Barfoot and Thompson's September sales already ahead of last summer's peak

When you cant pay the principal the interest rate becomes irrelevant!

I think you comments re boomers are stupid. Who the F are these boomers you are talking about?
Do they all vote in unison for the same party as you suggest?
Do they all own property that have made huge gains?
In your mind have the taken something that was owed to you?
Are they older people who have worked hard and you are envious of as you are part of the I want it now group of people?

Just check any house that is been sold in Auckland, most are going at premium.

Had commented in orther article that a FHB bought a house in goodwood hieght in March with pocession in May for 820000, did renovation of 30000 and situation changed so had to sell and feteched 1060000 AND this is not cherry picking.

Another colleague of mine loking for house in and near Pakuranga area and house that were earlier going in high 800s to mid 900s are going for million to 1.2million and is a fact. Check any house and ask RE agent and will be high (earlier was abour 10% below tonear around RV and now is 10% to 30% above RV mostly).

Also noticed another trend that many existing mum and dad house owners are using the equity to buy another house in area like manurewa and mangere where rent is good and covers mortage in such low interest environment as a result even houses in those area are also up by 20% to 30% in those area as RE agents are showing potential of future development.

Not to forget FOMO which is at peak and rightly so as people who bought as late as january/march have doubled their deposit and are richer-though on paper but richer.

Will it continue, have doubts but are having doubts since few years so have to admit that come what may now government has no choice but to support the ponzi for any correction, specially now will be disaster forr many have borrowed to maximjm that a sneexe and will drown.

Now housing market is really like any ponzi scheme that it has to continue or will fall tottaly.

A RE Agent may have told him?

Keep an eye on this one
https://www.trademe.co.nz/property/residential-property-for-sale/auctio…

It sold for $935k in April after passing in. I have no knowledge of the property and if there is any issues with it

As for Tax Policy, TOP does not have any real ideas. They are proposing a UBI that will cost about $52b. They propose to raise everyone's tax to a flat 33% which will increase government income from personal income tax to $52 from the current $38b (so increasing total tax by $14b).Well, that figure is incorrect because TOPs says that their UBI will either replace or reduce other social welfare payments that are actually subject to tax, while UBI is not. So if UBI reduces total social welfare by $20b, then the corresponding tax will reduce by 20b* 33%= $7b. So they will actually have $7b ($14-$7) more in taxation from this source.

They also propose to tax all NZ assets at 3% deemed rate. NZ total net wealth was $1,367b (Source: NZ Stats), at a 3% deemed income rate, there will be an imaginary income of $41b which at 33% will produce $13b for them as an absolute maximum. I will say why they are very unlikely to raise even a remotely close to this figure in my next comment. but for the sake of argument, lets say they will raise a total additional income (a very generous and optimistic estimate) of $20b ($7b from income tax, $13b from wealth tax) to cover the $52b UBI.

They say that UBI will replace some of the existing welfare, but do not give details of what is replaced with what. For example, will UBI replace super? will it reduce super? will it replace other social benefits? So without them giving details, it is not possible to know the reduction in actual expenditure if UBI is introduced. But lets be generous and say that UBI will reduce the social welfare from the current $34b by 60% to $14b ( a big assumption off course). That mean they are short by $12b under a very optimistic scenario.

I think that TOP leaders do not believe in their proposals, as they do not even bother to cost them in details to show how they will work.

Now, I clearly remember TOP attacking Greens wealth tax (1% of wealth over $1m i suppose), where they are proposing to do exactly that without the $1m cap! they say they will assume all assets will have a deemed return of 3% which they will tax at 33%: that is 1% of the net wealth: exactaly what Greens propose, but harsher as they have 0 threshold where Greens have a $1m threshold.
Also, it is simply ridiculous to tax asset that are being used to generate income at deemed rate. A rental house real income is the rent it gets. If you are going to tax a rental property at 3% of its estimated value, then you should surely not tax its rental income. If you are going to tax value of shares in a company based on their valuation (god knows how they are going to value companies, and almost 50% of NZ total net wealth is shares in companies), how can you justify taxing the company's income? if your argument is that a company's economic income is its realized income plus unrealized capital gains (as TOPS argues) then surely you cannot justify taxing it twice.
Their policy is both unfair (double taxing everything) and impractical (how they are going to value privately held equity for taxation?)

Alright, if you want to talk about recession.... S&P 500 is up 33.8% in the past 6 months "in a recession, with unemployment going up and still fighting a pandemic".
By the way, unemployment is up at record levels in the US (where S&P500 companies are based), whereas in NZ unemployment actually went down during the lockdown.

> It's clear that the NZ housing bubble will never be allowed to pop.

Indeed, this became apparent to us last year, which is why we bought. As they say, don't fight the Fed (or the RBNZ in our case).
Still think that the market is well departed from its real fundamentals, and certainly have some apprehension about the reality of all the Covid effects emerging in the next 6 months, but so far so good, 2 fairly secure incomes, and a good wodge of emergency cash in the bank should see us right.

Head in sand, she'll be right, incedibly mOrronic. Who put the fat kid in charge of the tuck shop?

That's supposed to be a secret. Should not be written or spoken to anyone about.

I'm picking 50 year mortgages to 'promote home ownership' and 'make it easier for FHBs to get on the ladder'. Then 100 year.

Bread and water diet lol

if you want credit growth (even more debt than now), then you have to have wage growth more than CPI.

Where does that leave us JC in your view?

Good luck with that. haha

Not to worry more stimulus as needed or economy may shut

House Democrats Pass $2.2 Trillion Stimulus Republicans Reject ["https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-02/house-democrats-pass…"]

Well, here is the official YouTube video from the RBNZ no less:

https://youtu.be/Elqmiah_uxc

I guess it doesn't make a lot of difference to me. Deposit interest rates go down but then rental profit goes up as I have mortgages. I just think they are overdoing it a bit unless there is something I don't understand. Maybe it helps businesses more than we think and our housing issues are just a sideshow in the overall big picture.

The writing was on the wall before he took the reigns. This has been decades in the making and central banks are backed so far into the corner now that their only option is to start chewing at the walls.

Only on Interest Only.

No, not on P&I. Your payments are 70% higher on $1m @ 1.25% than on $500k @ 2.5%.