UMR poll finds 60% of Aucklanders over 18 would prefer house prices fell a bit or dramatically; 63% of NZers want lower house prices; 55% of home owners would like lower prices; 85% of Aucklanders see housing crisis

UMR poll finds 60% of Aucklanders over 18 would prefer house prices fell a bit or dramatically; 63% of NZers want lower house prices; 55% of home owners would like lower prices; 85% of Aucklanders see housing crisis

By Bernard Hickey

In news that counters assumptions about home owners opposing falling house prices, an opinion poll conducted by UMR has found 60% of Aucklanders and 55% of home owners would prefer that house prices either fell a bit or fell dramatically over the next year.

The poll of 1,000 New Zealanders over the age of 18 was taken from July 29 to August 17 through UMR's online omnibus survey and found a total of 63% who would either prefer house prices to 'fall but not too much' (37%) or to fall dramatically (26%).

UMR, which conducts polls for the Labour Party, found 55% of home owners would prefer house prices to fall a bit (40%) or dramatically (15%).

The poll found 14% of respondents preferred house prices either kept rising rapidly (4%) or at a slower pace (14%), while 17% of Aucklanders wanted house prices to keep rising rapidly (4%) or at a slower pace (13%). A total of 15% of home owners wanted house prices to rise rapidly (2%) or at a slower pace (13%). There were 633 home owners and 331 Aucklanders in the poll of 1,000 respondents.

The poll also asked if there was a housing crisis at the moment and found that 81% of all respondents and 85% of Aucklanders thought there was a crisis, while 79% of home owners thought there was housing crisis. Fourteen per cent of those polled thought there was no crisis and 5% were unsure.

The Arthur Grimes Test

The topic of whether voters oppose falling or even sharply lower house prices has come into focus in recent months after Arthur Grimes challenged politicians to pursue policies that built 150,000 houses in six years to cause a 40% fall in house prices in Auckland. The political calculus of falling house prices was that voters would be opposed to falling house prices. See my July 10 column on this.

Prime Minister John Key said at the time that deliberately causing a 40% fall in house prices was "crazy."

"Go and ask the average Aucklander who has got a mortgage with the bank whether they want see 40% of their equity disappear on a sort of notion from an economist that you're gonna crash the market," he said.

"It would also leave an enormous number of people who have just entered into the market with huge losses," he said.

"I suspect it would put enormous pressure on developers, that could put pressure on some of the banks."

Turei vs Key over house price deflation

Opposition leader Andrew Little has also dismissed the idea of falling house prices.

However, Green Co-Leader Metiria Turei said in this Morning Report interview on July 26 that a house price to income multiple of three to four should be targeted, which would imply a 50% house price fall if it were to be achieved overnight without any income increase.

In what was clearly a deliberate move, she answered "yes" when asked the direct question about whether she wanted house prices to fall outright.

"What we don't want is people getting into trouble with their mortgages, that is absolutely what we don't want," Turei said.

She pointed to the Auckland Council's strategic goal, articulated by its then Chief Economist Chris Parker, of aiming to reduce Auckland's house price to income multiple to five (from over nine currently) by 2030.

'War on the poor'

Key has since targeted her comments in Parliament (see video above), saying she was launching a 'war on the poor'.

"What I do not support is the hard-working young couple who go out and buy a house, who borrow money against the equity that they have put down, only to see that house price halve," Key said last Wednesday in Parliament in answer to a question from Turei.

"That member has launched a war on the poor. She is saying to the poorest New Zealanders who are borrowing money against their property that she wants to see them owing the bank more than their house is worth. I think there is a reason why the Greens' numbers are tumbling, and that is because people can see that," Key said.

'Grain of salt'

Key told a post-cabinet news conference he took the survey results with a grain of salt.

"If you don't own a house, I'm sure you want to house prices to fall. If you do own a house it would depend on what you mean by a 'bit'," he said.

"I don't think there's any public appetite from home owners to see a substantial reduction in house prices," he said.

"There might be from those who don't own a house obviously, but the sorts of numbers that Metiria Turei's been talking about of a 50% reduction -- would have a very significant impact on the least well off New Zealanders who typically borrow the most. I can't see why they would want that policy."

Turei said the poll showed most New Zealanders understood that rising house prices had driven families out of the market, regardless of whether they were directly affected or not.

She said a comprehensive plan to return house price to income multiples to around 3-4 was needed, with slow house price deflation and rising wages, rather than a damaging bust with much sharper declines.

"If there is to be a correction it needs to be carefully managed over a reasonable period of time and that means both house prices falling and wages rising in order to get to a better proportion between median income and house prices. That can only happen with a planned approach," she said.

She rejected Key's 'war on the poor' comments.

"I'd like to know how many poor people he knows who owns NZ$1 million homes, and how many poor people National has thrown out of their state houses and who are now living in garages and cars. It's a dirty thing to say and it belies the fact that most New Zealanders know the housing crisis is in full swing and that its bad for them and their community, and they want someone to show real leadership on it and National is failing every day," she said.

"They won't accept there is a crisis and they won't put in place plans to help correct the market so that people don't suffer. If there is a housing crash, people will be hurt and the role of Government is to manage the economy to avoid the consequences of that. If there's not a plan to bring wages up and house prices down slowly over 5-10 year then a crash could happen at any time. Those are the two choices we have. At some point there'll be a crash unless there is careful planning to manage the housing crisis we have."

(Updated with comments from Key and Turei)

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.


Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

She is saying to the poorest New Zealanders who are borrowing money against their property that she wants to see them owing the bank more than their house is worth

John Key, the poor people' best friend. Who would have imagined?

If they were able to borrow money to purchase a house in this market they are not the poorest New Zealanders, maybe the dumbest?, but they certainly had money to gamble and put into an overheated market believing that tomorrow it will be more expensive.

So don't worry that much about adult people who make their own choices at their own risk and start worrying more about people who actually don't even have a choice (like the ones that cannot even rent a house in habitable condition).

If they were able to borrow in the current environment then they are probably hard workers and prudent savers. Why would you want to hurt those type of citizens? Instead you want to reward the lazy and stupid segment of our society. Why? Are you really that bitter? Think of the greater good. You don't want to punish and burden the productI've memberso of our society. If you did then who would pay pay your benefit?


Of course one could argue that the lazy, stupid and unproductive are the rentier / landbanking class who believe their magic tulips will keep pooping gold equity [imaginary] bricks forever. A lot more expectation of something for nothing there.

That said I think it would be a fantastic idea to phase out benefits like the accommodation supplement. Landlord welfare is a great drain on both the private and public finances.


Hey there Onwards and Upwards,
Wouldn't it be great if the Banks were lending on business and other productive enterprises which resulted in employment for skilled keen creative people?

