-2022 06:33

sir1963:

Peoples understanding of Tax, tax deductions, etc etc etc is complete garbage.

I agree. If more people had understood that they were effectively underwriting 2/3rds of the interest cost of a mortgage for a business with the unstated purpose of producing unintentional capital gains, we might have seen a change to the treatment of the interest deductions a long time ago.

The same house, used for the same fundamental activity, should not have resulted in a taxable deduction for one party and yet another having to bear 100% of the costs of the biggest expense.

Look, you have done what you could do, well within whatever laws existed at the time, to provide for your family. I am happy to accept that.

But those laws were manifestly inadequate for a country with a growing population and terrible ability to supply land and houses to the market. We see the same problem now with our tax rates frozen in time since 2010. Over time, the world changes and our tax code gets less and less fit for purpose - just gets bits tacked on or hacked off now and then for political expediency. The natural consequence was a drop in ownership rates and an increasing in people reliant on renting. It's a bug, not a feature.

So you also must accept that in doing so, you've made it harder for many other younger families, like mine, who were lifting paying much bigger mortgages and needing much bigger deposits, as well as having smaller families much later in life. I'm much older than my parents were when I was born. These aren't things you can put off forever.

I make no apologies for being pretty angry about that.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2978042 6-Oct-2022 07:31

GV27:

sir1963:

Peoples understanding of Tax, tax deductions, etc etc etc is complete garbage.

I agree. If more people had understood that they were effectively underwriting 2/3rds of the interest cost of a mortgage for a business with the unstated purpose of producing unintentional capital gains, we might have seen a change to the treatment of the interest deductions a long time ago.

The same house, used for the same fundamental activity, should not have resulted in a taxable deduction for one party and yet another having to bear 100% of the costs of the biggest expense.

Look, you have done what you could do, well within whatever laws existed at the time, to provide for your family. I am happy to accept that.

But those laws were manifestly inadequate for a country with a growing population and terrible ability to supply land and houses to the market. We see the same problem now with our tax rates frozen in time since 2010. Over time, the world changes and our tax code gets less and less fit for purpose - just gets bits tacked on or hacked off now and then for political expediency. The natural consequence was a drop in ownership rates and an increasing in people reliant on renting. It's a bug, not a feature.

So you also must accept that in doing so, you've made it harder for many other younger families, like mine, who were lifting paying much bigger mortgages and needing much bigger deposits, as well as having smaller families much later in life. I'm much older than my parents were when I was born. These aren't things you can put off forever.

I make no apologies for being pretty angry about that.

We are in a unique period where the capital gains of housing has outpaced the share market.

My Brother who is a bank manager told me to put my money into the sharemarket because it performs better than property.

I would guess that 99% of landlords did NOT buy for the capita gains, I know I did not.

Home ownership rates have risen and fallen etc over time.

Home ownership rates are also lower in places like Germany

No one has EVER been entitled to own their own home, there has ALWAYS been people and families who could not afford to, and there always will be.

The rents I charge are way less than "market rates", I have had realestate agents who manage rentals they could get me up to $200 a week more. So here I am supplying a young solo mum, a young family on low wages, a disabled person etc cheap rent because they will never be able to buy.

"Income related rents" costs the tax payer more than twice as much as accommodation supplement does.

You are "angry" because you have an unjustified entitlement that you can not achieve and choose to blame others for it.

I am 59, I have had some form of paid employment since I was 7 (Delivering the Wanganui Chronicle in the central plateau before school, even when it was snowing),

I studied hard at school, I actually paid my high school fees etc my self because my parents had financial issues

I have gained multiple qualifications

This has given me a reasonably good job I like, though I could be paid more elsewhere

I still study to maintain relevant knowledge in my field.

When I was younger I regularly worked up to 70 hours a week

I have done YEARS in voluntary work, and give to charities

I have been a solo dad for 10 years of my life. I did not get any tax benefits for that, no free child care, no free healthcare for the kids, no accommodation subsidies. In fact I owl have been better off on a Benefit given how much child care cost me. I chose to work, to teach my kids about work, and now I have the rewards of my choices.

ALL my choices since I was 7 have improved my life.

I do not drink (abusing alcoholic father), smoke, gamble.

