Hard News: So long, and thanks for all the fish ...
362 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 Newer→ Last
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Nobody needs to own more than one house
So where do rental properties come from?
In this country? From private landlords who don't need to be in that game, mostly. Once upon a time it was considered legitimate for the state to be a landlord. In much of Europe, it still is.That this country has extended private greed into the provision of housing does not mean it is right, or the only way to do things.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Getting hit with more costs would probably cause us to reconsider our philanthropic approach.
Which is unfortunate, but you’re also a distinct minority. Plus, if you’re not making an income from it you’re obviously holding it for capital gain. Which makes you a prime example of the landlord-who-doesn’t-care-about-income-because-they’ll-make-a-tax-free-pile-at-sale class. Not a personal attack, just an observation that landlords either own for the income or for the capital gain. If the gain at sale was going to be taxed, by your own admission you’d adjust what you did about income.
-
I don't agree that private provision of rental properties necessarily has to be a bad thing, as I hope my example showed.
-
Carol Stewart, in reply to
Plus, if you're not making money from it you're obviously holding it for capital gain.
Not really. We just like our little house. But sure, point taken that we are almost certainly a minority.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
There’s zero regulatory protection for tenants.
I think this is the point where somebody explains the protections for tenants in many European countries. I don't know much about it, but I'm sure somebody hereabouts could enlighten us, because it does seem to make for an interesting comparison.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
I don’t agree that private provision of rental properties necessarily has to be a bad thing, as I hope my example showed.
No, it doesn't, but because it introduces a private profit motive (and in this country gives tenants very, very little protection against bad landlords) it's not an activity which is broadly socially beneficial. You do sound like a good landlord, and I have never personally encountered a landlord from hell, but I know people who have. My brother used to work for DBH, and some of the stories would make your hair curl.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
I think this is the point where somebody explains the protections for tenants in many European countries.
I think a key one is a requirement for cause before terminating a tenancy. In NZ a landlord can give 90 days’ notice and that’s the end of the matter. There is no right of appeal (unless it’s breaking a fixed-term tenancy without mutual agreement), and no requirement for there to be any reason. Could have been a day ending with a ‘y’ when the landlord made the decision, and that’s more than sufficient.
ETA: This is not a recent change, either. It's been the law for many years.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
No, it doesn’t, but because it introduces a private profit motive (and in this country gives tenants very, very little protection against bad landlords) it’s not an activity which is broadly socially beneficial.
I'm not sure that it's clearly broadly socially detrimental either. A landlord is taking all the risk on for the property. Many people are simply not in a position to do this, hence they rent. Without landlords of some kind (even if they are the state) there would be no rental properties, and people who can't get a deposit together, or a loan from a bank, would be homeless.
The social detriment is a complex function of how expensive property has become, and how many people this excludes from owning. That goes to equity of capital and income - when property is in fewer and fewer hands, that means pretty much all the capital is too (since property is most of the nation's capital).
Essentially, if private property ownership is possible at all, then there are always going to be landlords. The problem of landlords is not their existence, it is their relative wealth. The two can work in a feedback loop, however, when becoming a landlord becomes one of the most effective means to wealth. The "real" landlord is in most cases a bank, and they have become obscenely wealthy.
-
Sacha, in reply to
should the Greens firmly punish anyone who slags Labour?
Yes
-
anth, in reply to
In NZ a landlord can give 90 days’ notice and that’s the end of the matter
Or 42 days in some circumstances where it'd be particularly useful for the landlord.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Essentially, if private property ownership is possible at all, then there are always going to be landlords. The problem of landlords is not their existence, it is their relative wealth. The two can work in a feedback loop, however, when becoming a landlord becomes one of the most effective means to wealth. The "real" landlord is in most cases a bank, and they have become obscenely wealthy.
To cut a long story short, the housing market in NZ has effectively become a textbook economic cartel. And recent proposals to weaken that cartel, such as the Unitary Plan, have been met with an orchestrated litany of wolf cries.
And the underlying snobbery behind much of the anti-UP propaganda implies that NZ society itself has become cartellised to a certain degree, for lack of a better analogy.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
The iron law of oligarchy at work?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.