When I was a student in Welly I lived in some total hovels. I even lived in a converted shed for a while. But they were cheap! Not sure how easy it is for students in Welly now, all of those dodgy flats in Te Aro probably got pink stickered lol.

apollo11 - 2021-03-26 01:11:00

Please sign this petition to show your support to reverse decision to remove tax deductibility of interest for landlords, please let as many people know as you can. link is here:

https://www.change.org/p/new-zealand-government-reverse-deci
sion-to-remove-tax-deductibility-of-interest-for-landlords?c
s_tk=AgS088gR7ik4MikCX2AAAXicyyvNyQEABF8BvPSjGM6_trP2c7mpHF8
Cab0%3D&utm_campaign=3c57ac6cdb28424a836c241993263ba4&am
p;utm_content=initial_v0_0_1&utm_medium=email&utm_so
urce=recruit_sign_digest&utm_term=cs

smallbird - 2021-03-26 10:21:00

Hazelnut2, yes those 5 and 4 bedroom homes were subdivided into separate flats, each bedroom in one villa. And in Auckland, Newmarket, a three-bedroom house divided into two flats, one the back that had the phone line and in the front, one bedroom that did not. In both cases, those houses went, in Newmarket for apartments and in Whangarei for town houses. The Newmarket one was right by the railway line.

Edited by kamo631 at 10:55 am, Fri 26 Mar

kamo631 - 2021-03-26 10:53:00

hydroplane wrote:

on top of building more homes we now need a 600 billion dollar upgrade of our electricity supply because the government are banning LPG and ICE car for EV
https://www.magic.co.nz/home/news/2021/03/is-a-fully-electri
c-energy-resourse-even-possible--physicist-mic.html

The worlds gone mad, we now by normalization of deviance are calling New Zealand a maori name - what the hell is going on.

You left out household gas. We have a gas hob, gas heating and gas hot water. Our barbecue is also hitched up to gas.

Government is also banning that.

princess52 - 2021-03-26 14:56:00

kamo631 wrote:

Hazelnut2, yes those 5 and 4 bedroom homes were subdivided into separate flats, each bedroom in one villa. And in Auckland, Newmarket, a three-bedroom house divided into two flats, one the back that had the phone line and in the front, one bedroom that did not. In both cases, those houses went, in Newmarket for apartments and in Whangarei for town houses. The Newmarket one was right by the railway line.

They weren’t all subdivided or divided into flats. None of the places I or my friends lived in were villas or bungalows which were split.

I started working as a Public Health Nurse in 1985. The nature of my work involved visiting families in the community. There were very few families I visited who owned their own homes. My area was Mt Albert. I did that job for 10 years.

Edited by princess52 at 3:00 pm, Fri 26 Mar

princess52 - 2021-03-26 15:00:00

This message was deleted.

puddleduck00 - 2021-03-26 15:00:00

puddleduck00 wrote:

I guess so is investing in banned chemical weapons or companies that use child labour, but it doesn't make it ethical.

For me the reality is that housing is not the same as another cafe or restaurant. Many countries have different regulations with housing, but even restaurants and cafes have their own regulations as well. You cannot say I don't give a toss, it leaks, there is no heating take it or leave it. Which some tenants may actually accept it.

You cannot run a public or private hospital the same as you can run a cafe, restaurant or a clothing store.

Edited by rayonline_tm at 3:54 pm, Fri 26 Mar

rayonline_tm - 2021-03-26 15:52:00

Well my mother was a solo mother and me a young child back 50 years ago and there were not that many three bedroom homes available in the 60s and 70s for rent. Sorry. My mother was a school teacher and some country schools offered three bedroom homes as part of the deal. But in Rotorua, I remember a bedsit we had, and in Hamilton a two bedroom unit. There were some houses available but not many. Remember to that back then the population was 3 million.

kamo631 - 2021-03-26 16:05:00

and back in 1985 that was high inflation and high-interest rates and Roger Douglas and the fourth labour government. when farmers had to get rid of their stock, and thousands of public servants lost their jobs around the country.

kamo631 - 2021-03-26 16:09:00

Back in the day. 3 bedroom homes were offered to government workers. Teachers were one and so were police and railway workers. The government used to own and offer to their employees. And the government may need to do that again to accommodate government workers.

