Posts by Jim Welch
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Cracker: Johnny Foreigner & the Auckland…, in reply to BenWilson,
In my case it would describe it very well. To me, 800K is a hell of a lot of money, and a house is just a house.
So you'd just move to a completely different community every time you could realise a profit from your family home? Sounds like pretty bloodless property-bubble thinking to me. I can see why your wife is taking some convincing.....
-
I can't see any argument against restricting foreign ownership. Most other countries do it, and if it's addressing a problem which doesn't exist, as some are claiming, the law wouldn't hurt anyway.
I'm in favour of anything that emphasise that houses are houses first and investments second. Tax laws shouldn't favour investment properties and there should absolutely be a capital gains tax (again, just about every comparable country has one)--the family home should be exempted up to a point, but perhaps windfall profits should be taxed and profits realised in a short period of time (so 'flipping' would be taxed).
Another thing that could address the 'demand' side of the housing equation which I haven't heard anyone bring up is to strengthen renters' rights. In many European countries, a majority of people rent and renters are protected from profit-taking landlords by strong rent stabilisation laws etc. It is all very well to crunch the numbers and decide that renting is economically more sensible but who wants to rent if they have to move every year at the whim of greedy landlords?
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Sudhvir Singh,
Some of the booing was captured on camera, halfway through this Campbell Live piece (one of the few balanced pieces on the plan in the mainstream media).
I must say, it's hard to watch that clip and not conclude that most of the opposition to the plan comes from smug, intolerant, ill-informed morons. These are the people who gave us John Key as our leader. Makes me angry.
-
Hard News: A plea for sanity on the…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
But, with apologies for beating a dead hobby horse here, it's seriously disquieting that the only daily newspaper in Auckland appears to have slipped into quarter-arsed campaign mode and is failing at Journalism 101.
Hear, hear. Disquieting but utterly predictable, sadly.
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
Well, as one of the commenters who went off on the doctor-salary tangent, I agree that a successful plan for Auckland will make it a better city to live in for all its inhabitants. Obviously. The point I was trying to make is that I think there is a rich/poor divide that is shaping our city and society perhaps more than the young/old gap that Generation Zero tends to highlight. Though I appreciate their perspective and there is clearly overlap and interplay between the issues of socio-economics and generational difference.
As far as the question of the shortage of doctors, particularly in regional and rural areas, well, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.
-
Hard News: A plea for sanity on the…, in reply to J Browning,
All these years, I thought my neighbours in Ponsonby couldn't give a monkey's about their brethren in Manukau, Albany and Henderson, but clearly I was wrong.
It's great to know we're all campaigning for the rights of those on the other side of town...
Just because some people are selfish doesn't mean everyone is.
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Sacha,
A couple of experts explain some relevant lessons from Seattle's successful planning..
Agree with all that. (Though I'm not a huge fan of Seattle. Very over-rated if you ask me, and still very car-based. Auckland should aim higher than that!)
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Right, thought you were talking about the UP, not its opponents. We are in agreement.
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Matthew Poole,
The calls to decentralise and stop focussing on the CBD, for example, would deprive an area that's reviving of the people on which said revival relies.
The way I understand what is proposed is that the goal is not so much decentralisation as increasing density around certain local centres in addition to the CBD. I don't think that means the CBD will be 'deprived' of people, just that there will be other secondary centres, which the city will obviously need when it has a population of over 2 million.
-
Speaker: Generation Zero: Let's Grow Up, in reply to Sudhvir Singh,
I'm not talking Penrith or Wollongong though, emphasis on inner suburbs. I'm talking friends who have moved to Darlinghurst and Surrey Hills and walk to St Vincents Hospital and enjoy all the vibrancy in that area after work.
Yes, but my point is that while those places are nice, they are similar to, and equally unaffordable as, Auckland's own funky inner city suburbs like Ponsonby and Grey Lynn. So it seems unlikely that the existence of that kind of lifestyle is the main thing which is drawing young doctors to Sydney, as they can pretty much get that here. The fact that they'll probably earn twice as much in Sydney is probably the clincher.
The question of doctor's lifestyles and salaries is really a red herring in this discussion (sorry, I shouldn't have harped on it in the first place!)--what good urban planning needs to do is make desirable central suburbs more accessible to those who don't have the financial advantage that doctors and other highly paid professionals do. In my experience it's pretty easy to have a good lifestyle just about anywhere if you're well off. It's what a place is like to live for the average person which is a real test of its 'livability'.