![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
dickytim:
What I get sick of is the poor blaming the other classes for their problems.
Where, when and for how much did you buy your first house?
dickytim:
joker97:
dickytim:
As the saying goes beggars can't be choosers, however in NZ they can.
No one said they were to be bussed out of site, that is your addition, they do however need to stop taking up space then is needed in the biggest city for workers that need to be there.
BTW what is the magic bullet from the leftist side of the fence? Robin Hood?
No need to ship anyone away, build a satellite town starting with state houses with a train straight to the CBD. Over time, as the big players come in eg Countdown, etc, other people will build houses, then prices go up, govt sell their state houses, make profit, go build another satellite state house town somewhere else.
Sorry not sure if this is sarcasm or not but it makes a lot of sense, then when people want to move closer to the CBD they upskill, improve themselves and move up in the world.
The conversation about the poor really gets me, I had nothing when I was growing up. We were the poor kids at school that wore second hand clothes, shoes etc. In our teens was a little better but we lived in the cheapest rental in the worst part of town. My first job was pumping petrol, then cleaning, working in a warehouse. I improved my lot with hard work, a little luck and patience.
What I get sick of is the poor blaming the other classes for their problems.
I can think of similar instances - Welwyn Garden City near London, Milton Keynes in Buckinghamshire and Cambourne in Cambridgeshire are all towns/villages that were virtually started from scratch with the intention of providing communities for people to live and work in and commute to London etc.
There is no reason (other than finance which can be dealt with) why the government (or indeed a private consortium with government support) could not buy 500 acres of farmland and create a new town from scratch. It can be done. If the will and drive to make it happen exists, of course.
Geektastic:
dickytim:
joker97:
dickytim:
As the saying goes beggars can't be choosers, however in NZ they can.
No one said they were to be bussed out of site, that is your addition, they do however need to stop taking up space then is needed in the biggest city for workers that need to be there.
BTW what is the magic bullet from the leftist side of the fence? Robin Hood?
No need to ship anyone away, build a satellite town starting with state houses with a train straight to the CBD. Over time, as the big players come in eg Countdown, etc, other people will build houses, then prices go up, govt sell their state houses, make profit, go build another satellite state house town somewhere else.
Sorry not sure if this is sarcasm or not but it makes a lot of sense, then when people want to move closer to the CBD they upskill, improve themselves and move up in the world.
The conversation about the poor really gets me, I had nothing when I was growing up. We were the poor kids at school that wore second hand clothes, shoes etc. In our teens was a little better but we lived in the cheapest rental in the worst part of town. My first job was pumping petrol, then cleaning, working in a warehouse. I improved my lot with hard work, a little luck and patience.
What I get sick of is the poor blaming the other classes for their problems.
I can think of similar instances - Welwyn Garden City near London, Milton Keynes in Buckinghamshire and Cambourne in Cambridgeshire are all towns/villages that were virtually started from scratch with the intention of providing communities for people to live and work in and commute to London etc.
There is no reason (other than finance which can be dealt with) why the government (or indeed a private consortium with government support) could not buy 500 acres of farmland and create a new town from scratch. It can be done. If the will and drive to make it happen exists, of course.
Canberra, Oz, was created in such a manner.
SepticSceptic:
Geektastic:
dickytim:
joker97:
dickytim:
As the saying goes beggars can't be choosers, however in NZ they can.
No one said they were to be bussed out of site, that is your addition, they do however need to stop taking up space then is needed in the biggest city for workers that need to be there.
BTW what is the magic bullet from the leftist side of the fence? Robin Hood?
No need to ship anyone away, build a satellite town starting with state houses with a train straight to the CBD. Over time, as the big players come in eg Countdown, etc, other people will build houses, then prices go up, govt sell their state houses, make profit, go build another satellite state house town somewhere else.
Sorry not sure if this is sarcasm or not but it makes a lot of sense, then when people want to move closer to the CBD they upskill, improve themselves and move up in the world.
The conversation about the poor really gets me, I had nothing when I was growing up. We were the poor kids at school that wore second hand clothes, shoes etc. In our teens was a little better but we lived in the cheapest rental in the worst part of town. My first job was pumping petrol, then cleaning, working in a warehouse. I improved my lot with hard work, a little luck and patience.
What I get sick of is the poor blaming the other classes for their problems.
I can think of similar instances - Welwyn Garden City near London, Milton Keynes in Buckinghamshire and Cambourne in Cambridgeshire are all towns/villages that were virtually started from scratch with the intention of providing communities for people to live and work in and commute to London etc.
There is no reason (other than finance which can be dealt with) why the government (or indeed a private consortium with government support) could not buy 500 acres of farmland and create a new town from scratch. It can be done. If the will and drive to make it happen exists, of course.
Canberra, Oz, was created in such a manner.
There you go. I am sure there are plenty more.
We could do it. The NZ Super fund could help finance it (for example).
You'd need to get a bit more backbone that is usually exhibited - an Act of Parliament to create it, giving the development corporation the right to compulsorily acquire the land brooking no argument and whining from landowners and NIMBY neighbours etc but that is certainly possible.