Edited by kamo631 at 4:33 pm, Fri 26 Mar

kamo631 - 2021-03-26 16:32:00

Trade Me wrote:

The originally quoted post has been removed.

agreed.

I call it the war on demographics, the power block used to be the older and nouveau rich, and now the ‘others’ are pushing back and they don’t like it one bit. They should get used to it mind you, because they don’t hold the power any more.

Me, I could swing either way, but I am not a greedy or extravagant person so I am siding with the young ones on this one.

No one seems to have put the ‘value’ in our young people being able to afford to put their own roof over their heads and to be able to bring their kids up in a stable home environment that doesn’t include shifting around every year or two.

Edited by lakeview3 at 5:02 pm, Fri 26 Mar

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 17:01:00

lakeview3 wrote:

agreed.

I call it the war on demographics, the power block used to be the older and nouveau rich, and now the ‘others’ are pushing back and they don’t like it one bit. They should get used to it mind you, because they don’t hold the power any more.

Me, I could swing either way, but I am not a greedy or extravagant person so I am siding with the young ones on this one.

No one seems to have put the ‘value’ in our young people being able to afford to put their own roof over their heads and to be able to bring their kids up in a stable home environment that doesn’t include shifting around every year or two.

very well said , its like old people think the world is just for them

robertchestnut - 2021-03-26 18:24:00

lakeview3 wrote:

and we wouldn’t have needed socialism if some capitalists weren’t quite so greedy.

The power imbalance in New Zealand largely comes about from what happened after world war 2. People who got the farms got the best start out and their offspring continue to enjoy the good fortune of this to this day. This wealth also bought them big influence in the governments of the day and naturally they favoured policies that favoured them and their networks of acquaintances. (tthere are still hangovers of this today)

It’s such a shame. New Zealand used to be a much fairer place and people were generally happier, knowing if they worked hard they could still make a comfortable life for themselves. These days it’s just harder and harder because the laws have favoured those who had already got themselves a bit of a backing.

They didn't get 'Farms', some of them got 'blocks of land' that they had to develop, or loose it.
This ment clearing, developing & farming, on borrowed $$, employing others when they couldn't DIY. Essentially for their lifetime with no more reward than a person in a basic job, knowing that their children would be locked into the same situation too.
It's only in the last 30 years that they have been able to reap any rewards at all & those rewards are mostly from a younger generation borrowing big $$ to buy the developed land & turn it into dairy farms.
It's quite easy to find 70 year old farmers who have done nothing but work their land for less rewards than any 40hr week worker gets & often less than their own workers.

marte - 2021-03-26 18:55:00

marte wrote:

They didn't get 'Farms', some of them got 'blocks of land' that they had to develop, or loose it.
This ment clearing, developing & farming, on borrowed $$, employing others when they couldn't DIY. Essentially for their lifetime with no more reward than a person in a basic job, knowing that their children would be locked into the same situation too.
It's only in the last 30 years that they have been able to reap any rewards at all & those rewards are mostly from a younger generation borrowing big $$ to buy the developed land & turn it into dairy farms.
It's quite easy to find 70 year old farmers who have done nothing but work their land for less rewards than any 40hr week worker gets & often less than their own workers.

I didn’t say they didn’t work hard. I am sure many a young person these days would be happy to clear and work the land if they were also afforded the same opportunity. I know me and my husband would have.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 19:07:00

robertchestnut wrote:

very well said , its like old people think the world is just for them

yes and while they are busy pointing the finger and saying ‘look over there at them’ they are quickly starting to be seen as entitled people who complain too much and want everything for themselves at the expense of others. As I said previously greed is not a very pretty trait.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 19:09:00

The member deleted this message.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-26 19:36:00

lakeview3 wrote:

As I said previously greed is not a very pretty trait.

???? And as I keep repeating, boomer bashing is not a very pretty trait either...

lovelurking - 2021-03-26 19:40:00

This message was deleted.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-26 19:44:00

This message was deleted.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-26 19:47:00

This message was deleted.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-26 19:49:00

This message was deleted.

kittycatkin - 2021-03-26 20:03:00

lovelurking wrote:

???? And as I keep repeating, boomer bashing is not a very pretty trait either...

this too. It’s not as though those of us who are investors have had anything fall into our laps. We worked bl00dy hard. We had jobs and then we worked in our annual leave and weekends. We did without so we could set up our retirement

princess52 - 2021-03-26 20:13:00

lovelurking wrote:

???? And as I keep repeating, boomer bashing is not a very pretty trait either...

who mentioned boomer? Not me. I said older (which could include me) and nouveau rich (who could be any age group)

I mean if none of what I say doesn’t apply to you then why are you getting so worried about it?

