Justcol

I know i do tend to rant on a bit, but, the up coming rate increases, and they are coming, expect one in the next few weeks
and another around sept/oct are to a large degree an attempt to try and curb the silly state of affairs in Auckland.
And as said, house prices are far cheaper (and I think quality of life is far batter) outside of Auckland.
I know people are drawn to cities like lemmings, that'll never change, but the smaller towns have just as much
appeal, if not more when it comes to work life balance. I didn't travel half way round the world to be a slave to a mortgage.
If my house was in Aux I would have had to pay well over a million unless i wanted to live in an "up and coming" area (or rough in plain English)
I saw run down shacks in Green lane, devonport, milford, takapuna, all selling for well into 7 figures

Bellasmum

I hear you. But some of us actually love our life style in and around Auckland and we are really quite nice people. One of my sons built his house during the 80's when interest rates were 20 % and they have survived. They are now living in a 5 bedroom house worth 1.5 mil. Hard work and patience will always rise to the top IMHO.

Purrball

In my opinion, the main reason why this was possible and this also goes for the 1960s and 70s is this:





Houses relative to incomes were less than half the price they are now. This is a very different world from those times.

bourbon-biscuit

Erm, that's why I said MOST. You're right that there are lots of 'affordable' areas outside of Auckland, but you and I live in Cambridge, which, however you like to spin it, is only 'affordable' in comparison to Auckland. Truly affordable towns are the likes of Tokoroa, Putararu, etc.

Ooo, that's uncharacteristically pointed of you. I wasn't telling a "good tale", I was venting my frustration with a government headed by a businessman under whose guidance property prices (in relation to incomes) have risen hugely. That's a fair frustration for an ordinary family like mine living on ordinary Kiwi wages.

The lemmings remark is pathetic: lots of people are drawn to cities for work. It's a global trend, and economists and social scientists who are more knowledgeable on the reasons for the trend, don't tend to put it down to lemming behaviour.

The other reason people are drawn to cities is because they like cultural diversity (using the term cultural to describe both people and the arts), and in that respect, no, the smaller towns do not have as much appeal. I do not like cities, though I like cultural stuff: I do not like crowds and traffic and I do like pottering in the garden and I like smaller communities but I don't deride others for not liking this. Most expats in Cambridge seem to think it's heaven here because you can invite your mates round for beer and a BBQ nine months of the year, or you can own jetskis and take them out to wreck the serenity of the lake every week. The appeal of small towns might suit your tastes but that doesn't mean it's for everyone - my sisters are city loves and spend their leisure time in museums, galleries, theatres, etc. They would hate living where I do - I would not try and tell them that here has as much appeal as Auckland or Welly, as the highlight of Cambridge calendar is either the autumn festival, the local dance school's show, harness racing, or the New World Xmas parade

Ahhh, your PM would be proud of you

Yes, but "Never let the facts spoil a good tale, aye "

Justcol

We've all made heaps of money on houses without doing a thing, its not a difficult thing to do.
All you do is buy a house and live in it, its not rocket science, prices double on average every 7 years.
lets not start pretending we're all property developers with incredible foresight.
you buy a house in any capital on the planet (Yes I know Auckland isnt but it might as well be) and your
going to be sitting pretty in 30 years time, there's no hard work involved and it doesn't make those who've done it
any smarter or astute than the rest of us, they just chose to build / live where they did whereas others didnt.
I could buy a POS in Auckland tomorrow, throw in a tenant and wait for the money to roll in, would it be worth it?
For me, I'd say no, I couldn't give a monkeys about making money I neither want or need, I leave that to the needy and the greedy.

Bellasmum

My son and daughter in law worked their buts off to pay for their first house just like the rest of us. And yes patience and hard work are required to get anywhere in life. Not too sure where the rest of your post is coming from but it certainly doesn't relate to our family.

Bellasmum

Settle down petal. There is no need to get nasty, my comments were nothing more than a sharing of situations our family have been in and certainly wasn't aimed at you or anyone else for that matter.

By the way my son and daughter in law were paying off two businesses when their interest was 20 % and living of the bones of an oily rag. Actually Mr B has just reminded me it was 21 % at the time.

What your comment about the current PM has to do with the interest rates in the 1980's beats me.

