Housing crisis in Auckland

Forums › Off topic › Housing crisis in Auckland

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 13

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1621183 2-Sep-2016 09:13

MikeB4:

joker97:

dickytim:

And we go back to the insistence of living in Auckland.

There are many, many countries in the world where a 1.5 - 2 hour commute each way is not abnormal.

Most first home buyers in Melbourne are living at least an hour out of Melbourne in the outer suburbs.

It is not realistic to think you are going to be able to buy a house close to Auckland as your first home.

There are some areas that need drastic improvement, a decent rail and public transport system, more money on roading, I am for tolls/ extra fuel taxes if it improves the roading quickly.

Looking from history every NZ govt cannot plan, has never been able to plan, will never do it. Just doesn't seem to have the ability to. Yell taunts at each other in parliament, very clever at that. Doing something that plans for the future ... name one.

Off the top of my head....EQC , Cook Strait Cable, UFB, Wind Farms, Fisheries Protection, Conservation, Natural Gas Exploration, Earthquake building standards, just to name a few.

Ok sounds like Auckland housing's gonna be sweet! Phew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1621217 2-Sep-2016 09:38

joker97:

Ok sounds like Auckland housing's gonna be sweet! Phew

Not sure where you read that. I was answering this "Looking from history every NZ govt cannot plan, has never been able to plan,"

Batman

Mad Scientist
29771 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1621268 2-Sep-2016 10:34

MikeB4:

joker97:

Ok sounds like Auckland housing's gonna be sweet! Phew

Not sure where you read that. I was answering this "Looking from history every NZ govt cannot plan, has never been able to plan,"

Oh I get it now!

UHD

655 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1621297 2-Sep-2016 11:17

I saw an interesting episode of Nigel Latta's new show a while back that I think most people in this thread need to view in order gather information rather than rhetoric when it comes to discussions regarding immigration.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/ondemand/the-hard-stuff-with-nigel-latta/09-08-2016/series-2-episode-4

I think it is interesting to note that when you filter the number down to what most people consider 'immigration' (i.e. people born in another country moving to New Zealand and intending to live here permanently) the number has been about 45,000 per year (about 1% of population) for a long, long time. Anyone telling you something else either has incorrect information or is pushing an agenda as the numbers are public information.

Geektastic

17944 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1621311 2-Sep-2016 11:34

UHD:

I saw an interesting episode of Nigel Latta's new show a while back that I think most people in this thread need to view in order gather information rather than rhetoric when it comes to discussions regarding immigration.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/ondemand/the-hard-stuff-with-nigel-latta/09-08-2016/series-2-episode-4

I think it is interesting to note that when you filter the number down to what most people consider 'immigration' (i.e. people born in another country moving to New Zealand and intending to live here permanently) the number has been about 45,000 per year (about 1% of population) for a long, long time. Anyone telling you something else either has incorrect information or is pushing an agenda as the numbers are public information.

Indeed. Someone coming here temporarily to work or study is a visitor, not an immigrant.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1621313 2-Sep-2016 11:35

Yep, by the time you allow for kiwis returning, overseas students and seasonal workers (hardly a factor in Auckland)... the flood of foreigners is more of a trickle.

But it suits politicians trying to pull the strings of xenophobia.

Now I expect that from NZ First. I am absolutely stunned that Andrew Little and Labour have sunk to the same gutter level. For example the family name analysis of house sales. I have never voted labour, but I have always thought they were above that sort of behaviour.

Mike

Geektastic

17944 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1621324 2-Sep-2016 11:53

MikeAqua:

Yep, by the time you allow for kiwis returning, overseas students and seasonal workers (hardly a factor in Auckland)... the flood of foreigners is more of a trickle.

But it suits politicians trying to pull the strings of xenophobia.

Now I expect that from NZ First. I am absolutely stunned that Andrew Little and Labour have sunk to the same gutter level. For example the family name analysis of house sales. I have never voted labour, but I have always thought they were above that sort of behaviour.

It's FUD to hide the two actual points.