We are not so lacking in compassion that we want to see people who earn good salaries, see no other way to increase their "stake"in Aotearoa, except by speculating into the Auckland housing PONZI which is the current government (and supporters) fastest profit-making wrort.
We don't want to see that, but sadly, they have been given a "Bum Steer."
Unfortunately, our "Money Trader" mentality is unable to relate to anything except a 'fast buck,'

How about a gradual decrease in the price of Auckland's speculative housing - as opposed to the Vancouver Shock Effect?
Think of the greater good?
How good would it be to see the hard workers have the opportunity to invest in business projects that are supported by Science and Technology, funded by the "Minister of Everything's department" as we have been "Spun?"

What a "Win Win" all round?

Ha Ha! Forget about Vancouver, that is a Mega city compared to Auckland at the bottom of the planet.
Chinese now promoting Calgary Alberta in advertising in China because low tax in the province there
Instead of talk and write here why not organise and start protesting !
Key just laughs off anything else
How could he still be PM after his worldwide reveal as a pony tail puller ?

So you can recognise a prudent saver from their enormous mortgage? Interesting thinking. Lets not mention how deducting interest on investment properties means these 'prudent savers' end up paying less tax to fund the country, not more. On the other hand, actual prudent savers putting money into businesses and banks, pay tax on their returns (except rare cases where tax rates are lower than imputation rates)

and if the government allowed the 500 million to be claimed against productive enterprises rather than rental houses imagine how much better off we would be economically .
I would even include house building in that as it creates employment

'Residential property investment leads to tax losses of about $500 million a year, which if offset against other income at about 30 per cent, would cost the Government about $150m a year in lost tax, experts say.'

Sharetrader, I am interested in the figures on this,as I was contemplating this same point recently. I was sort of speculating, mentally, that the total borrowings on so called"investment residential properties" ,might have been about 100 billion, leaving 5 billion of interest costs, 1.5 Billion being the tax loss. Where do your figures come from? Have you got a link?

mostly from the government questions and answers. Government ministers take great pride in quoting TAXPAYER funds being thrown at housing. BE will constantly quote the 2 billion in accommodation supplements, PB will quote the mllions going into emergency accommodation (motels) , NS will quote the millions for building, infrastructure etc.
even now and again they let slip the tax refund figure.
from my point of view these are wasted funds with a huge chunk finding there way to the banks in the form of interest payments then onto bank shareholders. (holder)
I have been watching it for years and the amounts are growing and with house price increases is leading to more needed yet.
so in my conclusion its a dumb idea to keep down this track and will become another huge cost blowout.
we would be far better to spend that money building and either sell to kiwi home owners at cost and building up social housing for those low paid that can not buy, as a aside for social housing there should be 3 or 5 year leases with annual reviews so no more lifetime houses the goal being to sell the house to a kiwi to live in,
also no houses or land sold to non kiwis, and take away tax advantages for investors over home owners

Would you agree it's pretty difficult to pay for benefits when you're not paying any tax on your capital gains?

No need to talk about "lazy" people. The simple truth is John Key wants to protect people's house prices, by forcing buyers to buy into the existing market as opposed to building their own new home at non-inflated values.

If anyone from the commercial private sector tried to do that--that is, forcing us to pay big money for their product by outlawing alternatives--then we would want their heads on a plate. And rightly so.

I did a cute little video on it:


Cynical bs from Key there. He could easily have stopped at "What I do not support is the hard-working young couple."

If 15% of homeowners really wanted house prices to fall then house prices would fall. If those homeowners who want prices to fall dramatically would please contact me I can arrange to buy your homes off you at prices that will help to cause a fall in the average house price.

Exactly! We like to talk the talk, but when it comes to the reality of losing equity in our homes, we would vote against any measure that would negatively affect it.

Would you not like the opportunity to upgrade to a nicer home for less money? Most people would jump at the chance.

If you have a mortgage and house prices fall the "cost" in real terms of a nicer house will have gone up in porportion to the level of equity you have.

I'm not sure what the point you are making here is? In the real world we pay for things using money, not equity.

Lets examine your logic by turning it around with a thought experiment. Somebody wanting to upgrade their home would be happy if house prices increased 500% right before they purchase because they would have "more equity" in the new house? Pigs might fly... they have more debt to carry, they are a victim of inflation.

Upgrading implies already having a house which you intend to sell (releasing equity) to buy a new house


That's right. So in our thought experiment, you have a house worth 200k and you want to upgrade to a house worth 300k. Lets assume you carry 100k of debt (50% equity) on house #1.

Now house prices suddenly increase 5x. House #1 is now 1.0M. House #2 is 1.5M. You now have 900k equity in house #1. Yay!

Your income has remained the same, you still need a house to live in, but now upgrading to that better house is going to cost you 500k instead of 100k.

So uhhh... remind us again, why a rational person would want this?

"Many young South Koreans say they can’t afford to get married or have children. They cite housing costs as one of the biggest obstacles. Record-low interest rates meant to spur economic growth have fueled a property boom that has priced many of them out of the market. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate among those 15 to 29 years old is 9.2 percent—more than double the national average."

Hmmm. sounds familiar.

If you have 500,000 equity in a house worth 1,000,000 and are looking to move to a house worth 1,500,000 but both houses lose 50% of their value you won't have enough for a deposit on your now "cheaper" upgrade.

That is a possibility. Might have to do the old fashioned thing and save for it. Fortunately it will take much less time and you are spared a lifetime of debt slavery.

Do some maths. You definitely have the enough cash for a deposit on the upgrade (the deposit to house value ratio is actually the same in both scenarios), and your total debt is less in the scenario where house price dropped 50%.

Before price drop
House 1 - $1,000,000 value. $500,000 equity
House 2 - $1,500,000 value, equity from house 1 = 33% deposit, total debt $1,000,000

50% price drop
House 1 - $500,000 value. $250,000 equity
House 2 - $750,000 value, equity from house 1 = 33% deposit, total debt $500,000

No he was correct 50% drop erases all your "equity" for house #1. Leverage goes both ways.

I believe you are correct. This shows through in our voting and even our current polls also. Winnie is probably the only one telling it like it is, has done for years, yet......people in this country hate the truth no matter who it maybe hurting. They will vote for self interest over the collective good, then have the audacity to wonder why our MP's do the same!

Me too, just call please

So long as it is still at a level that will make a real difference to the average house price I'll pay 0.25% more than he will (subject to finance)

The survey is about house prices, not my house price. I want house prices to fall. I do not want my house price in particular to fall while all others keep rocketing up.

That's rather disingenuous. It's not contradictory to want a fall in house prices without the pain falling highly disproportionately on one's self. I'm sure those homeowners who ansered the poll in that way would be fine with giving up their part of the book value if everyone else did too.

Why don't people get that the house price inflation was caused by the government so the government has to do something to curb it overall? What's the point in telling 1 home owner to sell his/her house for half of what it's worth when there are 70k people coming in with students on buying frenzy?


