Posts by Jim Cathcart
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Just as there would be if I applied it to the current residents of the suburb who, as Sofie pointed out, may be equally guilty of 'bending the rules' (and yes I do take a dim view on tax 'minimisation' by those fortunate enough to have creative accountants).
Well, you probably need to appreciate that negative gearing doesn't require that much creativity and it's mot definitely not reserved for the upper-income earners. It's definitely of more benefit to the mid-income earners who are close to or have paid off the family home and want to build their property investment empire.
-
Hard News: The uncooling of the inner West, in reply to Amanda Wreckonwith,
t will be interesting to see whether the anti-corruption drive by Beijing will have any effects in NZ.
I was told yesterday that a friend was talking to a retailer of luxury watches in Singapore, who was complaining that their sales were 60% down on the year (entirely due to the loss of Chinese buyers).
I wonder if anyone based in China has any similar reports?I'm based in Saigon and being closely connected to the China market, I can tell you that Unilever's sales are down 20% in Q3, but I believe luxury brands are fairing OK. Vietnam is on a par with China with flat-out corruption (possibly worse) and Bentley sales (a favorite of governmental thieves) are thin on the ground.
-
But the primary example of a 'quality' apartment block was also a flop - Metropolis. A developer who was possibly not at the top of the game - but the quality was there. Perhaps other developers didn't want to repeat his mistakes and went for the cheap and cheerful approach?
I agree. I would happily live there. Kruzeiner's vision has left something of value, despite his financial issues. I don't think you can say the same about the majority of developments in the CBD. Most of the product is depressing.
-
It could be argued that Auckland doesn't have the vision or desire for mid- to high-density housing. The fiasco from 2000 up to the GFC illustrates that well. The construction of apartment buildings in the CBD was the right move but the objectives--profit as the priority driven by an uninformed public who cannot see another direction to invest in their financial security--resulted in the construction in trash. The same phenomenon could be seen in Japan in the 1980s/90s. Now, with depreciation being the norm after 20+ years, developers have no choice but to offer higher quality dwellings to make a sale.
The issue in Auckland is that developers with the resources and vision barely exist compared to Japan. The only solution it would seem is for the government to take charge, which would see the deficit explode and existing property prices to fall or flat-line. Good for the young and the future but anathema for those whose wealth is tied up in residential property. Of course, without the productive capacity of NZ companies, it would likely require Asian developers to achieve this.
-
Hard News: The uncooling of the inner West, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
If your politics prioritizes the social benefits of housing, you would take measures to prevent speculation. The whole issue was barely raised as public debt was constrained as household debt did the heavy lifting. What is socially progressive about that?
-
This is the norm in Europe and it would have prevented the whole un-affordable house problem had some far sighted Govt. decided to build more state houses. Oh hang on, they did but then National gets in and decided it was compulsory to own your own home unless you were a Feral, in which case you should just curl up and die.
Oh, so housing as a speculative asset didn't exist under a Labor government? Good grief. I mean this was the period when the Australian banking system was effectively bailed out by the U.S. Fed.
http://barnabyisright.com/2011/12/24/westpac-nab-survive-on-us-fed-life-support/
-
Yes, and it's all too mainstream and conspiratorial to consider or try to understand why property prices are in the stratosphere. And the latest spurt in price growth post-GFC has pushed Auckland prices into the world's most unaffordable relative to incomes (yes I know that a single metric is incomplete).
The problem is that everyone is focused on the now and the future economic impacts on ordinary people's lives is potentially catastrophic. However, the "I'm alright Jack" attitude is widespread, yet how this can be sustained on NZ incomes (national or private) is only discussed by a small minority.
-
A media that's heavily reliant on advertising revenue from the banks, which earn not a small amount from property loans. Turkeys and Thanksgiving come to mind. As I've mentioned before, the orthodoxy will probably remain in place until there's a very big and disruptive event of Icelandic proportions.
Yes, and Hickey is very valuable to the media considering economic orthodoxy is blind to the inherent risks in the system, which have not been addressed nor answered by the govt, media, or general public. BH is a "the other" even though his questions are asked more stridently in other countries. He is no analyst, but he has the gumption to ask the questions that need to be considered.
-
Rod Oram? Are you serious? Economics is not paint by numbers where you color blue or Red in a minimal degree of shades. Hickey attempted to push the envelope in terms of opening the public' eyes, but it appears he's been largely written off by the media and he definitely irks the mortgage belters. David Llewellyn Smith praises the guy for his efforts.
-
Economics is akin to anathema for most NZers and the mainstream media and revolutionary voices are largely MIA in raising any debate or criticism. Across the ditch, Macrobusiness has taken up the challenge; yet in NZ, it appears that people are stupefied when confronted with economic issues. Given the precarious nature of the current debt-driven model, it is remarkable that the entire framework is not worthy of deconstruction and understanding.