| 1 | This message was deleted. domy2010 - 2021-03-27 10:30:00 |
| 2 | Nothing stopping build-to-rent, and think the government mentioned this in passing for future support. One or two developers reported as looking at these. There is a potential downside for tenants as the owning company will intend to make a decent ROI, and its property management arm will not be subsiding rent, that's for sure. Caps on rent - already have this. Index to income - also already have this, it is called taxpayer subsidised social housing. Property management - someone has to keep up with the waves of changes and complexities (and fines) introduced by this government. And since they operate on a % basis their commission increase is quite small. But their responsibility is to their clients to collect market rent and choose good tenants. Am I wrong? artemis - 2021-03-27 11:00:00 |
| 3 | NZ needs incentives to invest and work in the building industry.
And we need fewer bureaucrats deciding what's good for us.
And fewer non-productive people with nothing to do but complain, who expect everything for free.
If there are enough houses being built for working families, the housing crisis will solve itself. |
| 4 | This message was deleted. domy2010 - 2021-03-28 16:51:00 |
| 5 | This message was deleted. domy2010 - 2021-03-28 16:52:00 |
| 6 | build? the neighbour has to wait for at least a month just to get the pailings for the fence he is building. mkr_ahearn - 2021-03-28 16:56:00 |
| 7 | Get your own wallet out and show us how it should be done. Good luck with your building consents. And enjoy dealing with the feral tenants. Unless you’re just another do nothing expert keen to spend other people’s money. pcle - 2021-03-28 17:45:00 |
| 8 | masturbidder wrote:
NZ needs incentives to invest and work in the building industry.
And we need fewer bureaucrats deciding what's good for us.
And fewer non-productive people with nothing to do but complain, who expect everything for free.
If there are enough houses being built for working families, the housing crisis will solve itself.
there is plenty in the building industry. it can only build so much before it runs out of supplies etc.
judging by the amount of badly built homes that have hit councils, we need more not less bureaucrats because the building industry will always cut corners. houses are not built for "working families", they are built to make money and working families are not paying top dollar because they can't as everything is over priced. tweake - 2021-03-28 18:07:00 |
| 9 | domy2010 wrote:
Yep, at the moment we don't have a enough affordable housing for working people, especially when the majority of some working families incomes are going on rent. thats never going to change while kiwis keep using housing as a money maker.
the councils even take a big chunk.
we need a new way to fund councils so they are not increasing house prices to fund infrastructure. we also need to stop thinking that homes are an investment to make money out of.
govt is picking on a minority of investors when in fact the real problem is every home owner is an investor looking to make returns. thats never a sustainable practise. thats why working people can't afford a house. tweake - 2021-03-28 18:13:00 |
| 10 | also while there is profit to be made, there will always be more demand than supply, which in turn creates profit. tweake - 2021-03-28 18:15:00 |
| 11 | This message was deleted. domy2010 - 2021-03-29 20:27:00 |
| 12 | artemis wrote:
Nothing stopping build-to-rent, and think the government mentioned this in passing for future support. One or two developers reported as looking at these. There is a potential downside for tenants as the owning company will intend to make a decent ROI, and its property management arm will not be subsiding rent, that's for sure. Caps on rent - already have this. Index to income - also already have this, it is called taxpayer subsidised social housing. Property management - someone has to keep up with the waves of changes and complexities (and fines) introduced by this government. And since they operate on a % basis their commission increase is quite small. But their responsibility is to their clients to collect market rent and choose good tenants. Am I wrong? Build to Rent - wasn't this the model that was used by developers back in the late 90's when the Govt was entering into lease arrangements to bolster its housing stock and banks were reluctant to lend to owner/occupiers due to high interest rates and job insecurity. This was when negative gearing against wages/salary was initiated and condoned by the Govt. brouser3 - 2021-03-29 21:06:00 |
| 13 | tweake wrote:
also while there is profit to be made, there will always be more demand than supply, which in turn creates profit. so what? The Venezuela model works better you recon? How many more houses will this new tax on rents build? None probably. pcle - 2021-03-29 21:27:00 |
| 14 | pcle wrote:
so what? The Venezuela model works better you recon? How many more houses will this new tax on rents build? None probably.
the point is this tax is nothing in the scheme of things of what will need to be done to fix the housing issue. its a garden hose on a house fire. this whole talk of building more houses is BS. you can't increase supply when your already maxing out the building supply chain. you can't fix 30+ years of inaction overnight. the only real way to fix it is to reduce demand and demand is fueled by ALL home owners profiteering from housing. tweake - 2021-03-29 21:57:00 |
| 15 | tweake wrote:
the point is this tax is nothing in the scheme of things of what will need to be done to fix the housing issue. its a garden hose on a house fire. this whole talk of building more houses is BS. you can't increase supply when your already maxing out the building supply chain. you can't fix 30+ years of inaction overnight. the only real way to fix it is to reduce demand and demand is fueled by ALL home owners profiteering from housing.