The amount of people I know who own a house but wouldn't mind a drop in house values because they are genuinely concerned about a generation that is largely locked out of house ownership and the social impacts this is having on New Zealand society is staggering. it seems to me that only the naive or those that don't mind getting wealthy by others misery don't want house prices to fall. While I am not in this position I cant imagine how disheartening it would be to have no prospect of saving to own a house as is the reality for so many working families these days.

Educated homeowners know that a rise in house prices only makes them richer on paper as if they sell their house for a profit, they will likely buy another one in the same market. I have learnt this from experience.

I still think stamp duties on foreign buyers (as has happened in Vancouver with quite a result), or only letting them buy new builds would have a huge impact on the current crisis

Educated homeowners know about leverage and expand their income generating portfolio using their "only on paper" wealth.

Exactly !


If they were really educated they would know that leverage isn't a one way street. With a falling market that leverage can be a very very hard mistress indeed.

Buying into tulip mania is risky. The rewards may be high if you time it right, but there are significant economic and political risks that come along with the territory. I think the political ones are likely to start coming to fruition.

Too much piss has been taken for too long.

" If they were really educated they would know that leverage isn't a one way street. With a falling market that leverage can be a very very hard mistress indeed."

Here is a piece of information that might help you relax
These go back to 1980. I assume that you can follow trends on graphs:

How many TWO way streets do you see there?? or is it only One way ??

I see a couple. Enough to put the highly leveraged underwater. Are you so smug you think its impossible for the 4th most unaffordable housing market in the world to ever correct?

I see flat prices for 4 years as recently as 2008-2012. Painful to service a cashflow negative, static or falling price investment for that long. Think of the opportunity costs. And it's a basic error to assume that the past worst case is also the future worst case, and plenty of people and companies have blown up thanks to that kind of sloppy thinking.

Quite. The biggest correction is not the one in the past, its the one that has not happened yet. HT Nassim Taleb

Oh well, the smugs like me heard this argument from people like yourselves many years ago and decided to buy and invest even at market peaks ... And that is a personal choice and do not need others approval !!

“There are three types of people in this world. Firstly, there are people who make things happen. Then there are people who watch things happen. Lastly, there are people who ask, what happened? ”

Its up to you which one you want to be?

you can wait for Black Swans to come and hide under the kitchen sink or ride the waves , smartly.

You're talking as if we're not investing at all, I'm doing perfectly well without exposing myself to the risk in Auckland. Higher yields elsewhere quite possibly with lower risk.

My investments are doing well and I am well diversified and positioned to take advantage of growth or a downturn. My assessment criteria is quite strict and sometimes I choose to wait in safer options for an opportunity to arise. This strategy served me well in the dotcom boom/bust and the GFC and it will serve me well through this period of housing exuberance. It is a long-term allocation of capital, not a get rich quick scheme/bubble.

So following your logic, house prices will double every 10 years (assume 7% inflation pa). Wages double about every 30 years based on current growth (2.3% pa - possibly generous). So in 30 years time, the average house will cost 8 times as much and wages are double moving affordability from 10x income to 40x income. Good luck selling those houses!

@sadr001. I too am an educated homeowner. But I am not leveraging etc. Don't assume all think the same.

Then why the hell did they overwhelmingly vote for National last election? We all knew what was going on back then

Maybe they like their other policies? Housing isn't the only issue people vote on, although maybe it's starting to get that way.

Yeah, I'm voting Winston to ban foreign buyers.



Add me to the list. I would far sooner not see the value of my property leap upwards as it will have done so on the back of someone else's broken dreams.

Call me what you will but I'll take social cohesiveness over increased equity any day.

What a damned pity a few more don't take that attitude, instead choosing to take advantage. I really wish we could carve housing, especially the investor buy up of existing housing, off from the list of ways to invest, and preserve them for what they are, homes for people, every regulation/law written with that uppermost in mind.

Chinese don't care. It's all me me me

Much like Kiwi's whose howls of indignation are really about how they are missing out themselves.

Arthur Grimes challenged politicians to pursue policies that built 150,000 houses in six years to cause a 40% fall in house prices in Auckland
I wonder which is the greatest danger here.: the price of houses fall or the houses themselves fall down. A bit of of both (I suspect)?

Auckland soon to surpass Hongcouver house prices. Achievement unlocked!

John Key being hopelessly out of touch isn't news. If only he was capable of empathy he would relate to the problem being the insanely overvalued prices his policies have bought about not the eventual and inevitable correction.

Let's hope for the sake of the hapless recent fhb that mean reversion theory is a bunch of intellectual babble.

Give it a break regarding people not being able to afford houses!!!!
You one eyed Aucklanders need to get real and get things sorted.
If you can't afford to purchase a house then stop moaning and get out of the overpriced and overhyped housing market in Auckland as there is no value whatsoever in living there.
You can still purchase a home in Christchurch that is affordable and less than what you are paying on rent!
Christchurch I am telling you now, is far more desirable and opportunities are greater than Auckland currently is!
Seriously, what the heck has Auckland got going for it?
All property in NZ is not overpriced and yes one day there will be a long period of stagnation if not a drop in Auckland, but you are left to make your own decisions in this life!


TM2 "what the heck as Auckland got going for it" Free parking on motorways :-)

That deserves a gold medal, mate.

This is a good point. But why limit yourself to Christchurch? There is a whole world of cities out there and 99% of them are more affordable than Auckland.

True, there are heaps of affordable houses all around NZ. But they are affordable for a reason - no work, and no hope.

I am not from Auckland, but was does it have going for it - jobs, lots of jobs, across a range of industries, careers, and experience.

It's not the people that need to move - it's the businesses.

Yes, heaps of jobs in the cook,tour guide and student sectors.

Chch is only "affordable" relative to Auckland. Chch is still around 6x household income which on a global scale is unaffordable. People of NZ have become too used to expensive housing to notice.

Instead of house prices dropping it would be better if our salaries went up.

Sadr001, that makes the two of us- I'll happily buy a house if someone wants to sell me one at a dramatic discount.

Better for who, exactly?

The enormous pressure would ultimately fall on the land bankers. A few months of that and there would be a rush for the door. We saw it before in a minor way and it was then accentuated with recent arrivals getting out at just about any price.

My Goodness .... " UMR, which conducts polls for the Labour Party, found 55% of home owners would prefer house prices to fall a bit (40%) or dramatically (15%)." ... Say no more !! lol
As if barking at the same tree every day will shake it off ??
I have news for BH and others,. house prices are still going up !! the market fundamentals have not changed .. so wishful thinking and prayers are not going to affect that ... wait for 2 more years, maybe 3,... then you will start seeing a tangible change ... when supply catches up and demand subsides ....
No poll or any fake stories will deter this hungry market ...

