OneChoice Housing Trends survey finds 68% of aspiring home buyers feel unable to keep up with rising prices, while 46% feel hopeless about ever owning; 25% delaying starting families
The key is getting citizenship when you’re there. My three brothers moved before the 2001 watershed when New Zealanders progressively lost rights to welfare, fees free education etc. It’s a battle.
I think the Australian Government changed it just after I came back - in around 2016. Needed to have five years residence with earnings at or slightly above annual wages.
If you make the commitment young enough, it is very do-able.
That’s right Pat. Australia is breaching Human Rights and here our successive Governments have maliciously disincentivised having children, housing, feeding, training and looking after our own population to save money (it doesn’t problem just snowball as people are brutalised and neglected from childhood and fail or fall further) then fill the gaps with immigration when there isn’t enough infrastructure or affordability for the existing population. So that doesn’t work either and makes the social divisions and pressure on individuals worse and reducing access to our legal and human rights here. It is so lazy and cheap that I think most people can’t comprehend just what wickedness our elected representatives on behalf of the wealthy, companies and privately owned banks are doing to the public. They’re ok and literally burble excuses and obfuscate in the media ALL THE TIME. It’s an unintelligent system not designed to support life. Still very feudal I’m afraid with shameless self interested chancers at the top. Government can do any illegal and immoral things it likes without consequence and is beyond corrupt. Also very, very counterproductive bordering on stupid.
Not surprising. This was a common topic of conversation even before the recent house price jump - do we put off starting a family for 10 years until we're in our mid-30's, so we can save for a deposit and secure a mortgage, or do we rent indefinitely and try to start a family while living with flatmates? Or do we rent a place for ourselves and forgo saving as much for retirement? Or do we not have kids at all, so we can have a house and hopefully have it paid off by retirement age? Thought we were being a bit dramatic 10 years ago - we were just out of uni, what do we know about economics, really. But now we're another 50% further away from affordability
Honestly I have no idea. I've been trying to write a clever comment for about 30 minutes haha.
Righto here's a vague stream of consciousness, which is the best I can do I think:
Even the best proposals have little chance of being actioned because they require short term sacrifice, which voters are allergic to (including myself, if I'm honest)
I think the general population needs something a bit more concrete to frame voting decisions around. Currently it's just 'is this in my own best interests'. I like the 3 topics you focus The Kaka on - they're a good frame of reference.
I think we used to be better at this. As we've become less religious, we probably spend less time interacting with our local communities, and so we care less about how decisions affect them. Our focus has narrowed to only our immediate families, or even just ourselves. And I say that as someone who, on a scale of 1-10 for religiousness would be a -2.
The mindset should be more decoupled from one's self: Does X policy or Y market incentive make Z long term goal more or less likely to happen. I think until we fix that mindset, any government action that involves raising taxes, raising debt, or really any level of short term inconvenience will get voted down. I'd like to see some huge, 100 year, long term goals proposed and agreed to, which we can then use as a common frame of reference.
I'm not sure I've listened to a piece of journalism that resonates better. I'm on my way across the ditch shortly - I got a job offer 70% higher there, and there's no realistic path to home ownership in the next 5 years in New Zealand that doesn't include either huge falls in prices, or moving away from the kinds of jobs I'm good at and want to do. I didn't want to leave, but it's almost irresponsible not to at this point.
I'm wondering about the 'moral high ground', and who, as a society, we donate it to - who think they own it. Is it those with money and property? Seems to be.
A second and conflicting requirement is for on-going education. For the vast majority of people, how can the two co-exist?.
I'm having trouble finding the right words here. For all the blather about the knowledge economy, as a country we don't believe in knowledge. We charge young people through the nose for it, wave them off at the airport, and go back home to trim the hedges. It's sad.
As a 'young renter' (is 35 young for renting?) who's also an Australian living in NZ, I can say that its not just the price of renting that's the issue. Its how you're treated as a renter by landlords and agents in NZ. Contempt is the best way to describe how you're treated, contempt for renting their properties and paying them money. It was the same in Perth when I rented during the peak of the WA mining boom, so I suspect these feelings of contempt for renters go hand in hand with feeling powerful and smug in a constrained market. Its degrading and dehumanising to rent.
My father in law is one such rent seeker and the family arguments are getting more heated about property ownership. He retired in his late 40s to live off rental income and expects/demands that his wealth continues to increase, even if it means his children can't afford to own.
We've got what should be considered a good deposit, but there's no way we'll mortgage ourselves into mortgage serfdom to buy in NZ.