Justcol

I wind surf not jet ski, its much quieter.
I also like museums and the arts, but how many people in cities actually go to either. When I lived in Aux I would
go to the Gallery at least once a fortnight and also visited most of the big and smaller local history museums.
Whenever I did I could probably have counted the number of other visitors on my digits if I took my socks off.
As for cultural diversity, I've stood on queen street in Aux and actually seen people stop and point at a poor
woman in a full burka, kiwis may have many wonderful traits but an understanding and acceptance of different
cultures isnt one of them, The Chinese and Asian communities are blamed for many of the city's current
housing problems and they are viewed in a way I havent seen since the bad old days in the UK when Indians
and Pakistanis were the target of just about every racial slur.
I understand people will always flock to cities but my comments were meant for someone who has little or no knowledge
of life in NZ and to me anyway, if you are making such a life changing move you should be open to exploring every aspect
of what your new chosen country has to offer.
I spent almost all my life living in big cities in the uk and the thought of doing the same after making such a
monumental move seemed ridiculous

Purrball

Yes, o biscuity one.

There are other crucial factors as well, including students in those days, including myself, were the beneficiary of generous bursaries or grants. There were no such thing as student loans and people didn't graduate knee-deep in debt before they'd barely started in life.

Although it's incredibly self-flattering, people back then didn't work harder than they do now, they had certain structural economic advantages which made life far easier, including the world's most generous welfare state that mostly served the middle classes, post-war high levels of employment and widespread unionisation which ensured that salaries were high relative to household expenditures. Low income households had the option of a substantial supply of state housing. Immigration and capital flows were more tightly restricted into the country so that asset bubbles overseas didn't lead to speculation on New Zealand's capital assets becoming the norm.

Since you like graphs, here's another:






So, to cut a long story short, the facts are clear. As in the UK, but far more rapidly and to a less wealthy economy to start with, the middle-classes and all those who earned from their labour in New Zealand were hoodwinked into economically slitting their own throats over the long term, the consequences of which are only becoming clear 30-odd years later.

To cap things off, which politicians from both sides in both the UK and New Zealand, are suspiciously quiet about, is that we're in the midst of or just at the beginning of an industrial revolution in computer and robotics technology, where hundreds of types of jobs will disappear down the pan.

I'm just over 50 and once in a while, I have to remind my mother that this world is so unlike the time she grew up, the fundamentals changed so much, the playing field so tilted the other way, that she and my father could have never started off in life in New Zealand, four kids, getting an architect to design and build their own house in the new inner suburbs of Wellington, a mere primary school-teacher and a clerk, in the same way now as she and my father did back then... and that held mostly true until about 1989-90.

Instead of condemning those in their 20s and 30s, I genuinely feel sorry for you. Your elders and supposed betters sold your futures out on the promise of tax cuts on higher rate incomes and in New Zealand, no taxes on capital gains or family trusts, while the borders were opened to anyone with money. Shame you'll be renting or flat-sharing well into your 40s, maybe longer. And as for the kids of today, the children of friends of mine, they're saddled with huge amounts of debt before they've even left learning. No wonder New Zealand has one of the lowest personal saving rates in the world.

So, for those who are smugly patting themselves on the back for being born at the right time, I'm not particularly impressed. Interest rates may have been 20% (for only a relatively short time) but salaries in relation to houding costs were far higher. Times are undoubtedly far harder now then they were then...

The maths does not lie.

Bellasmum

And you know that because you found some stats. Good for you.

My facts are we returned from the UK in 1974 and bought a house in Auckland for $27000. Interest was 5% for a govt loan and that was with cashing in the family benefit for our two sons. Problem was what the govt would lend us was limited and we had to take out a second mortgage that had to be renewed every two years for a ridicules amount at a ridicules interest rate. Mr B was a well paid certified mechanic at the time and there is no way we could have survived on his wage alone. At $2700 a VHS was well out of the price range for the likes of us. That is just one example of the cost of things at the time. Now with respect unless you have lived it you can only look through the narrow vision of your graphs.

Purrball

I note that instead of addressing the arguments and facts I've put before everyone, that you don't address them at all. In my view, you have an unfortunate problem with your tone... and an unsympathetic and unflattering habit of disregarding the facts, as well people's testimony. It doesn't reflect well and what's more, is largely irrelevant to the problems that people are facing in 2014. It comes across as insultingly condescending.

Once again, at risk of repeating myself, house values in relation to average salaries in the 1970s and 80s were 45-50% cheaper than they are now. It's undeniable.


Ancedotes do not equal data. You may have found life difficult, but you were supported in ways that people are not these days, including living under a far more progressive tax rate and no sales tax.


Frankly, this is laughably absurd. Technology always comes rapidly down in price; it's virtually deflationary. You can't give VHS machines away these days... nothing you buy with a chip in it is going to appreciate in value unless it's a mint collectable. It's not comparable to the fundamentals of day to day living: mortgages/rents and bills which have steadily outstripped rises in wages.


This is incoherent. You're avoiding the issues and are wasting people's time. I'm putting the hardcore rock-solid financial facts in front of everyone, from the Reserve Bank. From 1980, average GDP earnings per hour in New Zealand are down about 25% while, inflation adjusted, housing is twice as expensive. In 1956, standards of living were higher than Australia, almost 90% of those in the USA. Now they're about 60% of that or lower. New Zealand in GDP terms has slipped down to about that of Slovenia.