BTW, the more I watch the Greens and their circus in Parliament the more I want to vote for National ... even if I don't want to !! but they leave me no other choice


The "fundamentals" were there in Vancouver too. Then at the stroke of a pen they weren't.

Mate ,,,Keep dreaming about Vancouver and hope that it may happen one day in Auckland , until then you will be posting your comments from Gisborne or the west coast while Aucklanders enjoy a smart CG ... get real mate and do not compare economies ,,, we are not Canada!! if you have ever been there you would have known better !!


Economies? Pay more attention friend, I was comparing politics. B.C. implemented a tax on foreign buyers due to political pressure and their market has responded big time. Given that the policy of Labour, Greens and NZF is an outright ban on foreign buyers and this government is getting very long in the tooth you would be a fool to discount the risk of the same happening in Auckland.

Damn, you are clever you totally caught me out. I don't live in Auckland. From my perspective Auckland is the equivalent of Gisborne. Been to Canada a couple of times though.

20% decline in 20 days. All the result of a 15% tax on foreign buyers. The Auckland market is driven by the same fundamentals as Vancouver (Chinese buyers) so we could expect the same with a foreign buyer tax here.


Eco bird. You just keep drinking the Kool Aid.


Try and keep up Economy Bird , head in the sand Lately?

National Bird nz need exactly the medicine that Vancouver had been given. 15% stamp duty on foreign buyers is just common sense in markets where prices are well beyond what is affordable.

Supply is tight so why should we not try to reduce demand by taxing foreign demand (includes students and temp 32% of resident buyers in nz)

The funds from any tax can help pay for infrastructure so nz rate payers pay less.

Firstly we need to define what "fall a bit" equates to as a percentage; is it 1%, 10%, etc.? I dare say everyone's definition is different depending upon whether they are a property owner or not. Besides which the sample size and polling methodology is - from what has been written - exceptionally poor, hence no conclusions can be drawn from this.


EB-You don't watch our supposed leader at Question Time then? Embarrassing!

This attempt at establishing there is no Opposition is simply spin. No opposition to who? Collins, Brawnlee, Smith and that fool of a foreign minister? None of them you would feel comfortable with in your house.

Responsibility? Remember Labour left office with a govt debtof $10 bn. The Nats have managed to increase that to $100bn.

You are right - and thank you for your comment .... I watch very little of Parliament question time or any of that crap because I have better things to do in life rather than wasting my time on kindergarten kids bullying and nagging on each other. That whole thing is a circus .... but even though ... some clowns are funnier than others ...

I do not support National , if that was what you were leading to ... and you are right, some jokers in the Nat party are a disaster including the ones you mentioned ...
but the alternative is far worse that the Nats ... Every election I weigh and elect the party that can do LESS Damage to the country at that given point in time...some call the likes of myself Swing Voters .. But sensibly, we all have to have the best of the country at heart rather than parties and few executives ... which may fight on the left side all their lives and then apply to be the next UN General Secretary .. !!!!
That said! ... Labour had some experienced hands when they left office, Helen, Michael & Phil ... they had $7B in surplus cash.. which they hoarded for few years... BUT, they left before the DAMAGE of the GFC started taking shape !! ... should they have remained in office , they would have done what Nats did ... spend the 7B and borrow tons and sell the family silver ... I guess that our dept would have been $120B now under Labour if not more ....ADD Christchurch and other bailouts and you get the numbers right! No one in the first and second worlds was immune from GFC ( with the exception of one country which refused to get engaged in the web of toxic international banking instruments and held a lot of cash and Gold - that was Lebanon) ...

BTW, Labour cannot be excused or immune from the accumulated causes of the carnage in the Auckland housing market today ... they had their share of ignorance and syphoning money between accounts / stupid frugal infrastructure policies and their influence in the ACC blunders.... Its not only the NATs who have friends in high places !! ....they have lots too to look after !! and IMHO no one can twist the arms of big corporations or big boys anymore no matter what they claim they will do!!

I know that the above and the following is not going to sit well with most comentators ... but To be honest, I do not know who to vote for or support at this point in time... L/G is looking so flimsy at the moment be it both in people and leadership .. it will be a disaster to vote them in !! they are simply not suited for this era, they still live in the past , using the same fear mongering techniques have just lost the plot ... Throwing everything and anything at the public hoping it might catch a sentiment or make a mark is not smart .... maybe they will improve until election time , but I will be very surprised if they did.....
Nats just sound to be the lesser evil for now! - nowhere near perfect , but they make more sense on certain issues ( not all) than the rest. and yes, their clowns can be irritating too at times...

We shall all watch a see.. there will be interesting times ahead..


Under national auckland prices up 500k in 8 years......... if you add up all previous governments since time began you only get prices rises totally 500k.

Well done National.

National are slowly destroying the lifestyles of the middle class and the poor of NZ. Only investors and foreign buyers are benefiting from the increased house prices.

Correct Joe,

I may also add that its not only investors and foreign buyers are benefiting from the increased house prices ... but also add All Home owners who cashed up in the last 3 years, the entire home renovation industry, tradesmen, related supply chains, Services, Ports, Car industry, retail and commerce, and almost all sectors in the economy .... and eventually the IRD.

A good number of the home buyers were actually the Middle Class ( not many people could afford the new prices in Auckland otherwise) they had to settle for buying a 3-4 bedroom instead of a 1/4 acre life style block ... I wouldn't really call that lifestyle destruction !!

I we assume that : should Labour have been in power for the last 9 years , then things would have been better ... then that is very debateable ...but common sense and the facts in the world would strongly suggest they couldn't have changed much ....

Without getting too carried away with absolute numbers Joe, Houses rose almost doubled between 2001 and 2007 non stop under Labour's watch ... : see for yourself

NationalBird the facts are as follows:
- Prices increased 500k under national.
- they only rose 250k under Labour

National increase is twice as much as Labour's.
- 500k in 8 years in incredible.
- The average Auckland annual house price increase under Nationals watch is a staggering 62k. This is more than the average Auckland wage and double the NZ Median wage :)

An economy driven off ever increasing house prices is not sustainable. Time to make NZ houses our homes again.
Loan to Income Ratios 4 to 1
Stamp duty on investors and foreign buyers (Stud + temp) 15%

Turn this Oil Tanker around before it hits the rocks .....

All those builders plumbers etc would still benefit if we directed investors and foreign buyers into buying new builds.

Easiest way to do this is tax existing properties 15% stamp duty and have 0% stamp duty for new builds. That throws your argument out the water and helps encourage benefit if investors buy existing properties. Often they kick out tenants while trying to do the properties up and flip.

Sounds like a page out of the John Key book of excuses.

Its 2016.

How much are you getting paid?

lol, apparently not as much as you guys :) ... I should have a chat with the PR office then !!
But hey, I rest my case, don't wish to offend anyone here... you can indulge in the pleasure of your own beliefs ... we just have to agree to disagree ... its a free country.