I agree. The construction scene in my neck of the woods is redlining. I wonder how much worse the housing scene would have been if the lurgy hadn't constrained immigration- plus left us with a bunch of empty hotels for our swelling homeless population. apollo11 - 2021-03-29 22:03:00 |
| 16 | tweake wrote:
the point is this tax is nothing in the scheme of things of what will need to be done to fix the housing issue. its a garden hose on a house fire. this whole talk of building more houses is BS. you can't increase supply when your already maxing out the building supply chain. you can't fix 30+ years of inaction overnight. the only real way to fix it is to reduce demand and demand is fueled by ALL home owners profiteering from housing. +1 sparkychap - 2021-03-29 22:09:00 |
| 17 | The only way I can profiteer by selling my house in this environment is to join the queues of the homeless. I'd need to buy another house, so no gains realised.
Talking to a mate last night over a beer, he has just received his share of divorce assets and is desperate to get the money out of his bank account and into a property. He is worried that inflation will start to gobble the lot. There isn't a lot out there that he can afford though. apollo11 - 2021-03-29 22:17:00 |
| 18 | Can the government free up land on a 'rent for 5-10 years, then option to buy' or such? Unfortunately I think their idea will slow down building of exactly what we need, high rise apartment buildings. Lots of people in a small land area, close to their employment. Less transport time & cost & less pressure on transport.
It's common overseas, but foreign to NZ on a decent scale. marte - 2021-03-29 23:24:00 |
| 19 | I thought it was only 9 yrs of neglect? Now it's 30?
More tax on rent - yeah that'll fix it. More homeless coming right up. Edited by pcle at 7:59 am, Tue 30 Mar pcle - 2021-03-30 07:49:00 |
| 20 | What if the government built some government apartments? In Germany they seem to have lots of apartments. tygertung - 2021-03-30 08:06:00 |
| 21 | tygertung wrote:
What if the government built some government apartments? In Germany they seem to have lots of apartments. They have already been very busy buying up properties and paying top dollar. One of the reasons FHBs can't find a house. pcle - 2021-03-30 08:13:00 |
| 22 | tygertung wrote:
What if the government built some government apartments? In Germany they seem to have lots of apartments.
Government couldn't build a Jenga tower, they are the wrong tools for the job. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 08:14:00 |
| 23 | The government used to build apartments, maybe the should resume doing so? tygertung - 2021-03-30 11:34:00 |
| 24 | mkr_ahearn wrote:
build? the neighbour has to wait for at least a month just to get the pailings for the fence he is building. He is going to the wrong merchant, plenty of palings here. ebygum1 - 2021-03-30 12:03:00 |
| 25 | domy2010 wrote:
I think market rent it part of the problem, if we have supply and demand issues, then the market rent is pushing out an increasing number of people into emergency housing... As time goes on, I'm not sure if something as important as housing should be seen as a business, which is driven from the market... its failing in a massive way right now. Caps on rent index to income for social housing, but what about outside of this? Agree that built to rent may be more for those on higher incomes, who don't attend to own a house. Unlikely to be directly beneficial for those on low incomes. Caps on rent discourages building for rental purposes so further exacerbates the problem. |
| 26 | apollo11 wrote:
Government couldn't build a Jenga tower, they are the wrong tools for the job. This. They proved that with kiwibuild. 9 years in the planning and they couldn't even get the basics right. Anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge of the building industry could see it was never going to work |
| 27 | loose.unit8 wrote:
This. They proved that with kiwibuild. 9 years in the planning and they couldn't even get the basics right. Anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge of the building industry could see it was never going to work No, the government wasn't building them on kiwibuild, they had contractors doing it. those contractors wanted to make a profit (reasonably). Maybe the kiwibuild needs to directly employ builders, electricians etc so no profit margin is required. And rectangular houses. Rectangular apartments. tygertung - 2021-03-30 13:29:00 |
| 28 | tygertung wrote:
No, the government wasn't building them on kiwibuild, they had contractors doing it. those contractors wanted to make a profit (reasonably). Maybe the kiwibuild needs to directly employ builders, electricians etc so no profit margin is required. And rectangular houses. Rectangular apartments. The government should streamline the consenting process for standard house builds and take the responsibility away from councils. They should invest in infrastructure and take out loans for this work, as it is bonkers to force the upfront cost of infrastructure onto the developers, when the infrastructure will benefit future generations too.