If you can't process this and all you have to offer is bromides about what it was like in your day and how much harder you worked than people of today, then honestly, what possible use or relevance do your contributions have in this discussion?

With respect.

davros1984

Getting that rich via property is just vile. All it does it ruin the future for the youth of today and tomorrow. Homes are just that "homes" and should be protected as such. Hopefully there is a big crash in Auckland and at least 50% of the value is wiped off.

Purrball - I applaud you for being able to see the sad reality of today. That post above with the graph was absolutely spot on. Specifically:

bourbon-biscuit

So you're not the rogue who was threatening to tip my daughter and her pals out all morning on Saturday. I can cross you off my list

Oh yes - I wasn't suggesting people would actually find much of the arts or a happily multicultural city when they get to Auckland, just that lots of people rate those aspects highly in their lives, even more highly than peace and quiet and windsurfing, so that's a pull factor to the cities.
You don't have to. I have no intention of exploring certain aspects of Kiwi culture, and I don't especially think any other immigrant should have to. Good to come with a positive and open mind and to expect a bit of adjustment so you don't then blame all your bad experiences on NZ and NZers, but there are as many reasons for immigrants to move here as there are immigrants, I reckon.

But what if you were younger and enjoyed cities and city life? What if your only viable work prospects were in the city? Would that make you a lemming or worthy of contempt?

Purrball

I read. Always best to try to wade into discussions like this armed with a few facts and informative nuggets to back up what you're saying. When I occasionally ponder about returning to NZ, I think about money and my health problems, I think about the wider global economy and how my nephews and nieces will find their way in New Zealand... not BBQs, the bush or the beach.

I'm lucky. I've got options. I can stay here in the UK until the end of my days or return to NZ any time I like. And I have the luxury of not being too invested in portraying New Zealand in one way or another. I realise that people will weave a narrative around themselves that justifies the life-decisions they make... and I've never denied that New Zealand isn't a fantastic place to live for the right kind of person, whether because they're financially secure or love outdoors living, but it's a hard graft for ordinary people these days. I mean, since we're talking about the 1970s, which I remember quite clearly, for one thing, food was subsidised, not taxed. Sounds crazy. You can call me a dreamer... but I'm not the only one.



If I'm cautious or occasionally a bit brusque with people who think that they'd like to move to New Zealand for the 'lifestyle' or for 'opportunities', then all I'd ask of these people is to closely examine what these things really mean in day to day life, especially for those on average wages. I'd even question the idea that it's a great place to bring up kids, as if all kids are the same.

I think it's great that some have gone out there, whether it's 40 years ago of five years ago, and have done well. But some will have had certain advantages, which they've long forgotten, or they were well set-up to start with. While there are always exceptions, I'm not the first person or the last to say that no-one goes out to New Zealand to become rich or advance their careers. New Zealand, generally speaking, repays you in different ways.

However, what I will not do is to pretend to tell people that are struggling to afford a house in New Zealand, that it's always been that way. It's not helpful, it's not true... and generally speaking, it hasn't always been that way. And this situation hasn't come about because it's a natural state of affairs; it's because of political and economic incentives and structures that have taken place since the 1980s. These are the facts.

I also will not tell people who expect a reasonable standard of living in a supposed first world country that they're lemmings for wanting to live in a city or a desire to have some luxuries in their lives is merely hankering after trappings, as someone recently here phrased it. I won't tell people to work 80 hours per week and I can't offer any advice, except to echo what others have said about looking outside Auckland if there are job opportunities elsewhere.

I've got a lot of sympathy for people, young families particularly, trying to make their own way. The greatest financial crisis in the last 80 years has changed the world so much, and those who have long paid off their mortgages, sitting pretty, if they have no idea how people are living their lives these days and the challenges they face, except to only tell people to pull their socks up because they they lived in a shoebox at the bottom of a lake*, then they're probably better keeping their thoughts to themselves.

Take care.

*Python

bourbon-biscuit

It really irks me when people slip the knife in sideways on a forum and then when called up on it try to pretend otherwise.

Post 43 Justcol quoted me and argued a contrary perspective to mine (have no issue with that per se), and then you quoted him answering me and made your comment about not letting facts get in the way of a good story. So unless you don't undrerstand how a forum works, you just made a dig at me

The irony being that later on in this thread you quibble over some very cold hard facts on the basis that your experience is different

You made a very right wing comment suggesting every one has a fair chance at enjoying the spoils of society. I hadn't pegged you as a right-winger, so it surprised me, but as I said, Key would approve.