Yes the insanity has to end and National have to go!!!! If Labour or a strong political party that have the guts to introduce a tax on foreign investors, I'll be more than happy to vote for them!


I like a good fairy tail "if labour where left in charge they would have done this and that"
how do you know what anyone would have done if we had not had national in charge, it did not happen so we do not know.
as for ACC levies again national party spin, check the accounts, the value of ACC investments fell dramatically due to the GFC (equities plummeted ) and since the asset boom has grown dramatically to be at a point way ahead so suddenly out nowhere became fully funded. it was very little to do with management from one side or the other that is cents on the dollar.
as for housing and labour we agree, theydid nothing to stem the mess and in fact a few MP's jumped onboard including the last leader.
so do I have faith in labour or national fixing it NO,
but I would like to see no sales to non kiwis, immigration tighten back to 15K per year, a first home building program incorporating aprenticeships. take away tax advantage from investors over home owners
encourage investment in the productive economy
as for house prices dropping, no biggie to me, I don't have any debt so if I sell and buy its all relative, but I would love to see young FHB get a leg up

..correct .. i said that it would have been debateable if Labour was there.

Auckland Council is the head and shoulders of the whole issue and big contributor to the problem ( supply side) .. their assets only allow them to borrow more against it but that is no excuse ... their planning and spending was the problem .. still is!!
Unitary Plan is a live example .. only agreed to it when they were told to accept or else! no assumptions on that one eh?

Unitary plan was past at the earliest opportunity. You make it sound like Auckland Council were holding out, but they are following the law as laid down by Act and National. Council requested permission to pass the plan sooner. Central govt said no.

You sound like National blaming supply only....

Just a reminder on the Demand side :
- 46% of buyers are investors
- 32% of resident buyers per the latest LINZ survey stated they were students or temp workers
- 13,500 houses were purchased by foreign Students & Temp in the last 12 months. (250 a week)
- Household debt is 230billion and increased 8.8% from last year
- NZ amongst the highest Income to House price ratio in the world
- NZ has the lowest purchase tax in the world (ZERO)
- 200,000 temp visa workers in the last year & 90,000 foreign students (13,500 of these purchased housing in NZ)

Opening up new land without the resources - Labour and Product - to do anything with it is a waste of time. Currently your suggestion is a waste of time. There is neither the Labour or Supply to do any more than is happening now.
I wonder if some of those recent Chef imports could wield a hammer ?

EB "BTW, the more I watch the Greens and their circus in Parliament the more I want to vote for National ... even if I don't want to !! but they leave me no other choice......." " I watch very little of Parliament question time or any of that crap because I have better things to do in life rather than wasting my time on kindergarten kids bullying and nagging on each other...."

Make up your mind - do you watch parliament or not? Suggest you call your Nats central spin office for your answer here - you will find the number on your speed dial #1.

Sorry there should've been a DON'T there - so I do not watch that crap ... the meaning was obvious from the whole sentence ...

as to your second comment ... lol, thank you for making my points

Selfishness will do that to people

The more I read this the more it becomes really entertaining :
"However, Green Co-Leader Metiria Turei said in this Morning Report interview on July 26 that a house price to income multiple of three to four should be targeted, which would imply a 50% house price fall if it were to be achieved overnight without any income increase.
In what was clearly a deliberate move, she answered "yes" when asked the direct question about whether she wanted house prices to fall outright.
"What we don't want is people getting into trouble with their mortgages, that is absolutely what we don't want," Turei said.""
Now how clever is that eh? two contradictions in the same statement - Does she have any financial literacy or just faking it?? would I elect her to be a co leader in the next Government ?? ... Hell NO
Labour have to revisit their coalition partners intelligence or they will be going down with them !!

What's the contradiction? The actual servicing of a mortgage has nothing to do with what happens to the price of the house, just makes it difficult to move if you're in negative equity. That's the risk of buying in an expensive market.


I think a 50% drop in house prices would be about right.

A bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Moral of the article is that John Key is totaly wrong.

Wake up time for PM who is always in denial but the question is will ego and arrogance allow them to see what the truth or.............

Still time Mr PM.

Why would a person who only cares about power have need of truth or wrong and right? This is why corruption is powerful. Because lack of morality makes it so

So 85 percent of homeowners want to see continued rising prices or possibly a small decline, over some random time frame . Twist the percentages around and any headline is possible. M13 inflation expectations 61.5 percent net see higher house prices in next 12 months, median increase of 5 %, median increase 5.5%. What people want and what people expect are two different concepts.

You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you might find you get what you need....

NZ is becoming a country where the news is generated by polls and surveys.
It's becoming a reality show of it's own.

You are correct and it is because our PM always hide behind false and manipulated data to justify their action or inaction and if any data is released which does not suit them will be denied by lie by them - Trade mark of John Key Government.

Exposed and shameless govt

The higher the prices go the bigger the mess....

the poor are not benefiting from high house prices locking them out of the housing market.

Make our houses our homes again. 15% stamp duty on foreign students and temp workers. 15% stamp duty on investors. Exclude new builds to encourage supply.

more like 50% please

Vancouver tax seems to be doing its job
Per the article:
Global News noted that the average home price in the city of Vancouver fell nearly 21% in the 28 days through August 17, to $1.1 million.

Some of this demand has been from rich foreign buyers who are speculating in the market. To combat this, a new 15% property-transfer tax on foreign buyers in metro Vancouver kicked in on August 2

Signs of a slowdown in sales could be a relief for economists who have been warning that the jump in Vancouver's house prices is unsustainable. In West Vancouver, for example, Global News notes that prices are up 450% since 2001, but incomes have not risen by that much.

The poor are not benefiting from high Rolls Royce prices either 2016 RR LWB $838,000 with massage seats.


Oh F'......... goodness sake ! , only 85% reckon there is a crisis ?

Where are the 15 % of Aucklanders who DONT think there is a housing crisis ?

I live in Aucks and interact with a good number of people every day , and there is NOT ONE person who does not think we are in big trouble with the housing market .

There is never going to be a soft landing when this bubble pops , and I hope the banks take a big hit for their complicity in enabling this , and I hope the Government is not re-elected for their lack of any meaningful action in preventing it .

John Key cannot say he was not warned ........... three years ago he was quizzed on the matter .

This balloon is so well inflated that its academic whether it pops or is deflated .............. people are going to get hurt when it happens .

Just kick the govt out but irony of democracy will have to wait till next election though everyone knows what is happening

I'm one of those 15%!
It's not a bubble, our properties and lifestyles are worth this much money.