Also it's not all rosie over the Tasman either. I'm currently visiting family in Perth and the rental availability (& housing affordability in general) situation here is worse than during the 2010s mining boom, yet the population is leaving or becoming homeless. The homeless encampments here have exploded in the last two years. I'm not sure if landlords are back to holding their tenants in contempt here again as well, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Power is a dangerous drug.
I've got friends and family who live in Perth, and for people building a house has been difficult for the last 12 months from what I've been told. Grass is certainly not greener, just a tad bit more sandy and brown.
Yeah, I know of several people waiting for their homes to be finished, many are renting and paying construction mortgages at the same time. We've looked at buying land in the south west of WA (Perth will be too hot for human habitation in 10-15 years) and have been told by builders they're not taking on new contracts for at least 18 months.
Not to mention the loss of state granted subsidies on building a new house after the time period lapses. Dire straights, none the less, wishing you all the best in procurement for your new land and hopefully whare.
Thanks Ryan. Perth is particularly heated. Melbourne a bit friendlier. But agree it’s not perfect there. The difference between Australia and NZ is the states have some revenue raising ability beyond rates (they do stamp duties and land taxes and have a share of GST), whereas our councils aren’t allowed those tools and aren’t helped enough by the central Governnment. That means the states are incentivised to fund infrastructure for housing. At least a bit more than councils here.
You make a great point about power Hamersley. But I do wonder when the penny will drop for individual towns and cities and states about the opportunity to use housing affordability as a tool for growth when competing for people and capital. How long before companies ask Mayor’s and state Premiers what they’re doing to make housing affordable for their young staff?
Why haven't these numbers translated into real political action on housing affordability? Does it come down to low voter turnout among young people, and if so is boosting turnout the key to meaningful action on the housing crisis?
My view is it's a combination of several common issues.
1) It's a bloody complicated topic - I think most people know that we've under-invested in infrastructure and new developments over time, but probably aren't making the connection that things like Three Waters, increasing the Debt/GDP limit or reforming the RMA could contribute toward addressing that. I think most evaluate each government action in isolation, see how the short term outcome would affect them personally, and use that to decide whether it's good or bad, and vote accordingly. Resulting in a lot of people voting against their own - or their children's - best interests
2) Almost any action to address housing is going to result in taxes and/or lost asset value, so they're against it. Even if the stated reason for hoarding property or not wanting to increase taxes is to benefit their children, and addressing the cost of housing would benefit their children more. I think there's also a certain amount of people who don't own asset, but align themselves with people who do, and don't want to destroy a club they might get to join one day - that whole 'temporarily embarrassed millionaire' fallacy.
3) It's difficult to convince people they may have contributed to a problem (either directly or indirectly), and they now need to course-correct. Any time I have the conversation about owning investment properties, the response is 'Investment properties are part of kiwi culture / the story of New Zealand' or 'I'm doing it to secure my kids future. Wouldn't you do the same thing in my position?'. There's never acknowledgement that they might be contributing towards the problem (or often, that the problem even exists). Feels similar to questioning Trump in certain circles, every time he does something ridiculous. Not only would they be admitting they were wrong, but they would also be admitting that they supported everything prior, but this is where they draw the line, which calls into question both their judgement and their morality overall. Very tightly coupled with one's self-image. Easier to deny reality than admit to being part of the problem.
I think the above applies all over the shop: Brexit; climate change; Covid; systemic racism, etc. I'm sure there are more, and I'm sure I've fallen into these pitfalls as well here and there.
As for what to do now, I'm not sure. I've managed to gain some ground with extended family, friends etc by doing the actual arithmetic. E.g. I work in software, so they assume I'm raking it in, but I'll bring up the mortgage calculator on sorted.org.nz and plug in my salary, and show them that 1) I'm about 10 years from having a deposit. 2) Based on this, I could MAYBE afford a 30 sqm apartment, if I paid it off until I'm 65. 3) I actually am making a bit more than the median household income, which means over the half the population is worse off than me. Or I'll frame the discussion around X median household incomes, which is an easier constant to visualise than raw $ values which need to be adjusted for inflation. E.g. They bought their house in 1980 at 3.5 median household incomes, it's now worth 9 median household incomes, despite the fact that it's essentially the same house, excluding general maintenance, so it must be worth more purely due to scarcity.
But to simplify surely young (and non-asset holding voters) know they've been shafted. It's too bad this hasn't galvanised them into voting for/seeking parties with a stronger message and sorting out the housing mess. I'd be keen to know what could be done to help change that from overseas/historical examples etc.
Thanks Nick, I got it for my birthday. Your name is pretty great too.