The easiest way to stop house price rises is to quell demand. Immigration needs to be kept to a minimum until the construction industry has a chance to ramp up supply. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 13:44:00 |
| 29 | apollo11 wrote:
The only way I can profiteer by selling my house in this environment is to join the queues of the homeless. I'd need to buy another house, so no gains realised.
Talking to a mate last night over a beer, he has just received his share of divorce assets and is desperate to get the money out of his bank account and into a property. He is worried that inflation will start to gobble the lot. There isn't a lot out there that he can afford though. And that is an issue - IMO one of the groups of people who will be disadvantaged the most will be those suffering relationship break-ups unless there is something to protect their interests from this tax grab. The 2 most worrying scenarios are 1. If one party sells to the other party as part of the financial settlement and 2. If one party moves out of the home due to the relationship breakdown (hence it is not longer their 'main home') and the settlement is a long, drawn out process (as relationship settlement things can easily become). |
| 30 | apollo11 wrote:
The government should streamline the consenting process for standard house builds and take the responsibility away from councils. They should invest in infrastructure and take out loans for this work, as it is bonkers to force the upfront cost of infrastructure onto the developers, when the infrastructure will benefit future generations too.
The easiest way to stop house price rises is to quell demand. Immigration needs to be kept to a minimum until the construction industry has a chance to ramp up supply. Well, by default isn't this Covid environment keeping immigration to a minimum??? Isn't making much of a dent in the 'housing crisis' tho is it. |
| 31 | apollo11 wrote:
The government should streamline the consenting process for standard house builds and take the responsibility away from councils. They should invest in infrastructure and take out loans for this work, as it is bonkers to force the upfront cost of infrastructure onto the developers, when the infrastructure will benefit future generations too.
The easiest way to stop house price rises is to quell demand. Immigration needs to be kept to a minimum until the construction industry has a chance to ramp up supply. Immigration has been at an absolute minimum for nearly a year and yet house price inflation is more rampant than ever due to government monetary policy and the reserve bank's low interest rates |
| 32 | gocontinental wrote:
Well, by default isn't this Covid environment keeping immigration to a minimum??? Isn't making much of a dent in the 'housing crisis' tho is it. Due to government monetary policy and low interest rates |
| 33 | gocontinental wrote:
Well, by default isn't this Covid environment keeping immigration to a minimum??? Isn't making much of a dent in the 'housing crisis' tho is it.
I meant moving forward, if population increase is limited, there will be a chance for the construction industry to get ahead of it. And I agree with you, imagine how much worse the housing shortage would have been if we had the same number of immigrants and tourists arriving as before covid. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 16:44:00 |
| 34 | loose.unit8 wrote:
Immigration has been at an absolute minimum for nearly a year and yet house price inflation is more rampant than ever due to government monetary policy and the reserve bank's low interest rates
Underlying it all is the supply and demand imbalance. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 16:45:00 |
| 35 | apollo11 wrote:
The government should streamline the consenting process for standard house builds and take the responsibility away from councils. They should invest in infrastructure and take out loans for this work, as it is bonkers to force the upfront cost of infrastructure onto the developers, when the infrastructure will benefit future generations too.
+1
funding councils via the housing market simply increases house prices.
councils need alternative funding and costs of consents etc should all be paid by govt.
this way councils don't imped construction. tweake - 2021-03-30 17:43:00 |
| 36 | apollo11 wrote:
Underlying it all is the supply and demand imbalance. with the added twist that the home owners can manipulate the demand in their favor. they know how to play the game.
this is why we need to get rid of the game. tweake - 2021-03-30 17:48:00 |
| 37 | apollo11 wrote:
Underlying it all is the supply and demand imbalance. Where is the demand coming from if immigration is at 1% of normal? Or are you suggesting supply is being restricted? |
| 38 | tweake wrote:
with the added twist that the home owners can manipulate the demand in their favor. ... lol please explain this because this makes no sense to me Edited by loose.unit8 at 6:15 pm, Tue 30 Mar |
| 39 | loose.unit8 wrote:
Where is the demand coming from if immigration is at 1% of normal? Or are you suggesting supply is being restricted?
Not sure. FOMO perhaps? Pent up demand from the last several years?