That was always going to happen - and going to get worse

I loved this quote from the article: "Some of the response is that New Zealand was a heaven but after two years it's not"

Remember those days when "Slice of Heaven" was the mutt's nuts (and 'The Dog's' bollocks)?

its just a consequence of becoming a very uneven society, I don't think Chinese are targeted as such,
many of us on here warned years ago where NZ society was heading and many times in my replies I have said I hope we don't get to gated housing developments to feel safe.
I am already seeing big fences and gates built around a lot of houses
also I have also said that as home ownership falls landlords will get slammed by politicians as they bring in renter friendly policies to appease the bottom of society .
I hate seeing this it will only hasten rent controls coming in,
We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals, we now know that it is bad economics. - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

I think the Chinese are more concerned that the criminals in NZ are not punished sufficiently as a deterrent to others. They can see that NZ is too soft in this regard. In a way it is what makes it good as well as what makes them fearful.

Absolutely. Perhaps we should have mass public executions just to reassure the Chinese government that we will do whatever is needed to keep them happy.

Yes and we should harvest their organs as well - no anesthetic to boot.

And I think the Chinese are concerned about their safety and welfare in New Zealand. Just don't let the people in mainland China find out that Auckland is full of criminals - they may not want to buy a house there.

Dream on buddy.

May not like to agree;but I do concur. Its not a bubble,its international demand valuing the market correctly. Its probably got another 50% in it. And there are Tens of millions of Families that have 1 million NZD in equity,that could and might buy up property here, apart from the tiny percentage of that group, who already have.
Make them build new!1 million x 1 million dollar new homes, adds 1 trillion of value to the total national worth?

Yes housing is being treated as a commodity and sold to the highest bidder international.

While the world can buy with ZERO purchase tax then yes prices will continue up especially as foreign buyers (Stud+temp) are buying 13,500 house a year which is approx 13billions based on Aucklands average.

BRING IN THE VANCOUVER TAX ! Then watch the bubble pop... as it has done in Vancouver... 20% down already since it was announced.

@Joe Public ..been doing a lot of reading about what is happening in Vancouver now is now really time for the NZ Government to step up to the plate and tax all "student", overseas, 2nd property and up etc buyers with 15% to help the infrastructure, hospitals, schools etc etc

This will "weed out" the buyers that want to make NZ their home, as opposed to the "money laundering" and speculation, that is just so obvious, it makes the NZ Govt look stupid !! (not the people though, we know these overseas and local "players" tricks !! )

If they don't impose such a tax, I as a NZ tax payer, ask that the accommodation supplement (which only goes into the landlords pocket) is removed, and that "landlords welfare" money goes to infrastructure !

C'mon Winnie - put this idea forward at the next Parliament "Question Time " !!

The penny is finally dropping overseas as well: modular, factory-built construction is the only way to end-run the current schemozzle: construction methods unchanged since the Chicago fire rebuilders invented the balloon frame, a cosy materials cartel, consenting processes which add little benefit for massive $ and elapsed time, Elfin Safety at 10% of build, and on top of land that is 2-3 times overpriced.

See this Torygraph article:

They look like chest freezers.

Great place to chill out.

Met a friend back from London, was trying to buy a house there ,,, small 3 beddy , 3 story shoe box type old london property (obviously an apartment) for 950,000 pounds !! that is about $2M

London has become like that.
Now who there is driving up prices?
Not the old locals that's for sure.
But the lure of quick cash, whilst thier community disingerates around them.
And around them, Rome burns.

This guy called Mark Carney is driving up prices.

first of all £950k is 1.7m NZD not 2M... NZD is high remember

London has many more high paying jobs than Auckland as it is one of the Financial Capitals of the world with approx 8million people and a great start-up tech scene. You can't compare that to Auckland.

A friend in London bought a 3 bed for £450k 30-minute commute to the centre so I guess it depends on which friend you talk to. 812k NZD.

1.2million gets you an ugly looking house out west auckland that is
- cold and damp due to lack of insulation
- does not have double glazed windows
- with no central heating
- power poles down the road
- no public transport other than a bus to the city which will take over an hour.
- you get to the city and you earn 80k a year and struggle to pay off your mortgage.
- Ok it has a decent sized section, however, let us not forget the whole idea of NZ is lifestyle with a section out the back

Auckland is expensive because of the foreign buyers, especially when combined with tight supply.

Pay in Auckland has been stagnant. Low-interest rates have helped increase prices however the main overriding factor is the share number of foreign Student buyers, Foreign Temp worker buyers and offshore buyers. (Like Vancouver)

In Vancouver:

Saretsky says this cool-down period has changed peoples' mentality, reducing fears they would miss out on getting into the real estate market.

We feel that the foreign investors have been propping up real estate in Vancouver, creating more demand, which is raising prices,” said Susan Hosterman, director of U.S. structured finance at Fitch Ratings.

Great article. The comments section has lots that sound eerily familiar...

"Both realtors and the provincial government are proven to be liars as they both claimed for years that foreign ownership was not an issue. Sadly, action taken 5 or 10 years ago could have nipped this problem in the bud."

"Well said...and this is where Canadians have lost their way and thus put a lot of their country and future into ruination. Other countries, including the U.S...learned their 'real estate lesson' and took their money and invested in business, technology and innovation so they could offer high quality employment, opportunities and a distinct future for their kids and grandkids. Real estate bent Canadians took their money and...(wait for it)...bought rental and investment property... lol."

So a labour poll with only 33% Auckland home owners surveyed, what a crock of Sh.t this poll is only 331 Jafas asked

I just woke up from my annual hibernation (a bit earlier than usual I'll admit - must be the weather). My first visit was to my favourite site -

Reading through the articles and comments on housing - I'm quite surprised that nothing has changed for the better in 12 months. There are the same jaded pollies spouting the same tripe and trying to shoot each other down. There is obviously a focus on Auckland.

Let's not forget about the rest of the country and those still suffering the after affects of the Christchurch earthquakes (Reminder: there were two earthquakes).

I'm disappointed that the mainstream media is falling into line... 'if you are out of work or can't afford decent accommodation then it's your fault mwahahaha' -
for a recent example see:

Meantime the banks and corporates are raking it in - in fact they need more machinery to collect the windfalls.

Time to pick berries, catch fish, eat honey and hope the world improves...chance would be a fine thing.

Overall summary: Greed rules OK in NZ

thank you Zeds,
Excellent article by Duncan Garner - Just told what most of us already know and what most articles on this site are trying to suppress ... Hope BH will have a read too , maybe his choice of published stats gets a bit more balanced next time ..

It's not bubble. I think house prices will go up by another 8 to 10% this year.

If or when income to loan ratios are introduced, the new Zealand housing market will be crushed...this is not a maybe but a certainty if introduced. As a result our dollar will decline and overnight will see the biggest destruction of wealth in new Zealand's 176 year history...the only happy people in NZ will be the few commentators on this website unfortunately...I can just picture BH's celebration party on the eve of the announcement...

I tend to agree. It would be the stupidest thing to do ever. Practically price setting by decree.