I have travelled a lot, most of it for work and work related training.

I have NEVER felt that anyone owes me, that I am entitled to some of what someone else has.

Equality is a myth, ask any disabled person, they have been dealt a much worse hand than you, and they carry on and make the best of it.

And yet here you are, renting, because you can not afford to buy. Without private landlords you would be MUCH worse off.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2978045 6-Oct-2022 07:39

sir1963:

You are "angry" because you have an unjustified entitlement that you can not achieve and choose to blame others for it.

I'm angry because people like you keep thinking ranting is going to change the fact that investors bought more properties, it made housing less affordable for young Kiwis. It does not.

The only person here with an entitlement complex is you.

In your ranting you've also made multiple assumptions about my circumstances and assumed your own are totally unique. You are incorrect on many fronts.

You are incapable of accepting that people may have it harder than you did and for some reason are choosing to take that as a personal attack.

You are literally part of the problem and it infuriates me that my vote is worth the same as yours.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

blackjack17

1713 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 865

#2978048 6-Oct-2022 07:49

So anyway.

I would really like to see some more policies aimed at improving conservation and increasing access to nature for recreational purposes. The western Ruahines are almost inaccessible, The Kamais are infested with rats and possums, there are only half a dozen huts in total and the only reason the tracks stay open is due to volunteers , Pirongia has a single hut and a couple of trails, Northland a couple of huts.

I would love to see a real push to developing a greater network of huts, trails and mountain bike trails through the North Island. Extensive retiring of uneconomical/marginal land and the replanting of this land.

Every time I drive south from Auckland on the new motorway and look at the farmland by Huntly I think how cool would that be if replanted and a mountain bike network and North South Hiking trails were developed. Could rival Rotorua's redwood forest.

Being able to jump on the train in Auckland, off in Huntly and hit the trails.

There are a huge number of opportunities all the way down the country.

Electric kiwi signup credit Sharesies credit

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2978056 6-Oct-2022 08:30

Still blows my mind I can't catch a train to Taupo or Opua.

But then again I can't catch a train from Huapai or Kumeu to Swanson either.

Genuinely expanding our passenger rail networks should be priority one for a country supposedly in the midst of a climate emergency.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2978057 6-Oct-2022 08:41

GV27:

sir1963:

You are "angry" because you have an unjustified entitlement that you can not achieve and choose to blame others for it.

I'm angry because people like you keep thinking ranting is going to change the fact that investors bought more properties, it made housing less affordable for young Kiwis. It does not.

The only person here with an entitlement complex is you.

In your ranting you've also made multiple assumptions about my circumstances and assumed your own are totally unique. You are incorrect on many fronts.

You are incapable of accepting that people may have it harder than you did and for some reason are choosing to take that as a personal attack.

You are literally part of the problem and it infuriates me that my vote is worth the same as yours.

The GOVERNMENT was who was out bidding first home buyers , not private landlords.

Its the government who has 53% of their houses failing to meet health homes standards, and they supposedly have the most vulnerable people.

Its government policies that have pushed up rents, increased homelessness , continued to damage health, education, welfare.

So be angry at them. I and no other landlord I know is to blame for that.

Am I entitled to what my choices have given me, yes.

I am 100% capable of understanding, I have an intellectually disabled son, let me know when life become "fair" for him.

I have 4 grandkids with ADHD, their lives are hard too.

But, I am sure that you being such a caring person, wanting to look after those with less than you have taken in a homeless person into your house.

I am also sure that you understand that 90% of the people in the world have even less than you.

In your utopia, everyone is worse off, including you.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#2978058 6-Oct-2022 08:46

GV27:

Still blows my mind I can't catch a train to Taupo or Opua.

But then again I can't catch a train from Huapai or Kumeu to Swanson either.

Genuinely expanding our passenger rail networks should be priority one for a country supposedly in the midst of a climate emergency.

Total Agree, and I am angry the electrification we paid for is being dumped because dead technology diesel trains are cheaper.

Worse, by the time we get our act together and realise electric trains are the future, so will all the other countries with more money than us who can pay more for the materials.

And we bough cheap rolling stock that has failed to save money long term rather than building it here.

Loosing knowledge and skills that we need for the future is not a winning strategy.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4