1) Kiwis do not earn enough because the economy is not big enough

2) It takes too long and costs too much to build houses

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1621341 2-Sep-2016 12:17

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Yep, by the time you allow for kiwis returning, overseas students and seasonal workers (hardly a factor in Auckland)... the flood of foreigners is more of a trickle.

But it suits politicians trying to pull the strings of xenophobia.

Now I expect that from NZ First. I am absolutely stunned that Andrew Little and Labour have sunk to the same gutter level. For example the family name analysis of house sales. I have never voted labour, but I have always thought they were above that sort of behaviour.

It's FUD to hide the two actual points.

1) Kiwis do not earn enough because the economy is not big enough

2) It takes too long and costs too much to build houses

Neither point has been addressed by any party in any meaningful way.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1621348 2-Sep-2016 12:27

Increases in earnings will not help. This would fuel inflstion, increase unemployment in other words 70s and 80s revisited.

UHD

655 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1621359 2-Sep-2016 12:40

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Yep, by the time you allow for kiwis returning, overseas students and seasonal workers (hardly a factor in Auckland)... the flood of foreigners is more of a trickle.

But it suits politicians trying to pull the strings of xenophobia.

Now I expect that from NZ First. I am absolutely stunned that Andrew Little and Labour have sunk to the same gutter level. For example the family name analysis of house sales. I have never voted labour, but I have always thought they were above that sort of behaviour.

It's FUD to hide the two actual points.

1) Kiwis do not earn enough because the economy is not big enough

2) It takes too long and costs too much to build houses

Interestingly, Mr. Latta deals with housing in another episode rather well. He makes an argument based on information he gets from builders and council officials that all new houses being built are too large. Either large, expensive infill builds or large, expensive greenfields builds.

The problem isn't so much that new housing is built too slowly it is just that everyone who wants a new house wants a large (4+ bedroom, 2+ garage, standalone, etc...) home and they are expensive and take a long time to build compared to more efficient housing like three storey apartment blocks. In other words, the problem with the housing in Auckland is that the population of Auckland is unwilling to look at more efficient options, not the government, council, or a lack of builders.

Of course, it is an impossible sell to try and make people understand that they are personally responsible for the issues that affect them so we'll no doubt see more government/council blaming until they decide to add a whole lot more red tape and force a change through law. A terrible solution for everyone.

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#1621415 2-Sep-2016 13:58

MikeB4:

This issue is a 'be careful what you wish for' situation. If the "bubble bursts" there will be a lot of collateral damage and its effects will be hard to predict and control.

The strategy appears to be to flatten price rises....and wait for wages to catch up.

But the government push-down-the-wages policy 9after promising to raise them) running in tandem since 1998 has stuffed that up a bit.

We only see annual wage rises because the govt puts the minimum wage up every year. Compare the annual increase to the rate of increase in the minimum. They track.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Geektastic

17944 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1621495 2-Sep-2016 16:43

UHD:

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Yep, by the time you allow for kiwis returning, overseas students and seasonal workers (hardly a factor in Auckland)... the flood of foreigners is more of a trickle.

But it suits politicians trying to pull the strings of xenophobia.

Now I expect that from NZ First. I am absolutely stunned that Andrew Little and Labour have sunk to the same gutter level. For example the family name analysis of house sales. I have never voted labour, but I have always thought they were above that sort of behaviour.

It's FUD to hide the two actual points.

1) Kiwis do not earn enough because the economy is not big enough

2) It takes too long and costs too much to build houses

Interestingly, Mr. Latta deals with housing in another episode rather well. He makes an argument based on information he gets from builders and council officials that all new houses being built are too large. Either large, expensive infill builds or large, expensive greenfields builds.

The problem isn't so much that new housing is built too slowly it is just that everyone who wants a new house wants a large (4+ bedroom, 2+ garage, standalone, etc...) home and they are expensive and take a long time to build compared to more efficient housing like three storey apartment blocks. In other words, the problem with the housing in Auckland is that the population of Auckland is unwilling to look at more efficient options, not the government, council, or a lack of builders.

