3 ms·

Lol this sounds like a bunch of words from someone so has more than one house. House prices going down is a GOOD thing for the vast majority of the population.

Lol this sounds like a bunch of words from someone so has more than one house. House prices going down is a GOOD thing for the vast majority of the population. What you also forget is that as a coastal property people buy those houses as holiday homes. So by not living there for 48 weeks off the year, local businesses suffer. By ensuring those homes are lived in means local businesses will flourish.

maratc 4y ago
> someone so has more than one house I'm not going to answer the ad-hominem attack, you know nothing of my situation, and it's irrelevant to the discussion anyway. But I think it's stupid to own a property which brings no revenue and stands empty 95% of the year, but still requires taxes and upkeep. > House prices going down is a GOOD thing for the vast majority of the population. On the opposite. House prices going down is a good thing for the unhoused population, and it's a bad thing for the homeowners. In the most markets, more people own houses than not. So the majority of the population usually enjoys house prices rising (at the expense of the minority, of course). Additionally, the more a house is "worth" on paper, the more people are willing to invest in it (renovations, keep-up), which is usually a good thing for the economy. > What you also forget is that as a coastal property people buy those houses as holiday homes. I don't forget that, I completely understand the situation. What I don't know is the situation in a neighbouring town which is not coastal and where no rich londoners are buying.
- philliphaydon 4y ago
  > at the expense of the minority, of course That minority is slowly becoming a majority. Home ownership in NZ is the lowest ever. It’s down to like 60-65%. The market is becoming completely unaffordable. Raising prices is good for high income earners and people who have homes to leverage from. > Additionally, the more a house is "worth" on paper, the more people are willing to invest in it (renovations, keep-up), which is usually a good thing for the economy. People who can barely afford a house cannot renovated it. When a mortgage payment is 2-3 times the cost of renting you don’t have disposable income to renovate. > House prices going down is a good thing for the unhoused population, and it's a bad thing for the homeowners. The ONLY time prices falling is bad for a home owner is when the value of the house is less than what they paid.
  - maratc 4y ago
    > Home ownership in NZ is the lowest ever. It’s down to like 60-65%. If I read it right, the homeowners outnumber the non-homeowners 2:1 then? This would mean twice as much votes for measures getting prices up than against these measures. > The ONLY time prices falling is bad for a home owner is when the value of the house is less than what they paid. I disagree, not on the question "are prices going up good?" but on the question "do most people like the prices going up?". I think most people who own property want to see their property go up, not down, in price; and I think the majority of the population owns property, and so falls into that group. In other words, I think that on a referendum of whether to get all property up by 50% or down by 30% the people would act in their own self-interest, and the "up" would win.

maratc 4y ago

> someone so has more than one house I'm not going to answer the ad-hominem attack, you know nothing of my situation, and it's irrelevant to the discussion anyway. But I think it's stupid to own a property which brings no revenue and stands empty 95% of the year, but still requires taxes and upkeep. > House prices going down is a GOOD thing for the vast majority of the population. On the opposite. House prices going down is a good thing for the unhoused population, and it's a bad thing for the homeowners. In the most markets, more people own houses than not. So the majority of the population usually enjoys house prices rising (at the expense of the minority, of course). Additionally, the more a house is "worth" on paper, the more people are willing to invest in it (renovations, keep-up), which is usually a good thing for the economy. > What you also forget is that as a coastal property people buy those houses as holiday homes. I don't forget that, I completely understand the situation. What I don't know is the situation in a neighbouring town which is not coastal and where no rich londoners are buying.

philliphaydon 4y ago
> at the expense of the minority, of course That minority is slowly becoming a majority. Home ownership in NZ is the lowest ever. It’s down to like 60-65%. The market is becoming completely unaffordable. Raising prices is good for high income earners and people who have homes to leverage from. > Additionally, the more a house is "worth" on paper, the more people are willing to invest in it (renovations, keep-up), which is usually a good thing for the economy. People who can barely afford a house cannot renovated it. When a mortgage payment is 2-3 times the cost of renting you don’t have disposable income to renovate. > House prices going down is a good thing for the unhoused population, and it's a bad thing for the homeowners. The ONLY time prices falling is bad for a home owner is when the value of the house is less than what they paid.
- maratc 4y ago
  > Home ownership in NZ is the lowest ever. It’s down to like 60-65%. If I read it right, the homeowners outnumber the non-homeowners 2:1 then? This would mean twice as much votes for measures getting prices up than against these measures. > The ONLY time prices falling is bad for a home owner is when the value of the house is less than what they paid. I disagree, not on the question "are prices going up good?" but on the question "do most people like the prices going up?". I think most people who own property want to see their property go up, not down, in price; and I think the majority of the population owns property, and so falls into that group. In other words, I think that on a referendum of whether to get all property up by 50% or down by 30% the people would act in their own self-interest, and the "up" would win.