Sounds like you agree that prices are irrational compared to incomes

Loan to income is an arbitrary and very conservative way to give out credit, I'd say 15 to 1 would be OK, but you have fanatics on this website asking for 4.5 to 1. Houses prices are fair IMHO, remember no credit = death to NZ economy as we know it...with no cash there will be no growth and no jobs and maybe no website as sponsors can't afford to pay for advertising

15:1. Dear god maybe you like to be the lender for that? Lend somebody earning just 75k a million bucks?

Are the Bank of England "fanatics with their 4.5 ratio.

They managed to introduce loan to income restrictions in the UK without crushing the housing market...

That's not true home ownership in London is less than 40% and only the wealthy can afford to buy a house...and going down as no one can afford due to Loan to Income

No one can afford because prices are too high. Loan to income didn't drop prices.

That is where you are dead wrong. Affordability is not about what a house is worth, its about how much it costs to service and the restrictions on lending to buy it. At interest rates of 2% in the UK a 1 million pound mortgage would only cost you 20k a year (380 pounds a week). Its because of debt to income that banks cant lend you money hence why normal people do not buy...only the rich and high income earners can afford to buy a house in London....

Dead wrong?

Uhhh no a million pound mortgage will cost you 20k in interest plus principal repayments. On a 25 year mortgage that's more than a grand a week at current interest rates. Plus you won't get that kind of interest rate without putting down a 30 or 40 percent deposit. Add another forty of fifty grand of stamp duty for good measure.

The folks at the financial stability committee set the 4.5 loan to income limit to regulate risky lending practises. What happens when at some time over the next decade or three that 2℅ tracker goes to 4% or 6%? Financial bloody armageddon at higher LTIs. Mass defaults. Insolvent banks.

Interest rates will not stay low forever. Hell with the 20% drop in the pound thanks to Brexit it won't be long till the inflation comes back.

Look, I said cost, not what your repayments would is cheap in England, and even so you cant get loans because of Loan to Income ratio..the extra 600 pounds is not a is paying back principal so you are paying yourself not paying the bank...I also said 1 million pound loan I did not say 1 million pound property value

And a low dollar would do wonders for the struggling dairy farmers and all other NZ exporters as well as giving tourism a huge injection.

Speculators will get burnt and those that said NZ house prices can only go up will learn the hard way having completely ignored what happened to many other nations during the GFC.

FHBs will have a fighting chance to get on the ladder.

Bring on LOAN TO INCOME ratios and Stamp Duty on investors and foreigners before it all gets even more out of control.

not only will speculators get burnt, lets be clear, everyone will get burnt, even those FHB's will get burnt, because NZ will head into a huge recession, I would wager debt to income will be worse than 1987 but actually probably worse than the 1930's and 1939-45 in actual wealth destruction...the winners will be: rich overseas investors who will swoop in on the cheap house prices, the wealthy that can afford the absurd debt to income restrictions (remember the rich always win) but most importantly the biggest losers will be current FHB's for the simple reason in that they will be out of a job so there will be no getting a loan from a bank...

The wealth destruction that you speak of is no less horrific than the wealth transfer that's been effected by the influx of foreign capital into our real estate market since 2012. Billions of dollars of personal future net worth has been transferred from young kiwi individuals to foreigners who've priced them out of home ownership.

in 30 years time there'll be pensioners who will eat cat food for dinner, they'll be poverty stricken beneficiaries of the state, and for many of them it will be the National reign of 2009-2017 that did them in.

The money is going to someone, no?

short term gdp growth with terrible life destroying consequences for a lot of people.

can someone please explain to me how this website works?
This article arrived in my email at 5.54am this morning and yet it already had 89 comments.
I obviously get the email when its already out of date.
Any suggestions folks?

To keep up to date on this website best to save website on your home page on your smart phone if you have one and click on regularly to see what articles have been uploaded.

Foreign money's big roll in Vancouver's housing market.

"Leaked documents have revealed that Canada’s tax department was warned 20 years ago about the impact of millionaire migration on greater Vancouver, by a team of auditors who discovered the influx was playing a huge role in the luxury housing market and suspected the buyers were engaged in widespread tax cheating."

Instead of everyone's money going into a mortgage, they could generate economic growth by spending money on goods and services. The country would be better off if land was 1/4 of the price that it is now, and everyone will get richer.

I go back to Auckland all the time and what strikes me is the absence of spending money in peoples pockets. Even the high earners. If all that money that goes into mortgages was instead going into goods and services spending the economy would really boom.

I got a C in Economics 101 & 102 and even I know what you are saying is complete tripe...there will be no economic activity in New Zealand when house prices drop by 50 to 75% as no one will have any money as everyone will be bankrupt and will owe the banks thousands and millions of dollars in negative equity...the only way to fix this issue is to stop the growth, not pop the balloon....even I am happy (or at least would accept) to see a slight decline in house prices circa 5%-10% but what you are saying is scary leftie talk...

Please provide evidence. From any of the previous busts in UK, Ireland, San Fran, Spain where property lost 40% of its value, they all saw recessions (although debatable whether these were cause or effect) but nothing like the picture you paint.
This was right after I left. Lots of my friends were hurting during those years....

interesting, where have I seen this behavior Hmmm
Role of the media
Throughout the bubble, newspapers and media played a vital role in hyping property. No national newspaper was without a glossy property supplement and weekend papers were often equally filled with property ads, reviews of new developments, stories of successful purchases, makeovers, and a gamut of columnists relating their property experiences. TV and radio schedules were filled with further property porn - house-hunting programs and house makeover programs were regular features on every channel

yes. the main difference between Ireland and NZ was that by the time the GFC came about, there were already ghost estates built in Dublin's commuter belt.
Lots of properties built by developers which nobody was buying.
There was not the influx of dirty money we're having, here, at the moment.
Just lots of Eastern European workers of the ten newly minted EU countries.
Who then left, after 2008....
So the scenario here is different.
I still think the one thing to do to stop the bubble (crash it, land it, whatever you want to call it), is to stop the money laundering. Follow Vancouver's example.
Migration is very much a secondary issue. Still important, but I don't think it has the impact on house prices most people think it has

no wonder you got a C as for economic activity that reduces when business reduces not house prices.
its when people loosetheir Jobs and no longer spend in the economy so the money flow decreases
or are you saying house buying and selling is the biggest business in NZ and without it we have nothing else
for every bankrupt person ( leveraged buyer) there will be those ready to snap up cheap houses the world is awash with money due to the credit that has been created and we have the most open market in the world
happened everywhere where house prices dropped, has always been the case.
the only scary part is how low they will drop because once they go and why would I or someone that has funds buy until I see its near the bottom when we can make a killing

You got a C in economics so it is understandable you don't get it.

Prices have gone up 85% in 4 years.
Not everyone has bought a house or increased their mortgage in last 4 years have they. Only a small percentage a price drop of 40% wouldn't make everyone bankrupt. Most of the wealth is just sitting as equity in people's homes.