I started writing out a response to your point, but after writing the words 'winter of discontent' I think it would just be unproductive. Someone more optimistic than me should take over
Bernard's point about selfishness is key, mixed with the stab-me-in-the-eyes contradictory statements from well off boomers who blame the Government for causing problems those very same voters would never entertain the idea of actually voting to fix.
My in-laws and parents, case in point. "Hate Jacinda, look what she's doing the economy. Ruined for the next generation."
However, mentions of CGT, density increase, investment in infrastructure, grants or the potential closing of any gap which may erode their ballooning on-paper wealth and warrant another couple of percentage points added to their tax bill is met with similar disdain. The problems must be fixed but at no expense to me, please. May I have my cake and eat it too.
I don’t know if I count as young at 36. But my husband and I have accepted that we will never own a house. Being a writer and teacher aide plus the cost of living plus everything else means it’s not possible. We are incredibly lucky though because we rent from family so we don’t have to deal with a landlord. Renting is Hell if you have to deal with a landlord. The places we lived in before were full of black mould and miserable. Without family I don’t know where we would be.
Thanks Emily. Sadly, that’s one of the ‘solutions’ many of the home owners see for their own families. To essentially become benign landlords to their own kids. I do wonder how it changes power relationships and the ‘vibes’ within families though.
Yes exactly! Also not having a home means you can’t borrow for other things - like building a business to get ahead (to buy a home) and it means if there is divorce or break ups there’s no protection. You’re left with the person whose whānau is renting to you both still being housed but the other person in the relationship is left unhoused which could lead to staying in an unsafe abusive relationship. There’s security only really for the person whose parent it is. You just hope that if the relationship didn’t work you wouldn’t be left unhoused and as few families do rental agreements they don’t have to follow those rules right? And it’s so depressing that despite all of that I still think it’s better than having a landlord 😱
“Older men living in Taranaki without children were found to have the best wellbeing.” Simple explanation- able to surf 7 days/week. A nag free existence. Queue enraged feminists…..
The Young Renters are not wrong.
Better try Australia for a better chance of a good life. See ya, Kiwiland, I'll fly back for a few visits.
Agree.
P.S I'm not moving just yet.. have little remaining hope left
Another Young Renter
The key is getting citizenship when you’re there. My three brothers moved before the 2001 watershed when New Zealanders progressively lost rights to welfare, fees free education etc. It’s a battle.
I think the Australian Government changed it just after I came back - in around 2016. Needed to have five years residence with earnings at or slightly above annual wages.
If you make the commitment young enough, it is very do-able.
The social consequences of the housing situation are dire. How can any government ignore this?
That’s right Pat. Australia is breaching Human Rights and here our successive Governments have maliciously disincentivised having children, housing, feeding, training and looking after our own population to save money (it doesn’t problem just snowball as people are brutalised and neglected from childhood and fail or fall further) then fill the gaps with immigration when there isn’t enough infrastructure or affordability for the existing population. So that doesn’t work either and makes the social divisions and pressure on individuals worse and reducing access to our legal and human rights here. It is so lazy and cheap that I think most people can’t comprehend just what wickedness our elected representatives on behalf of the wealthy, companies and privately owned banks are doing to the public. They’re ok and literally burble excuses and obfuscate in the media ALL THE TIME. It’s an unintelligent system not designed to support life. Still very feudal I’m afraid with shameless self interested chancers at the top. Government can do any illegal and immoral things it likes without consequence and is beyond corrupt. Also very, very counterproductive bordering on stupid.
Not surprising. This was a common topic of conversation even before the recent house price jump - do we put off starting a family for 10 years until we're in our mid-30's, so we can save for a deposit and secure a mortgage, or do we rent indefinitely and try to start a family while living with flatmates? Or do we rent a place for ourselves and forgo saving as much for retirement? Or do we not have kids at all, so we can have a house and hopefully have it paid off by retirement age? Thought we were being a bit dramatic 10 years ago - we were just out of uni, what do we know about economics, really. But now we're another 50% further away from affordability
What might change the situation?
Honestly I have no idea. I've been trying to write a clever comment for about 30 minutes haha.
Righto here's a vague stream of consciousness, which is the best I can do I think:
Even the best proposals have little chance of being actioned because they require short term sacrifice, which voters are allergic to (including myself, if I'm honest)
I think the general population needs something a bit more concrete to frame voting decisions around. Currently it's just 'is this in my own best interests'. I like the 3 topics you focus The Kaka on - they're a good frame of reference.
I think we used to be better at this. As we've become less religious, we probably spend less time interacting with our local communities, and so we care less about how decisions affect them. Our focus has narrowed to only our immediate families, or even just ourselves. And I say that as someone who, on a scale of 1-10 for religiousness would be a -2.