The way some people are throwing all their toys out of the cot and the reasons why should really be quite embarrassing to them.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 20:13:00

kittycatkin wrote:

I don't see that as good use of taxpayer's money when one considers what the police et al are paid.

my husband was a cop. There were no free houses for us. I think there *may* have been some attached to one man/person stations. I know a lot of cops who moved to smaller places when their kids were little. I don’t know of any who had police houses. This is going back 30 - 55 years.

princess52 - 2021-03-26 20:16:00

princess52 wrote:

this too. It’s not as though those of us who are investors have had anything fall into our laps. We worked bl00dy hard. We had jobs and then we worked in our annual leave and weekends. We did without so we could set up our retirement

I refrained from commenting on your other post.

But I will say this, a person who doesn’t work should not be complaining about not being able to live on a pension they haven’t yet qualified for, especially while renting houses to people paying taxes to pay for said pension.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 20:16:00

lakeview3 wrote:

who mentioned boomer? Not me. I said older (which could include me) and nouveau rich (who could be any age group)

I mean if none of what I say doesn’t apply to you then why are you getting so worried about it?

The way some people are throwing all their toys out of the cot and the reasons why should really be quite embarrassing to them.

because one of the things you harp on about are those of superannuitant age.

princess52 - 2021-03-26 20:17:00

Your post # 215, first word was “yes”...

lovelurking - 2021-03-26 20:19:00

princess52 wrote:

because one of the things you harp on about are those of superannuitant age.

that’s how you read it. But that’s not you even is it?

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 20:20:00

lovelurking wrote:

Your post # 215, first word was “yes”...

OMG crime of the century! Yet you didn’t haul up the poster who said it? Gee anyone would think you had it in for me?

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 20:21:00

lakeview3 wrote:

OMG crime of the century! Yet you didn’t haul up the poster who said it? Gee anyone would think you had it in for me?

Perhaps the poster you were agreeing with doesn’t rave on about us every opportunity they can and isn’t as nasty about old people as you are?
I’ve not noticed them soapboxing on here. Your comments however were your usual vitriolic behaviour.

lovelurking - 2021-03-26 20:54:00

lovelurking wrote:

???? And as I keep repeating, boomer bashing is not a very pretty trait either...

I bet none of them turn down an inheritance from their 'rich' Boomer parents either.

kacy5 - 2021-03-26 21:07:00

lovelurking wrote:

Perhaps the poster you were agreeing with doesn’t rave on about us every opportunity they can and isn’t as nasty about old people as you are?
I’ve not noticed them soapboxing on here. Your comments however were your usual vitriolic behaviour.

sorry I can’t help it if you take it personally when I make a general statement. That’s all they are, generalisations. If they don’t apply to you then there’s no problem.

This country needs to have conversations about how inequality affects our youth. Sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable. I am all for young people having the same chances us older people have had. It’s not hating on anyone, it’s about being FAIR.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 21:10:00

kacy5 wrote:

I bet none of them turn down an inheritance from their 'rich' Boomer parents either.

Some people will never inherit anything. Shouldnt they have the same opportunity as anyone else?

BTW if that comment was supposed to be a dig at me, my parents aren’t boomers, they are older than that.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-26 21:16:00

There’s nothing fair about the tax laws. Too much politics and playing favourites. If only there was one law for all. But no.

pcle - 2021-03-26 21:17:00

lakeview3 wrote:

sorry I can’t help it if you take it personally when I make a general statement. That’s all they are, generalisations. If they don’t apply to you then there’s no problem.

This country needs to have conversations about how inequality affects our youth. Sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable. I am all for young people having the same chances us older people have had. It’s not hating on anyone, it’s about being FAIR.