Like someone said you pay now or will pay in the future.... the taxpayer will be paying rent subsidies for all those locked out who can't afford to buy or to cover the rent as house prices continue to spiral upwards with rent.

I think average house prices will decrease quite a bit. Maybe 40%+. This will be because cheaper and smaller dwellings will be squashed onto smaller pieces of land. Quality houses in good locations will still be mega bucks.

The Millennials need to be marching on the streets demanding a 15% property-transfer tax on foreign buyers. I for one would march with them, come on there must be one or two on this site? Get busy on your snap twitter, go pro, and give these boomers a wake up call!

I don't get it either. I'm seriously active about it on facebook and yet no one NOT one person ever comments on what I post or supports me. I think my homeowner friend sympathise but don't see it as their battle and FHB friends are too ashamed (yep there is a level of shame at still being a renter) don't care, are moving away or think it's a losing battle.
For me this is worse than the problem itself. The willingness to get continually shafted month after month, day after day.

Hang in there HW....worm is slowly turning me thinks. Renter like yourself I had to move away from Auckland in disgust...but will be back one day (sailing is just too good on that harbour)

Yes indeed, the sentiment has decidedly turned this year

But, don't hold your breath, while great numbers of interlopers keep coming in

whatever happens. your Auckland of tomorrow can never ever be the same as it was yesterday

Hardworker.... I watched with interest the way 'Bung the Bore' in Ashburton really made a difference with their FB page. They had a specific goal,a target.. and went for it. They ended up with mainstream tv coverage and a council that backed down.

So it can be done.....but most of the property sites and associated anti Key on FB are just winge winge winge..... a bit like us lot here (ill confess). Seems ranting has replaced action for most of us.

Agreed and it is why I was soooo impressed with what The Spinoff were/are doing with their 'War for Auckland' segment. But, even that seems to have fizzled out to nothing.

I think my peers have given up. They don't see anything changing so instead of protesting they leave or just suck it up buttercup. I don't do much more than moan on here because elsewhere no one seems to be listening to me.

Nobody cares about a non-existent problem. They're probably laughing at you.

Oh cool, resorting to nasty, shallow, hurtful digs. Aren't you just gorgeous doll. Heard it all before, move along...

Forget about this multiple of 3 times average salary as being affordable.
So ridiculous comparing figures from several decades ago!
Interest rates are going to be where they are indefinitely.
Apart from the grossly overpriced Auckland you can buy a home and interest payments are less
Than the amount of rent.
If investors are buying and are getting a
Minimum of 6 per cent return then anyone can!
This is a great time for young kiwis to get on the property ladder even if you need to bring in your
parents in on it.
NZ is a great country to live in but going by the bleaters on here you wouldn't think so.
We are so very lucky and everyone has the same opportunities it is a matter of just doing it.

So your saying its a fair playing field from previous generations?

There are hundreds of cities bigger than Christchurch with multiples much less. 3 times household income is a proven measure of affordability. In an efficient market when interest rates fall this should spur a boost in spending rather than house price increases.

It is easier now to get a housing loan than it was in the 70s 80s .
Back then the Banks didn't have unlimited amounts to lend and they had to pick and choose who they lent to.
Nowadays you can leverage off other people's property including parents to get the deposit.
The thing is that a large per centage of the population is financially illiterate.

It's heartening that us "pathetic" unlikely FHBs have more and more support. Most of my friends who are homeowners and a little older than me have given me hope. Not that I'll ever be able to have a home but that humanity does still care. Some don't and still continue to boast about their latest investment, although interestingly enough one friend who is scooping up every last property he can in my area of West Auckland (much to my chagrin) admitted the other day he wanted house prices to stabilise. I thought at first it was a thinly veiled comment in support of FHBs, then I realised there was maybe more to it? A bit of fear? I don't know. I'm just sick of being told to move out of Auckland because quite frankly right now I really can't and I am also sick of thinking about it. I'm sick of waking every morning and worrying about being kicked out of my rental or thinking about how I'll afford rent when I'm older and have no house. I also had to laugh when I saw JK had made some statement about the All Blacks bugging story and yet his silence on housing has been deafening so far, deafening. Priorities totally in order there Mr Key.
I don't believe anything is going to change, in fact I feel house prices are going to keep on rising. But, at the very least we're not alone in thinking this cannot be a good thing for ANYONE in the long run.
I'm sure I'll get replies telling me to stop moaning, I'm entitled, go buy another latte etc, I don't care now. I'm beyond caring. I've heard it all before. One day maybe I'll get to escape.

Agreed. I am a homeowner who is quite happy for a drop in house prices - it makes no difference for me, but it may make a difference for people like you. My home is my home, not some object of speculation. I remember all too well renting and the lack of security it brings.

The reason JK talked about the All Black bugging was because he was asked a question about it.
The only reason he doesn't talk about housing is because our press have got their heads in the sand or elsewhere.
If you take away rugby and housing there would be no news in NZ...BOTH THE ONLY GAMES IN TOWN.

Fair point. Maybe that's why I don't see any of my peers caring. They're over it, it's never going to change.

Anyone wanting prices to drop 50% please contact me & I'll buy your houses at that price. Thank you. 021 221 6232

The people who want a 50% drop in house prices don't own any houses. They're deadbeats.

Like you

When the prices drop i will call you.

When prices actually do fall, many people won't want to buy due to fear of it falling further. Look at the Hong Kong property bubble now, down 20%+ and projected to fall another 20%. Would you want to buy now?

Nothing new here

Good article

Vancouver, Sydney and Melbourne are, in a strange way, “sister” cities because all three have been subjected to unprecedented Asian buying of domestic real estate, which has sent prices so high that young locals are being priced out of the market.

So, what has happened in Vancouver in the last three months is of vital interest to the Sydney and Melbourne real estate markets.

While that may be too alarmist, real estate experts say that the foreign buyer tax has certainly stopped speculative buyers. This has caused many other buyers to take a wait-and-see approach, which has essentially frozen the market.

Ok, so I'm an Auckland home owner, I earn around or even below average annual income. Would I want my house to decrease in value? of course not!
What a ridiculous poll... What kind of home owners (55%) would like their property to go down in value in 15% even say 'dramatically'?? I'd like to meet those people... Shocked... Must be a fake poll.

Seabass I am quite happy if my property drops relative to all others - 50% would be just fine. The reason being I need a home, so the digits attached mean little. Secondly, I believe for us to have a happy and healthy and wealthy society, we need peole who can aspire to owning their own homes. It is good for all.

However, i can see why the greedy who paid through the nose, geared up to buy the new car, boat, bach, overseas trips etc all to keep up an outward image of success might disagree.

same here makes no diff to me. I have no debt so the value is only paper value anyway.
I am sure there are many many old people that would be in the same situation