Geektastic:
SepticSceptic:
Geektastic:
dickytim:
joker97:
dickytim:
As the saying goes beggars can't be choosers, however in NZ they can.
No one said they were to be bussed out of site, that is your addition, they do however need to stop taking up space then is needed in the biggest city for workers that need to be there.
BTW what is the magic bullet from the leftist side of the fence? Robin Hood?
No need to ship anyone away, build a satellite town starting with state houses with a train straight to the CBD. Over time, as the big players come in eg Countdown, etc, other people will build houses, then prices go up, govt sell their state houses, make profit, go build another satellite state house town somewhere else.
Sorry not sure if this is sarcasm or not but it makes a lot of sense, then when people want to move closer to the CBD they upskill, improve themselves and move up in the world.
The conversation about the poor really gets me, I had nothing when I was growing up. We were the poor kids at school that wore second hand clothes, shoes etc. In our teens was a little better but we lived in the cheapest rental in the worst part of town. My first job was pumping petrol, then cleaning, working in a warehouse. I improved my lot with hard work, a little luck and patience.
What I get sick of is the poor blaming the other classes for their problems.
I can think of similar instances - Welwyn Garden City near London, Milton Keynes in Buckinghamshire and Cambourne in Cambridgeshire are all towns/villages that were virtually started from scratch with the intention of providing communities for people to live and work in and commute to London etc.
There is no reason (other than finance which can be dealt with) why the government (or indeed a private consortium with government support) could not buy 500 acres of farmland and create a new town from scratch. It can be done. If the will and drive to make it happen exists, of course.
Canberra, Oz, was created in such a manner.
There you go. I am sure there are plenty more.
We could do it. The NZ Super fund could help finance it (for example).
You'd need to get a bit more backbone that is usually exhibited - an Act of Parliament to create it, giving the development corporation the right to compulsorily acquire the land brooking no argument and whining from landowners and NIMBY neighbours etc but that is certainly possible.
By the time every subgroup is consulted and debated and debriefed inc the wizards and pets, the house prices would have doubled since
SepticSceptic:
Canberra, Oz, was created in such a manner.
Canberra is the seat of Federal Government hardly a good example
Bad examples
Wainuiomata
Porirua
Flaxmere
Just to name a few.
You put low income in low quality homes in an area with zero facilities, zero employment then expect them to travel for kilometers to get a bottle of milk or groceries or to travel into main centres to go to low income jobs or job interviews. You expect them to transfer their kids schools or they travel long distance to schools. Of course they have the funds to pay for new uniforms and new stationery, moving expenses. Of course they have the money for all the transport. This is a failed method from last century.
At some point, someone has to realize that not everything needs to be located in Auckland.
Get the companies to move from Auckland, the people (might) follow (if they want to work). At the moment with everything being in Auckland or moving to Auckland, the problem is only going to get worse.
There are other parts of the country to locate things in ... though Dunedin seems to be self-sabotaging in this regard so as a result, I won't suggest Dunedin (where I live)
nzkiwiman:
At some point, someone has to realize that not everything needs to be located in Auckland.
Get the companies to move from Auckland, the people (might) follow (if they want to work). At the moment with everything being in Auckland or moving to Auckland, the problem is only going to get worse.
There are other parts of the country to locate things in ... though Dunedin seems to be self-sabotaging in this regard so as a result, I won't suggest Dunedin (where I live)
However, from a businesses point of view, if you have the need to travel internationally, and further afield than just Australia, your better off being based in Auckland and not have the added expense of internal domestic flights
WyleECoyoteNZ:
nzkiwiman:
At some point, someone has to realize that not everything needs to be located in Auckland.
Get the companies to move from Auckland, the people (might) follow (if they want to work). At the moment with everything being in Auckland or moving to Auckland, the problem is only going to get worse.
There are other parts of the country to locate things in ... though Dunedin seems to be self-sabotaging in this regard so as a result, I won't suggest Dunedin (where I live)
However, from a businesses point of view, if you have the need to travel internationally, and further afield than just Australia, your better off being based in Auckland and not have the added expense of internal domestic flights
Not just Auckland the whole ' it must be centralised' thing is bitting us in the butt but the resolution is not easy. It's a chicken and egg scenario, what to do first? move folks where there is no work in the hope that companies will relocate, or do we relocate companies in the hope that folks will relocate.
From OECD. NZ is leading the world at something, apparently:
Fred99:
From OECD. NZ is leading the world at something, apparently:
And Pine Apple Lumps :P
Fred99:
From OECD. NZ is leading the world at something, apparently:
Sam91:
Fred99:
From OECD. NZ is leading the world at something, apparently:
I'm far from an expert, but isn't that graph is misleading? Shouldn't it start at zero?
No. The dotted line in the middle at 100 is baseline based on 2010 data, so NZ has become about 30% less affordable (based on household income to house price ratio), Spain about 25% more affordable.
Fred99:
Sam91:
Fred99:
From OECD. NZ is leading the world at something, apparently:
I'm far from an expert, but isn't that graph is misleading? Shouldn't it start at zero?
No. The dotted line in the middle at 100 is baseline based on 2010 data, so NZ has become about 30% less affordable (based on household income to house price ratio), Spain about 25% more affordable.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |