Posts by llew40

  • Hard News: Crowded houses, in reply to Marc C,

    With respect, the creation of an environment for massive bias towards investment in property for both domestic and foreign investors predates the current government by many years. Granted, it's now hitting an extreme but this has been a generation in the making

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Crowded houses,

    Yes, I agree and sort of said that in the post.

    Sorry just reread your comment - just a little frustrated at what seems to me like a lack of accuracy in the way Labour are operating at the moment (possibly related to lack of funds and resources), and also what seems to be a lack of strategic coherence or discipline or consistency.

    Are they for the Unitary Plan or not, are they for intensification or not, do they really want to abolish urban growth limits, do they want to stick with their approach to foreign speculators in the Auckland housing market. How many passing cars can be barked at, at once? (sigh)

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Crowded houses, in reply to Russell Brown,

    You may well be right, and it may have been the same house, but, media editorial bias or interests aside, surely its the job of the Labour Party support/comms team to ensure that any media photo ops match the pitch they have given?. Who is managing this stuff?. Frustratingly, it feels like another entirely avoidable own goal that feeds a pre-existing narrative.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Media Take: Heavy topics,

    RB, I wonder, if done well, with veitch owning it properly and playing the same role that Jeremy did a few days later, it might have been easier to stomach, and achieved NZME aim of rehab a little more effectively. But no.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: How the years flew by ..., in reply to Glenn Pearce,

    Well maybe, but I am kinda reluctant to criticise people for wanting to leave wealth and/or opportunity behind for their children, just because they are (to be honest rationally) using an instrument which is sooooo much more effective than any other means at their disposal at creating that wealth/opportunity. The means for such social equity and inter-generational distortion needs to be taken away.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: How the years flew by ...,

    I don’t think so, have you ever tried borrowing money from the bank to buy shares like you can property?

    Not quite true - funnily enough banks were more than happy to lend people vast sums of money to buy shares in the mid-80's

    Now they are happy lending easy money for property (at least until if/when the bubble bursts) because risk is low, returns are predictable, the system allows investment capital from anyone (including non-residents) and the macro trends in Auckland suggest demand will continue to outstrip supply for many years ......

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: How the years flew by ..., in reply to DeepRed,

    It came about from the accident of history that was the 1987 Crash which turned a lot of people off shares for life.


    And the later myriad of finance company collapses where hundreds of thousands of kiwis lost their life-savings to sharks like Hotchin.

    But I think more particularly we have had a taxation system that has for well over a decade now had a deeply entrenched bias towards property investment (Australia is in a similar situation) rather than other forms of saving. This has led to all sorts of perverse outcomes - many of them only now coming home to roost.

    To be fair to investors (and I am not someone with multiple houses), should we actually blame them for putting their money where there is a demonstrable higher return, and low (ish) risk, when their experience of other forms of investment was so poor?. Capital flows to where there is least resistance.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Lady luck smiles more than we think,

    Your assuming thats what they want. Or do you know for sure?
    There are other ways to consider future generations you know

    Good point. If they are anything like their parents they may well decide that roaming and living elsewhere is perfectly fine. And all strength to them. I guess I feel compelled to consider their future by trying to preserve their options :)

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Lady luck smiles more than we think,

    Nice piece Rob

    With regards to housing, like Liam Dann, I'm one of the lucky ones. We bought a house in Mt Albert 12 years ago, and have subsequently seen it more than triple in value in that time. While we've not gone out and used the equity in our house to invest in more houses, I'd be lying if I said I hadn't seriously thought about it.

    A challenge is, in terms of attaining a financial position that would enable us to offer our kids a better chance of being able to get their own foothold in the Auckland property market, there isn't too many other options in terms of wealth creation than property investment. Or at least options that keep pace with the value of property. Its a vicious circle.

    Do I blame those who have decided to invest in property? - to be honest, no, and the urge of some to call these people names such as 'generation rentier' doesn't help the debate one iota.

    Do I think Auckland needs more intensification?, hell yes (and those who oppose it for self-interested reasons probably do deserve to be called names).

    Do I think property needs to be properly taxed? hell, yes (although given most MPs seem to be property investors themselves it might be hard to change those tax laws).

    Could a more civil society be founded on a greater self-awareness of the role that luck or circumstance has played in our lives? No doubt.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Home-spun non-truths, in reply to RuralJohnny,

    Hmmmm, not sure if I necessarily agree with the approach as a hard-nosed political strategy though.

    Floating policy balloons is a tried and trusted political tactic thats been around for hundreds of years, I get that. But floating balloons that gives aggressive political opponents (and their proxies) opportunities to frame the debate negatively? I thought the idea was to float balloons that give you the opportunity to put your opposition on the back-foot. Politics is a blood-sport, I wish Labour remembered that more often.

    Since Nov 2012 • 121 posts Report Reply

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 13 Older→ First