The mindset should be more decoupled from one's self: Does X policy or Y market incentive make Z long term goal more or less likely to happen. I think until we fix that mindset, any government action that involves raising taxes, raising debt, or really any level of short term inconvenience will get voted down. I'd like to see some huge, 100 year, long term goals proposed and agreed to, which we can then use as a common frame of reference.
I'm not sure I've listened to a piece of journalism that resonates better. I'm on my way across the ditch shortly - I got a job offer 70% higher there, and there's no realistic path to home ownership in the next 5 years in New Zealand that doesn't include either huge falls in prices, or moving away from the kinds of jobs I'm good at and want to do. I didn't want to leave, but it's almost irresponsible not to at this point.
What is your field of expertise if you don't mind me asking.
Software product management.
Thanks Rory. I can’t help thinking I’m pushing my subscribers away to another country. Marketing fail.
I'm wondering about the 'moral high ground', and who, as a society, we donate it to - who think they own it. Is it those with money and property? Seems to be.
A second and conflicting requirement is for on-going education. For the vast majority of people, how can the two co-exist?.
I'm having trouble finding the right words here. For all the blather about the knowledge economy, as a country we don't believe in knowledge. We charge young people through the nose for it, wave them off at the airport, and go back home to trim the hedges. It's sad.
Love the hedges line Wendy. Quite right.
As a 'young renter' (is 35 young for renting?) who's also an Australian living in NZ, I can say that its not just the price of renting that's the issue. Its how you're treated as a renter by landlords and agents in NZ. Contempt is the best way to describe how you're treated, contempt for renting their properties and paying them money. It was the same in Perth when I rented during the peak of the WA mining boom, so I suspect these feelings of contempt for renters go hand in hand with feeling powerful and smug in a constrained market. Its degrading and dehumanising to rent.
My father in law is one such rent seeker and the family arguments are getting more heated about property ownership. He retired in his late 40s to live off rental income and expects/demands that his wealth continues to increase, even if it means his children can't afford to own.
We've got what should be considered a good deposit, but there's no way we'll mortgage ourselves into mortgage serfdom to buy in NZ.
Also it's not all rosie over the Tasman either. I'm currently visiting family in Perth and the rental availability (& housing affordability in general) situation here is worse than during the 2010s mining boom, yet the population is leaving or becoming homeless. The homeless encampments here have exploded in the last two years. I'm not sure if landlords are back to holding their tenants in contempt here again as well, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Power is a dangerous drug.
I've got friends and family who live in Perth, and for people building a house has been difficult for the last 12 months from what I've been told. Grass is certainly not greener, just a tad bit more sandy and brown.
Yeah, I know of several people waiting for their homes to be finished, many are renting and paying construction mortgages at the same time. We've looked at buying land in the south west of WA (Perth will be too hot for human habitation in 10-15 years) and have been told by builders they're not taking on new contracts for at least 18 months.
Not to mention the loss of state granted subsidies on building a new house after the time period lapses. Dire straights, none the less, wishing you all the best in procurement for your new land and hopefully whare.
Thanks! We're planning on staying in NZ now. The 'Mordor' economy / attitude of WA is rather grating once you leave and come back to witness it.
Thanks Ryan. Perth is particularly heated. Melbourne a bit friendlier. But agree it’s not perfect there. The difference between Australia and NZ is the states have some revenue raising ability beyond rates (they do stamp duties and land taxes and have a share of GST), whereas our councils aren’t allowed those tools and aren’t helped enough by the central Governnment. That means the states are incentivised to fund infrastructure for housing. At least a bit more than councils here.
Brilliant last sentence Hamersley. 'Power' says it all!
You make a great point about power Hamersley. But I do wonder when the penny will drop for individual towns and cities and states about the opportunity to use housing affordability as a tool for growth when competing for people and capital. How long before companies ask Mayor’s and state Premiers what they’re doing to make housing affordable for their young staff?
Why haven't these numbers translated into real political action on housing affordability? Does it come down to low voter turnout among young people, and if so is boosting turnout the key to meaningful action on the housing crisis?
My view is it's a combination of several common issues.
1) It's a bloody complicated topic - I think most people know that we've under-invested in infrastructure and new developments over time, but probably aren't making the connection that things like Three Waters, increasing the Debt/GDP limit or reforming the RMA could contribute toward addressing that. I think most evaluate each government action in isolation, see how the short term outcome would affect them personally, and use that to decide whether it's good or bad, and vote accordingly. Resulting in a lot of people voting against their own - or their children's - best interests
2) Almost any action to address housing is going to result in taxes and/or lost asset value, so they're against it. Even if the stated reason for hoarding property or not wanting to increase taxes is to benefit their children, and addressing the cost of housing would benefit their children more. I think there's also a certain amount of people who don't own asset, but align themselves with people who do, and don't want to destroy a club they might get to join one day - that whole 'temporarily embarrassed millionaire' fallacy.
