A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby phill » Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:06 pm

Perry wrote:
phill wrote:maybe some sort of " abandoned house " legislation

I doubt they are abandoned - just not occupied - but still paying Rates.


But it's symptom-chasing, not cause fixing.
]



no doubt they are not abandoned .. in the literal meaning
but
if they are not in use they functionally are
the term is designed to motivate

and you may call it addressing the symptoms instead of the problem
i would reply
fix enough of the symptoms and the problem goes away or at least is mitigated to a large degree

the chances of being caught by council and fined for an abandoned house .. carries little risk to the owner and hence would not work well
the idea that some stranger/s can squat at will at no benefit to the owner is a somewhat higher motivator to the average greedy
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )

i might live and eat in a sewer .. but hey look how many of these shiny things i have got
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 2325
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby greven » Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:32 pm

I'm surprised the Auckland Super City Council hasn't tried the old trick of a rates discount for compliant building owners (and just ignore that matching rates hike - it is just a coincidence)
greven
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:41 pm
Location: Invercargill

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby phill » Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:58 pm

sage advice
beware when they relax the pressure on your left nut
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )

i might live and eat in a sewer .. but hey look how many of these shiny things i have got
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 2325
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby Ossified Location » Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:57 pm

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:1. NZ fairs[sic] very badly on international metrics on house affordability.
A sort-of hung comparative. Similarly, NZ also fares very badly on pay and productivity and related things.
Yes, and each of those is interesting in its own right.

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:2. There are socially unacceptable levels of people who cannot find a house to live in.
Disagree. Adding the adjective "socially" distorts things. There are unacceptable (to who?) levels of people who cannot find a house to live in. There are many causes. E.g. No private LL wants to house a "P-head druggie." Would you blame them for that?
Of course not. I am a private landlord, and I am currently in the process of kicking out a tenant for not opening his windows often enough. But I know of many people with good references who cannot find a property either, and I know of other landlords who report being flooded with applications when they have a property available. I'm not overly happy about that. so to answer your question, it is unacceptable to me. But it is partly because of that that I feel confident that I can remove the current tenant and find a better one.

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:3. At the census there were 39,393 empty houses in Auckland alone.
No comment - it's a statistic.
It is, and I find it a highly interesting statistic.

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:4. This is partly because the current system has made empty houses a profitable investment.
What is "the current system?" Are the anti-LL, pro-tenant laws being passed a part of what you refer to? If so, those laws will worsen the present situation - in 2, above - in my view.
No, I do not consider laws not yet passed to be part of the current system. The "current system" I am referring to is the last 30 years which has seen House prices and rents rising faster than incomes.

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:5. The trend of rapidly rising house prices has happened under both National and Labour governments.
Agreed.

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:6. MPs tend to own a lot of houses.
Too broad. On the figures provided in the chart you posted, some particular party MPs may do. Because the chart says it's averaged, it's not possible to say with any certainty.
Oh, but it is. MPs are required to register their Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests. You can find the latest list at https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/mps-financial-interests/mps-financial-interests/2020-current-register-of-pecuniary-and-other-specified-interests/
So lets take Judith Collins as a random example. CDL Hotels Limited – hotel operator. Beneficial interests in Sigmund Trust (trustee and beneficiary), Judith Collins Family Trust (trustee and beneficiary), Schoeller Family Trust (trustee), Barbara Collins Family Trust (trustee), Edith Moorman Trust (trustee). She has her family home (owned by trusts) in Auckland. Her superannuation scheme owns Commercial and residential property in Wellington, and residential property in Nelson.

Now I'm certainly not saying MPs have done anything wrong by investing in property. I also have, because with the current system it is the most logical choice. But is it the best choice for New Zealand to have us all trying to out bid each other for a pool of houses that isn't keeping up in real terms? Is it the best choice to have families sleeping in cars while thousands of houses sit empty? So is the current system (supported by both Labour and National) the best system, or could there be a better one?

Perry wrote:
Ossified Location wrote:7. We all have cognitive biases.
Agreed.

Ossified Location wrote:8. Is it possible that MPs owning a lot of houses could subconsciously influence their ability to see solutions to the problem of rising house prices?
Anything is possible. Even more so when W'gton woodenheads are involved. I find it perplexing that MPs who own houses which I presume are residential rentals, vote for Draconian tenancy laws. But then, they're not a very bright lot, are they?
[/quote]
Ossified Location
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby Malcolm » Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:39 am

I wonder how many MPs who own two homes have a family home in their home electorate and a house/apartment in Wellington. Especially since Bill English changed the rules so the taxpayers pay an allowance for them to rent the house back to themselves and pay the mortgage that way. They of course pocket all the capital gains along the way. Giving a nice nest egg when they finish being an MP and sell the Wellington property.
Malcolm
 
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: A new oligopoly brewing? (10 Aug, 2020)

Postby phill » Thu Aug 20, 2020 12:22 pm

Malcolm wrote:I wonder how many MPs who own two homes have a family home in their home electorate and a house/apartment in Wellington. Especially since Bill English changed the rules so the taxpayers pay an allowance for them to rent the house back to themselves and pay the mortgage that way. They of course pocket all the capital gains along the way. Giving a nice nest egg when they finish being an MP and sell the Wellington property.


pretty much all of them that have a house in wallytown
and thats a lot of them
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )

i might live and eat in a sewer .. but hey look how many of these shiny things i have got
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 2325
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Previous

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests