Sir Bob

New Zealand, but interesting none the less

Foolish to blame landlords and foreigners

Leave it to the property market to correct the imbalances caused by high demand for housing in Auckland.

So the Prime Minister is considering restraints on residential landlords, joining the clamour of nonsense spouted on this subject in recent times. Here are some observations, but before there's a deluge of "he would say that, wouldn't he" letters, note that I've never owned residential property and never will. The lousy returns and tenancy hassles would drive me to tears.

First, if Auckland's housing woes can in part be laid at the door of residential investors as alleged, simply ban them. Give landlords three years to dispose of their properties and, hey presto, paradise. Or would it be?

Let's say an orderly sale of the tens of thousands of rental properties is achieved to owner-occupiers, then where do the former tenants live, now private renting is illegal? There's only one answer - the Government will have to house them, and remember, when the Government spends, it's your money. I doubt anyone would be too delighted at that prospect.

So why place impediments in the landlord's way? To the contrary it's in society's interest to encourage the private rental housing sector; it even makes sense to give it subsidies if we must adopt a tweaking of the market system.

Another foolish cry is that landlords buying houses drive up prices. As they buy to rent and will stop abruptly if the tenancy demand dries up, that argument is not very logical. Lately, world-class foolishness has been on display with the "unfair" claims that a landlord can deduct his mortgage interest while an owner-occupier cannot.

It's not hard. The landlord is running a business and pays tax on his earnings. And if be doesn't pay much, that's because he doesn't earn much because of the minuscule returns. One can equally argue the homeowner should pay a fringe benefit tax for the use of his house.

cont....

Housing affordability saga a load of codswallop

The alleged crisis over the cost of buying a home is more about expectations being too high rather than feasibility.

A sense of automatic effortless entitlement to everything has evolved. Housing affordability is topical, more so following Finance Minister Bill English's relaxation of land development rules, which, however, he admitted would make little beneficial difference.

Contrary to all that is being said, newly-built houses have never been more affordable, but that assertion requires explanation.

But first, compare today's situation with what occurred in the 1960s, that decade being a golden age of house-building in New Zealand, carried out mainly by many hundreds of small operation spec' builders, designing the houses themselves on their kitchen tables.

In those pre-pill days, for that reason, people married in their late teens or early twenties. House mortgages were mainly available only from life insurance companies which would lend a maximum 65 per cent of the total land and building cost at 6.5 per cent interest, but, with the added sizeable financial burden of insisting on the purchase of a costly whole-of-life insurance policy.

But no one complained for values were different then. People did not expect anything for nothing or see everything as a natural human right. Instead it was common-place for newlyweds to obtain higher interest rate, second and third mortgages to make up the shortfall, then both work at part-time evening and weekend jobs for several years to pay off these supplementary debts. Only then would they start families, albeit still in their twenties. Also back then, those first homes were simple one level structures with a single bathroom. Home-seekers' housing ambitions, particularly for their first home, were realistic and matched their financial capability. None of this is the case now.

continues...
 
Yep!

Only one bathroom......dear God help us!

Do we really need more than one today!

Still remember the bed sheets for curtains and planting grass "runners" ans seed to start a lawn.
 
Yep!

Only one bathroom......dear God help us!

Do we really need more than one today!

Still remember the bed sheets for curtains and planting grass "runners" ans seed to start a lawn.

Planting grass "runners"...yep

Growing cuttings...yep

Outdoor toilet...yep

3 minute showers...yep

Don't shoot anything unless you're going to eat it (except crows) :confused: hmm

Watched an interesting show called 'The house the 50's built' ..not that I was even twinkle then

An examination of the ingenuity and life-changing technology behind the 1950s inventions that launched drab, black-and-white post-war Britain into a Technicolor-drenched world of the future
 
I have long argued that there is NOT a housing crisis rather an expectation crisis.

Most Kids today will NOT live in a "starter" house as we (and our parents) did.

Even Grandma's house in the (now) trendy expensive suburb was probably either fairly long way from town or a "shady" area when they bought it.
 
What about starting in a flat...I would never have started at all if it was not in a basic flat..and very grateful I was to get finance as a female in the 80s as it was still not usual for women to buy their own places
 
Yep!

Only one bathroom......dear God help us!

Do we really need more than one today!

Still remember the bed sheets for curtains and planting grass "runners" ans seed to start a lawn.

remember being made to share bath water in the tiny 3 bed a bath asbestos house but it was such a step up from the weatherboard with the outside dunny (with no septic) still remember the summer smell of that
 
Back
Top