3) It's difficult to convince people they may have contributed to a problem (either directly or indirectly), and they now need to course-correct. Any time I have the conversation about owning investment properties, the response is 'Investment properties are part of kiwi culture / the story of New Zealand' or 'I'm doing it to secure my kids future. Wouldn't you do the same thing in my position?'. There's never acknowledgement that they might be contributing towards the problem (or often, that the problem even exists). Feels similar to questioning Trump in certain circles, every time he does something ridiculous. Not only would they be admitting they were wrong, but they would also be admitting that they supported everything prior, but this is where they draw the line, which calls into question both their judgement and their morality overall. Very tightly coupled with one's self-image. Easier to deny reality than admit to being part of the problem.
I think the above applies all over the shop: Brexit; climate change; Covid; systemic racism, etc. I'm sure there are more, and I'm sure I've fallen into these pitfalls as well here and there.
As for what to do now, I'm not sure. I've managed to gain some ground with extended family, friends etc by doing the actual arithmetic. E.g. I work in software, so they assume I'm raking it in, but I'll bring up the mortgage calculator on sorted.org.nz and plug in my salary, and show them that 1) I'm about 10 years from having a deposit. 2) Based on this, I could MAYBE afford a 30 sqm apartment, if I paid it off until I'm 65. 3) I actually am making a bit more than the median household income, which means over the half the population is worse off than me. Or I'll frame the discussion around X median household incomes, which is an easier constant to visualise than raw $ values which need to be adjusted for inflation. E.g. They bought their house in 1980 at 3.5 median household incomes, it's now worth 9 median household incomes, despite the fact that it's essentially the same house, excluding general maintenance, so it must be worth more purely due to scarcity.
Sorry for the wall of text everyone
No worries. Pure gold.
Excellent summary Nick. Couldn’t have said it better or capture the conundrums better.
Yes good summary Nick (and great name).
But to simplify surely young (and non-asset holding voters) know they've been shafted. It's too bad this hasn't galvanised them into voting for/seeking parties with a stronger message and sorting out the housing mess. I'd be keen to know what could be done to help change that from overseas/historical examples etc.
Thanks Nick, I got it for my birthday. Your name is pretty great too.
I started writing out a response to your point, but after writing the words 'winter of discontent' I think it would just be unproductive. Someone more optimistic than me should take over
Bernard's point about selfishness is key, mixed with the stab-me-in-the-eyes contradictory statements from well off boomers who blame the Government for causing problems those very same voters would never entertain the idea of actually voting to fix.
My in-laws and parents, case in point. "Hate Jacinda, look what she's doing the economy. Ruined for the next generation."
However, mentions of CGT, density increase, investment in infrastructure, grants or the potential closing of any gap which may erode their ballooning on-paper wealth and warrant another couple of percentage points added to their tax bill is met with similar disdain. The problems must be fixed but at no expense to me, please. May I have my cake and eat it too.
The only power now is to point out they won’t see the grandkids very often.
I don’t know if I count as young at 36. But my husband and I have accepted that we will never own a house. Being a writer and teacher aide plus the cost of living plus everything else means it’s not possible. We are incredibly lucky though because we rent from family so we don’t have to deal with a landlord. Renting is Hell if you have to deal with a landlord. The places we lived in before were full of black mould and miserable. Without family I don’t know where we would be.
Thanks Emily. Sadly, that’s one of the ‘solutions’ many of the home owners see for their own families. To essentially become benign landlords to their own kids. I do wonder how it changes power relationships and the ‘vibes’ within families though.
Yes exactly! Also not having a home means you can’t borrow for other things - like building a business to get ahead (to buy a home) and it means if there is divorce or break ups there’s no protection. You’re left with the person whose whānau is renting to you both still being housed but the other person in the relationship is left unhoused which could lead to staying in an unsafe abusive relationship. There’s security only really for the person whose parent it is. You just hope that if the relationship didn’t work you wouldn’t be left unhoused and as few families do rental agreements they don’t have to follow those rules right? And it’s so depressing that despite all of that I still think it’s better than having a landlord 😱
“Older men living in Taranaki without children were found to have the best wellbeing.” Simple explanation- able to surf 7 days/week. A nag free existence. Queue enraged feminists…..
I think we have more important things to worry about than what you think Neil.