Oh, come on, give us a break!
Things are much fairer these days. My Mother divorced my Father in 1970. No child maintenance, no Government handouts and she had to work in a mans job ( truck driving ) because there was no equal pay or minimum wage back then either.
The differences between then and now is that back then there were no support systems for solo parents, back then we weren’t eating and drinking shitty processed foods, obesity wasn’t running rampant in New Zealand and we recycled everything... Stop blaming us, tell the kids of today to get off your RRRRs and tell them they are lucky they weren’t around in my grandparents day when they had no electricity or flush toilets.

lovelurking - 2021-03-26 21:35:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I refrained from commenting on your other post.

But I will say this, a person who doesn’t work should not be complaining about not being able to live on a pension they haven’t yet qualified for, especially while renting houses to people paying taxes to pay for said pension.

Why do you think I’m harping on about a pension? I don’t qualify on age but my husband has been of pension age for 6 years. I said the pension wasn’t enough to live on IMO. I’m not complaining about that because we are not/will not be dependent on a pension.

I said we invested so we didn’t have to worry about our retirement. And we pay a shedload of tax on our income. So I’m not sure why your post says “tenants paying tax”. We pay too.

And I joined both of us up to KiwiSaver in 2009

Edited by princess52 at 9:55 pm, Fri 26 Mar

princess52 - 2021-03-26 21:51:00

lakeview3 wrote:

yes and while they are busy pointing the finger and saying ‘look over there at them’ they are quickly starting to be seen as entitled people who complain too much and want everything for themselves at the expense of others. As I said previously greed is not a very pretty trait.

the wealthy don't have time to complain, they are too busy making money and enjoying life to the fullest. if you care what other people do and how they make their money, that's not a very good trait.

toenail - 2021-03-26 22:05:00

princess52 wrote:

this too. It’s not as though those of us who are investors have had anything fall into our laps. We worked bl00dy hard. We had jobs and then we worked in our annual leave and weekends. We did without so we could set up our retirement

But how many rentals do you need to supplement your retirement? A guy I met today who works full time as does his wife and looks to be about or near retirement age has 6 mortgage free rentals in Auckland so minimum $500pw rent each. It'll be like winning Lotto if/when he sells them all.

mazalinas - 2021-03-26 22:18:00

I'm a tennant and I'm worried about my rent going up. First of all we had a heat pump installed which we didn't want, and I would bet that the Landlord didn't want, then extracter fans,(gen less my eye) the only people that wanted it were not involved in the tenancey agreement and they didn't have to pay for it, and hypocritically they gave themselves more time to comply than anyone else. Now this craziness. I am a business owner any if I borrow money for anything else related to the business the interest paymets anre tax deductable. If I wanted I could buy a house but at this stage it would take up too much of my capitol and the grants they are offering are crubms and subject to all sorts of things. If my rent goes up my income will have to go up or I'll be worse off, it will go up by putting my prices up or cutting expeces there by reducing someone else business income a little bit. There are no winners in this. Wathc the landlords sell up and sink all the money in muilti million dollar family homes. The people they are trying to help will end up paying for this.

Edited by curlcrown at 10:24 pm, Fri 26 Mar

curlcrown - 2021-03-26 22:22:00

lovelurking wrote:

.....My Mother divorced my Father in 1970. No child maintenance, no Government handouts and she had to work in a mans job ( truck driving ) because there was no equal pay or minimum wage back then either.
The differences between then and now is that back then there were no support systems for solo parents......

My mother separated from our father and raised 6 kids in the 60s and beyond and was afforded plenty of support from the government by way of a Family benefit and a State Advances home. We drank Fanta, ate biscuits and had lollies, and fish and chips on Fridays. We were given male teachers to compensate and life was great. I don't remember going hungry at all as in our case, solo parents were looked after in the 60s. And thank goodness :-)

mazalinas - 2021-03-26 22:28:00

mazalinas wrote:

But how many rentals do you need to supplement your retirement? A guy I met today who works full time as does his wife and looks to be about or near retirement age has 6 mortgage free rentals in Auckland so minimum $500pw rent each. It'll be like winning Lotto if/when he sells them all.

it depends what your plans are for retirement. I want to travel a lot. So I need enough money to do that.

