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.
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 ......
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.
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 :)
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.
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.
Excellent comment John - I've felt uncomfortable for some time about the relative (and unproductive) obsession with Key (and more latterly and - unfairly in my view - what his children get up to - the perceived sins of the father are no excuse to sneer at two young people trying to live their lives) and am convinced it is electoral poison to those who find tribalism and partisonship a trun-off. And to be honest, Rob's original post is a good example of the genre, albeit dressed up as academic critique. Some new music needs to be developed for the post-Key era.
There seems to be a very well funded PR campaign underway for flag change fronted by sports people and media people, but paid for by whom?
Hmmm, I dunno - I just dont think this is the sort of thing that would stay under wraps for long in NZ. I think the far more likely scenario is that McCaw and Carter - like many prominent NZers - are being asked for their reckons, and they're quite happy to provide them. Don't have any issue with that.
Whilst I am sure that MH has (at least in this column) his finger firmly pressed on his big red 'troll Labour tribalists' button, I do think there is some truthiness that Labour strategists should be well aware of (and probably are). Its a fact that they've not been elected as Government for a long long time now. There's a zillion reasons for that I'm sure. I think one of them may well be related to a disconnect between the Labour party faithful and sufficient numbers of New Zealanders to form a Government under MMP. Is that disconnect related to some perceived position on a political spectrum? (God I hope not, but heck, we live in a world where Barack Obama is perceived as a socialist by millions of Americans). Is the disconnect getting smaller or bigger?
I hate that this shit happens. And I honestly don’t remember it being like this when I was in my teens/twenties either. Maybe it was the environment I was in. Who knows.
I don’t think you need to pretend everything was rosy to feel that way. I don’t recall it either.
A hopeful thought. My oldest daughter (16) is a keen and frequent gig-goer, and I've ferried her and various members of her extended posse (pretty even mix of boys and girls all in the 16-18 age group) back and forth from the likes of Tame Impala, Mac DeMarco, 1975 over the last year or so. At no stage have I ever witnessed or heard of the boys acting like dicks, or disrespecting the girls in any way. Hearing their excited post-gig reports, its usually the girls who have led the charge into the mosh-pits and generally been the musical ring-leaders. I might be being naive, but I hope its a good sign.
That said, I've also heard second hand some horror stories from this years Rhythm and Vines.