The house construction sector would appear to be at capacity in a lot of areas. Local quarries can't keep up, builders booked up two years in advance etc. Edited by apollo11 at 6:33 pm, Tue 30 Mar apollo11 - 2021-03-30 18:30:00 |
| 40 | loose.unit8 wrote:
lol please explain this because this makes no sense to me
you can simply play the market.
if people sit and wait, demand increases as there is a population increase. you can simply wait out low prices until demand pushes prices up to what you want.
these days you can do that en mass which dictates prices. another way to put it, people know that because they don't build a new home, it will push their existing house price up, so instead of spending more money, they can make more money. tweake - 2021-03-30 20:29:00 |
| 41 | loose.unit8 wrote:
Where is the demand coming from if immigration is at 1% of normal? Or are you suggesting supply is being restricted?
still plenty of kiwis coming back. but i suspect many are buying a 2nd home. money is worthless in the bank and housing is normally a safe bet. interest rates are low. tweake - 2021-03-30 20:33:00 |
| 42 | tweake wrote:
you can simply play the market.
if people sit and wait, demand increases as there is a population increase. you can simply wait out low prices until demand pushes prices up to what you want.
these days you can do that en mass which dictates prices. another way to put it, people know that because they don't build a new home, it will push their existing house price up, so instead of spending more money, they can make more money.
If you only have your primary residence to sell then you are either joining the homeless in a motel or selling and buying in the same market, so not likely to see a financial windfall. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 20:41:00 |
| 43 | apollo11 wrote:
If you only have your primary residence to sell then you are either joining the homeless in a motel or selling and buying in the same market, so not likely to see a financial windfall.
thats not the whole story. you left off "or shifting area or demographic."
eg sell the big auckland home to retire in a cheap country town or sea side bach.
or sell and move to the "next big thing" area.
its still playing the game. nz average length of home ownership is not very long. people move around a lot, "climbing the ladder". so its not just investors playing the game, its everyone. tweake - 2021-03-30 21:29:00 |
| 44 | tweake wrote:
thats not the whole story. you left off "or shifting area or demographic."
eg sell the big auckland home to retire in a cheap country town or sea side bach.
or sell and move to the "next big thing" area.
its still playing the game. nz average length of home ownership is not very long. people move around a lot, "climbing the ladder". so its not just investors playing the game, its everyone.
But people would still get the advantage of moving from a wealthy area to a less expensive area even without price rises. You can move from a big house to a smaller house with a similar result. You are losing amenity in both cases.
It usually happens the other way, people sell and move up, never managing to shrug off the mortgage noose around their neck. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 21:38:00 |
| 45 | apollo11 wrote:
Not sure. FOMO perhaps? Pent up demand from the last several years?
The house construction sector would appear to be at capacity in a lot of areas. Local quarries can't keep up, builders booked up two years in advance etc. Fomo and cheap money. lakeview3 - 2021-03-30 21:40:00 |
| 46 | I'd be overjoyed if all property returned to around 3x average household income, and I'm sure most home owners would feel the same. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 21:41:00 |
| 47 | tweake wrote:
thats not the whole story. you left off "or shifting area or demographic."
eg sell the big auckland home to retire in a cheap country town or sea side bach.
or sell and move to the "next big thing" area.
its still playing the game. nz average length of home ownership is not very long. people move around a lot, "climbing the ladder". so its not just investors playing the game, its everyone. yes retiring to the regions and our hospitals are struggling to cope with the influx of ex Auckland retirees. Edited by lakeview3 at 9:41 pm, Tue 30 Mar lakeview3 - 2021-03-30 21:41:00 |
| 48 | apollo11 wrote:
I'd be overjoyed if all property returned to around 3x average household income, and I'm sure most home owners would feel the same. same here. The whole thing is so out of hand. Why can’t they just free up some more land for a start? We have so much land around here and if it could be subdivided (and I am talking not one big subdivision but bits here and there) so as not to put immediate pressure on infrastructure. There just doesn’t seem to be any planning and greed and overpaid council managers are slowing down any meaningful progress. Edited by lakeview3 at 9:50 pm, Tue 30 Mar lakeview3 - 2021-03-30 21:45:00 |
| 49 | And there is the feeling that even though the numbers are going up, the actual money you might get for your house is increasingly dwindling in value. Solid assets are the best place to be in this sort of financial turmoil and I think people realise this. apollo11 - 2021-03-30 21:56:00 |
| 50 | apollo11 wrote:
Not sure. FOMO perhaps? Pent up demand from the last several years?
The house construction sector would appear to be at capacity in a lot of areas. Local quarries can't keep up, builders booked up two years in advance etc. Perhaps pent up demand but why now? Builders have been at capacity for ages. Years Edited by loose.unit8 at 9:59 pm, Tue 30 Mar |