Of course, it is an impossible sell to try and make people understand that they are personally responsible for the issues that affect them so we'll no doubt see more government/council blaming until they decide to add a whole lot more red tape and force a change through law. A terrible solution for everyone.

It's possible to build faster using more modern systems than a couple of blokes wandering around nailing up bits of 2x4 with a nail gun..!

mattwnz

20177 posts

Uber Geek

#1621529 2-Sep-2016 17:11

UHD:

I saw an interesting episode of Nigel Latta's new show a while back that I think most people in this thread need to view in order gather information rather than rhetoric when it comes to discussions regarding immigration.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/ondemand/the-hard-stuff-with-nigel-latta/09-08-2016/series-2-episode-4

I think it is interesting to note that when you filter the number down to what most people consider 'immigration' (i.e. people born in another country moving to New Zealand and intending to live here permanently) the number has been about 45,000 per year (about 1% of population) for a long, long time. Anyone telling you something else either has incorrect information or is pushing an agenda as the numbers are public information.

Do you have a legitimate source, rather than a TV program quoting the numbers?. Numbers can always be spun to suit different peoples agendas. But the number of overseas people coming to live here permanently, vs temporary, vs people returning from overseas, doesn't really make much difference, as all those people need housing today,and from what I have read those numbers are up significantly. It may change in the next 10 years, and we may again get a lot of people moving to Oz again.

But investing in housing has tax benefits over other forms of investment, people often pay no tax if they sell their house for a profit. Kiwisaver can be used, along with special first home grants, which all benefit investing in housing over other forms of investment like businesses and shares. And there are a significant number of houses being sold to overseas based buyers. In Queenstown at least 10% of houses are overseas owned, as 10% of rates demands are sent to overseas based owners. Stats like this are very difficult to find, because there have been no records kept for who is actually buying our houses. The problem is the media also tries to make these things into a race issue, when it has nothing to do with that.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1621557 2-Sep-2016 17:45

Will this do?

Whinery

104 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#1621782 3-Sep-2016 07:57

MikeB4: Increases in earnings will not help. This would fuel inflstion, increase unemployment in other words 70s and 80s revisited.

An increase in earnings would certainly help. Greater income doesn't mean inflation. The two are linked by common sense, but no in a real sense. The problem with the "common sense" evaluation is a macro-economic look at the long-term. When 20 years have passed, and inflation was 2%, everything will cost 50% more, and you'll be making 50% more. post hoc ergo propter hoc. But there's a reason that's considered a logical fallacy.

Yes, when wages go up slowly and over time, they seem to correlate with inflation.

But if wages were to go up 10% here one year (with no other significant changes). The inflation would not be 10% that year, or the year after. Some finite, NZ only resources may go up, like land. But not everything, and not the price of building. There are already those that are working on eliminating labour from the cost of housing. So if the cost of building a house went up 10% due to labour, but the materials stayed the same, we'd see a use of the labour-reduced building methods.

What is missed is there's a simple fix to the crisis.

The Government could buy 5000 hectares of land near Auckland. Develop that with 20 homes per hectare, and a target of 50% development (defined by people living in side the homes) in 5 years, and 100% development in 20 years.

Build all the homes to a high-quality 5-star energy long-term eco-friendly standard, and for a target price of $200,000 each. Keep back 10% as a rental stock, and sell the rest to fund the whole project.

Put a rail spur through it, so the detached and self-contained community could easily commute to Auckland.

1) Make a profit

2) Solve a crisis.

But the current homeowners and developers hate that plan. The edge development in Auckland is targeting $1M per house (north, closer to $750k south and west). When they can make so much per house now, blocking affordable housing is in their best interest. And if there was ample housing available, the unsustainable traectory of the current housing market would stall, making the homeowners unhappy.

And there's a perception that this would benefit the immigrants, and poor, so some are against it because it seems "unfair" to someone who just bought an over-priced $500k 15 year old house, now worse than a $200k new house.

There would be enough negativity towards solving the crisis that I don't think it'll be solved. Just delayed. Shuffle credit terms in ways that make no difference, but show an appearance of trying. It doesn't actually hurt anyone or help anyone, but feels like doing "something.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 13