The people with 6 rentals have to pay for rates, insurance, tax and maintenance costs. So they won’t get anywhere near the $500 per property per week.

princess52 - 2021-03-26 23:37:00

Those that think they cant will be 100% correct. Those that think they can will be 100% correct. Mentors favour the latter while moaners blame everyone else. Capitalism, socialism, communism, suppose that is voting time.

market1 - 2021-03-26 23:40:00

kittycatkin wrote:

Some of the 'farms' were such poor land that no amount of backbreaking (heartbreaking) work could make them pay.

The history of the land beyond The Bridge to Nowhere makes sad reading. The farmers couldn't make a living on the land there, the soil was poor and unsuitable. They had to walk away and soon the bush claimed the land back.

Interested if this was the land that was offered to veterans from the wars.. I have an old diary from one of these and they mention having to make payments for land they had to walk away from being it was unproductive land

karlymouse - 2021-03-27 00:12:00

curlcrown wrote:

I'm a tennant and I'm worried about my rent going up. First of all we had a heat pump installed which we didn't want, and I would bet that the Landlord didn't want, then extracter fans,(gen less my eye) the only people that wanted it were not involved in the tenancey agreement and they didn't have to pay for it, and hypocritically they gave themselves more time to comply than anyone else. Now this craziness. I am a business owner any if I borrow money for anything else related to the business the interest paymets anre tax deductable. If I wanted I could buy a house but at this stage it would take up too much of my capitol and the grants they are offering are crubms and subject to all sorts of things. If my rent goes up my income will have to go up or I'll be worse off, it will go up by putting my prices up or cutting expeces there by reducing someone else business income a little bit. There are no winners in this. Wathc the landlords sell up and sink all the money in muilti million dollar family homes. The people they are trying to help will end up paying for this.

Re the heat pump - I assume your concerns are that the extra expense will be passed on to you, the tenant? Because obviously whilst it's there, you're under no obligation to use it.
Regarding interest deductibility: it seems legitimate to me to allow it given it is allowed in other businesses. Essentially then, it's a tax increase. They have done a similar thing in the UK except I think you're allowed to claim 20% of the interest cost. So perhaps it will have the effect of removing the incentive to invest in residential? Or perhaps it will have the effect of pushing rent up? The market will decide I suppose. If this has a serious negative effect then can you expect it to go at a change of government?

webstereo - 2021-03-27 06:08:00

Will this extra tax be applied to HNZ rentals as well? They are the biggest landlords.

pcle - 2021-03-27 06:31:00

masturbidder wrote:

This is a business, not a charity.
'Market rents' are the income needed to provide and maintain the service, and make investment worthwhile.
Anyone losing money is not running a business properly, and under-cutting those who are.

I hate people like you.

bit - 2021-03-27 07:40:00

market1 wrote:

Time the government housed all the about to become homeless.

Probably just what they want. People not only dependent on the government for their income, but for the roof over their head as well. "Do what we say or you will not get your benefit and you will not be able to live in our house either" (I'm referring to the new member of the National Party, ex CEO of Air New Zealand, who would cut benefits of people who don't get their kids vaccinated.)

bit - 2021-03-27 07:52:00

puddleduck00 wrote:

I agree with CGT and taking away the ability to offset your gross profit with mortgage interest. If you want to gobble up property by using your borrowing capacity/equity and push housing out of reach for people who work hard and save hard to own a home, then it serves you right.

Save up yourself and buy property outright. Build new homes instead of taking existing ones. Start a business and make some productive income. Actually contribute something to society rather than taking from it.

Buying up existing houses and renting them out is not a business. Profiting off inflation that you, yourself have caused is not a business. It's society subsidising your profits.

You're quite judgemental. I bought my rental because I could see it was sitting empty for an extended length of time while people were crying out for a home to live in.

bit - 2021-03-27 07:56:00

pcle wrote:

Will this extra tax be applied to HNZ rentals as well? They are the biggest landlords.

Good point, and also the biggest borrowers for housing. But to answer your question - hahahahaha!

artemis - 2021-03-27 08:23:00

curlcrown wrote:

... . The people they are trying to help will end up paying for this.

Good post, and agree with you. But you know, we voters clearly wanted all these changes, and there are many more than you mentioned, all carrying costs, extra compliance and risks. Paid for by tenants of course.

You don't need to worry though because Finance Minister
Robertson said you can just look elsewhere for a place to live. There's this nice motel, soz about the neighbours. All good then.

artemis - 2021-03-27 08:30:00