The Dim-Post

September 27, 2016

Problem solved!

Filed under: Uncategorized — danylmc @ 10:25 am

Everyone relax. The head of Barfoot and Thompson has figured out how to solve the housing crisis.

23 Comments »

  1. As Lange said: That’s like getting a panel-
    beater to design an intersection.

    Comment by Graham Adams — September 27, 2016 @ 10:35 am

  2. B&T could do their bit but not doing auctions which just seem to be a vehicle for ramping up price

    Comment by Ron Wilson — September 27, 2016 @ 10:37 am

  3. I wonder if Peter Thompson is a billionaire yet.

    Comment by danylmc — September 27, 2016 @ 10:59 am

  4. “Thompson would like to see political parties form a group on housing affordability — “like they did with superannuation” — and try to come up with a paper of substance and implement that.” Looks like he means a cross-party consensus (but didn’t say so because Herald readers wouldn’t get such a radical notion).

    The same solution could be applied to end the war in Syria. All you need to do to get national unity and sensible solutions to endemic social problems is create consensus. However doing so requires a general perception of a potential mutual-benefit outcome. As long as some groups believe they benefit more from the status quo, it ain’t gonna happen.

    Comment by Dennis Frank — September 27, 2016 @ 11:05 am

  5. Funny how he worries about overexposed borrowers, while at the same time advocating relaxing LVRs

    Comment by Antoine — September 27, 2016 @ 11:27 am

  6. Funny how he worries about overexposed borrowers, while at the same time advocating relaxing LVRs

    To be fair, he does say “relax the loan to value ratios for first home buyers on all purchases of residential properties under $500,000

    Which is probably the only thing that makes somewhat sense in that piece. LVRs are most restrictive on first home buyers who don’t have assets yet that they can leverage. Then again $500k doesn’t get you much in AKL.

    Comment by eszett — September 27, 2016 @ 11:50 am

  7. Loosening lending on housing under $500k in Auckland… So one poor family can buy a 1 bedroom flat?

    Yay for the cross-party agreement on superannuation that was abandoned by National in 2008!

    Comment by RHT — September 27, 2016 @ 11:51 am

  8. I saw that, but these first home buyers are as much at risk as anyone if interest rates rise

    Comment by Antoine — September 27, 2016 @ 11:53 am

  9. To be fair, he does say “relax the loan to value ratios for first home buyers on all purchases of residential properties under $500,000”
    Which is probably the only thing that makes somewhat sense in that piece.

    Australia has a similar thing with relaxing stamp duty for first home buyers buying under $500,000. All it does is generate a market ‘floor’ where investors bid prices up to $501k, knowing marginal first home buyers are then shut out of the sale.

    Comment by Phil — September 27, 2016 @ 12:16 pm

  10. Barfoots would sell like 10 or twenty new homes to first home buyers…its just not their market niche… and yet he claims to be an expert. Basic House and land packages dont include real estate agents as that too expensive for the builder.

    Comment by ghostwhowalksnz — September 27, 2016 @ 12:34 pm

  11. 4. Patience … because the bubble will eventually burst and housing will (for a time) be more affordable than it is now.

    Comment by MeToo — September 27, 2016 @ 12:46 pm

  12. A real estate agent opining on the housing market? “Now, Mr Fox, what are your thoughts on facilitating the protection of the henhouse and its residents?”

    Jaysus….

    Comment by D'Esterre — September 27, 2016 @ 2:18 pm

  13. “because the bubble will eventually burst and housing will (for a time) be more affordable than it is now.”
    Lolz, when there’s a bust, no one can get the financing to buy the property. So unless you’re a cash buyer (and your bank didn’t go under), you still probably won’t be able to buy at a decent price.

    Comment by Clunking Fist — September 27, 2016 @ 2:50 pm

  14. What would you suggest Danyl?

    Comment by SG — September 27, 2016 @ 4:13 pm

  15. I saw that, but these first home buyers are as much at risk as anyone if interest rates rise

    That is true, but if your aim is to raise home ownership and have more first home buyers, you should have an LVR exception.

    What and LVR does discourage is once you bought a first home to quickly by another one by leveraging your first home and thereby overexposing yourself.

    Comment by eszett — September 27, 2016 @ 5:30 pm

  16. Australia has a similar thing with relaxing stamp duty for first home buyers buying under $500,000. All it does is generate a market ‘floor’ where investors bid prices up to $501k, knowing marginal first home buyers are then shut out of the sale.

    Well, if an investor was going to bid $500k+, the other buyers would have lost anyway.

    Relaxing the LVRs allows the at least to participate and give first home buyers a chance, which they couldn’t do without.

    Comment by eszett — September 27, 2016 @ 5:32 pm

  17. Not News: Official spokesman for Generation Rentier insists that Rome isn’t going up in smoke.

    Comment by Kumara Republic (@kumararepublic) — September 27, 2016 @ 5:45 pm

  18. Here’s a potential policy setting: stop importing record levels of people into Auckland.

    How long does it take to make a family dwelling? Months

    How long does take to process a family immigration application ? Days

    We have immigration policy settings that bring in more people to under-stress places such as Auckland than we can accommodate, and now we have Te Puea and Manurewa Marae having to deal with the resulting homelessness problem.

    How about this: If we don’t have enough homes, stop importing people.

    I’d be happy for a moratorium on additional people in Auckland until we no longer have a housing crisis. What’s the downside ?

    Comment by Mikaere Curtis — September 27, 2016 @ 10:54 pm

  19. Damn right, Mikaere! The downside is that the inflow makes the government look good. It creates the semblance of a growth economy, and you know what addicts to growth the NatLabs are. They’d start whining that they need another hit. Suit-wearing dorks whining all over the media, all the time. It’d get real tedious real fast.

    Comment by Dennis Frank — September 27, 2016 @ 11:16 pm

  20. In his defense, he is probably quite interested in a large movement of people from rental to home ownership. (About as interested as I am in no longer paying my landlords mortgage plus $150 each week.)

    Comment by Michael — September 28, 2016 @ 1:32 am

  21. “Here’s a potential policy setting: stop importing record levels of people into Auckland.”

    Winston Peters agrees.

    Comment by Ortvin Sarapuu — September 28, 2016 @ 2:54 am

  22. We need to look at establishing rent controls based on what families can afford to pay and then fit the price of real estate around that so that these families can someday own their own home.

    Comment by Daniel Lang — September 28, 2016 @ 9:34 am

  23. @David go back to Soviet Russia

    A.

    Comment by Antoine — September 28, 2016 @ 11:51 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: