Editors choice comments
What didn't happen today:
1. First time in living memory no major property story on a Thursday - I got some work done for a change
2. Two months have passed and still no progress report on the Auckland Housing Accord. Must be embarrassing if it takes two months to work up some spin.
I do have a view. The short answer is "no", The slightly longer version is here. http://croakingcassandra.com/2015/05/28/what-can-the-reserve-bank-do-abo...
by: michael reddell
Who is this Andrew Dean anyway? Bill English has talked to allot of young people and none of them are worried about superannuation. Get with the program.
Not too sure this will happen. There are people out there including first home buyers who are willing to borrow large amounts of money because they think they are missing out on something. It's funny how people think paying interest to a bank is different from paying rent to a landlord. I do not see any distinction between the two. In fact it can be cheaper to pay rent when landlords are only getting a 2 to 3% return. If property values drop in Auckland there will be a few people wishing they had waited for it to happen. Especially if they have borrowed around the $800 to $900k as reported.
Government superannuation comes out of the current account, paid for by current taxpayers. The money has not been set aside. When payments do reach 8% of GDP as the main cohort of baby boomers retire, the government of the day will be forced to means test. There will be no Goverment Super when subsequent generations retire.
That's a common misconception. The baby boomer generation haven't paid for their superannuation. The governments of that period spent every cent on things like a generous welfare state, free tertiary education, healthcare, universal student allowances etc. None of that money was put aside to fund future superannuation costs. Given that we are now cutting or have cut many of these things wholesale as they are unaffordable, young people have good reason to ask why we are not also cutting superannuation.
Superannuitants are beneficiaries like any other. We should treat their benefits in the...by: ballsmrspeaker
A lot of young people I talk to believe Super will not exist by the time they reach retirement. They are completely cynical about it.
In fact many of them are completely cynical about government, democracy, NZ......
It is all part of the gradual "Loss of Hope" that the young have in many countries.
When talking to my mates up in Auck first home buyers are regularly carrying 700-900k mortgages. They are earning in excess of 100k. In wgtn first home buyers carrying 300-500k mortgages and earning the same. Something smells wrong with this.
by: Tane Mahuta
How dare Labour consider denying me my birthright to Naional super. How else do they expect me and the wife to fund our annual three month European tour? What with the golf club subs and her in laws' weekly coiffure we can hardly rub two pennies together at the end of the fortnight. We'll only be claiming for 20 odd years anyway if the actuaries have their sums right. Hardly long enough to make up for all those years we paid our taxes. Meanwhile the bleating younger generation are off to the shops to buy their latest smartphones and flatscreen TVs, blah blah...
.. if I consume more Gummy Bears than they can extract from the Gummibar Mines , the price goes up ....
Why is oil different ?
... we aren't consuming enough oil are we ... huh ! ... I'm right aren't I .... yupppppppp ......
by: Gummy Bear Hero
Good work Labour. As a young person lucky enough to be in a sound position financially (although missing this housing boom!) I think that we should have to provide for ourselves in retirement. It should just be a safety net for the hard up, or maybe bottom 60% of the population. $300 a week makes no difference to a weathly retiree.
.. a great pity that the government(s) totally ignore the tax working papers which have been presented to them over the years ... papers which the current and the previous government each instigated ...
We would now have a comprehensive land tax .... and consequently have less need to borrow off-shore ... infrastructure projects could be easily internally funded ...
... the idle rich and speculators would have had a little of the fat trimmed from their ample portfolios ... absentee owners , moguls , Chinese chaps , Hollywood stars , Dotcoms of every colour ... all would pay their proportion...by: Gummy Bear Hero
Demographics are going to stop meaningful change to the existing state pension scheme. Unless the country goes broke, then we are going to be sticking to what we got. It will be a political hot potato best not mentioned, especially in an election year.
Re. #4. So even though
a) The baby boomers are retiring and becoming net sellers of property according to Harry Dents predictions of doom gloom.
b) House price to income ratios are a staggering 10 to 11x
c) Gross rental yields are going below 3%
d) We're 6, perhaps 13 years into the most aggressive interest rate driven housing boom cycle in New Zealands history.
e) Wage growth is virtually absent and commodity prices are static if not deflating.
f) The Auckland market is being propped up by multi-decade record high net immigration.
Even in spite of all of that risk, gen X and Y Aucklanders...by: fat pat
Re number 6 - quite a dramatic visual representation of what the effect of the new LVR policy is - thanks BH. The banks will be falling over themselves to lend to anyone with 30%+ equity. There are actually quite a few investors out there that fall into this camp. I think they may have a field day.
by: Robert Meek
Yes. First one going up for auction next month. Yield was 2.5% gross on estimated market value. (I shouldn't really be talking the market down, but home buyers aren't exactly going to be listening to doomers on here! And who knows I could be wrong - we did sell a nice double grammar Epsom bungalow for only a bit over $900k 3 years ago which obviously was a bit of a mistake...a unit in that street went for almost that recently...)
This idiocy of burgeoning growth has to stop somewhere, Auckland can't cope with another million, what do they plan to do for drinking water, draw more out of the Waikato? What do they plan to do with all the extra waste? Will rates increases force the subdivision of some of the best growing land in the country - the Bombays?
I think we need to have the how many people talk, and why, frankly.
Stop importing people its just a ponzi scheme and stop foreigners buying houses and land, if all those empty houses were presently occupied, what's the bet we wouldn't have anywhere near the shortage of...by: don'tgetmegoing
but that would deflate the bubble... the Nat's don't want to deflate the bubble and hurt their paymasters, they just want to be seen to be doing something. Hence all the latest flap and noise re-hashing existing rules.
You just don't get it.
Oh yay more houses for the foreigners to buy as that is exactly what will happen to them, quite possibly, the bulk of them. Foreigners will hoover them up, then they'll rent them back to people who can't afford the rental on their wages, so the landlord will be able to pick up welfare disguised as accommodation supplements to their tenants.
We are idiots.
And again, I will call for residential housing to be removed from the Investor category for prospective immigrants, and then moving on from that I will continue to call for a ban on foreigners owning land in this country.
Being a Building Consenting Authority is a terrible job. The government keeps the best bits for itself so the BCA's end up with all sorts of liabilities in return for SFA revenue. Councils wouldn't do it either if they weren't forced to by law.
Seriously the monopoly isn't statutory - anyone can register as a BCA today, has been able to for the last 24 years - it's just that no-one else wants to do it.