Property costs in NZ - the heart of evil

[merv]

There still seems to be a lot of comment on the high price of houses but you seem to be ignoring my comment about the 10 times factor - prices and wages since 1978. What I think some are grizzling about then is that the price of houses hasn't come back proportionally in relation to wages compared to so many other things because they are so used to buying other stuff cheap. Electronics keep getting cheaper so whereas I paid almost $2,000 for my first VCR and now you can record TV or play DVD or MPEG for a fraction of that price we think so why isn't a new car only $2,000 now and a decent motorbike only $700.

All the things we bought then compared to our wages were bloody expensive - so if you were prudent and didn't have the money, you waited until you could afford it. Those not so prudent put them on HP and suffered the high interest rates.

Even simple things like a vacuum cleaner are now a fraction of the price they used to be - less than $100 at Godfreys. Me and Mrs cringe remembering the prices we paid for things which makes you feel like they were valuable and so you hang onto them too long.

With GST now instead of high taxes the yoof should be even better off if they don't buy stuff. At the tax rates we used to pay, you paid it whether you bought anything or not which made saving harder surely. So as I said before - make your choice - first house or spending up large lifestyle. If you don't get paid enough you can't have both.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Dont even get me started on "earth ships and sustainable housing ...... thats a county councils nightmare !

why arent they built more !

Stephen

We already did this one. The volume and cost of producing the reams of documented evidence and/or professional opinions required to demonstrate compliance with the minimum requirements of the building code makes it impractical. (you need to read the building code, verification methods and alternative solution methods along with each of the codes clauses to understand just how incredibly anal it is.) There is less effort required to build ten ordinary homes than is required to deal with the red tape requirements for a full on Earthship (although the degree of difficulty will vary between BCA regions and it might not be impossible everywhere.. if you are lucky).

[flyingcrocodile46]

firstly , you cant go talking about , "in my day " we .....
Stephen

Heh!

[Brian d marge]

We already did this one. The volume and cost of producing the reams of documented evidence and/or professional opinions required to demonstrate compliance with the minimum requirements of the building code makes it impractical. (you need to read the building code, verification methods and alternative solution methods along with each of the codes clauses to understand just how incredibly anal it is.) There is less effort required to build ten ordinary homes than is required to deal with the red tape requirements for a full on Earthship (although the degree of difficulty will vary between BCA regions and it might not be impossible everywhere.. if you are lucky).

I know we did , but a big part of me just wants to build it then say ..........F...K em

my house my decisions , f off

Stephen

[mashman]

There still seems to be a lot of comment on the high price of houses but you seem to be ignoring my comment about the 10 times factor - prices and wages since 1978. What I think some are grizzling about then is that the price of houses hasn't come back proportionally in relation to wages compared to so many other things because they are so used to buying other stuff cheap. Electronics keep getting cheaper so whereas I paid almost $2,000 for my first VCR and now you can record TV or play DVD or MPEG for a fraction of that price we think so why isn't a new car only $2,000 now and a decent motorbike only $700.

All the things we bought then compared to our wages were bloody expensive - so if you were prudent and didn't have the money, you waited until you could afford it. Those not so prudent put them on HP and suffered the high interest rates.

Even simple things like a vacuum cleaner are now a fraction of the price they used to be - less than $100 at Godfreys. Me and Mrs cringe remembering the prices we paid for things which makes you feel like they were valuable and so you hang onto them too long.

With GST now instead of high taxes the yoof should be even better off if they don't buy stuff. At the tax rates we used to pay, you paid it whether you bought anything or not which made saving harder surely. So as I said before - make your choice - first house or spending up large lifestyle. If you don't get paid enough you can't have both.

I wasn't ignoring your comment about the 10x factor, but merely offering other reasons for that 10x factor being next to non existent. Whilst you may say that taxation has never been lower etc... there are other not so obvious taxes and add ons to living in this day and age that didn't exist back then. As Indy pointed out before, he seems to be relatively frugal in regards to spending, yet can't service the mortgage payments for some reason or other. Being frugal just doesn't cut it anymore, likely true even if you have absolutely no life and/or toys for 20 years and have an average salary. It was getting that way back in the last 80's early 90's in the UK when I finally got into the workplace. However I was happy to live in a caravan to fund my lifetyle . I'd love to see a breakdown of costs next to each other as it may give a clearer idea of why these things aren't as affordable. You would think the govt would have something like that, non seasonably adjusted

[flyingcrocodile46]

I know we did , but a big part of me just wants to build it then say ..........F...K em

my house my decisions , f off

Stephen

I

Pretty sure that I said the same thing then as now. go for it. It is a gamble that you can take.

You would probably spend less money and expend less effort fighting a demolition order and you may eve win if you use a logic based defence and could demonstrate proof that you hadn't actually failed to comply with most or all of the code clauses (compliance by way of historical use... the proof is in the pudding)

[Brian d marge]

I

Pretty sure that I said the same thing then as now. go for it. It is a gamble that you can take.

You would probably spend less money and expend less effort fighting a demolition order and you may eve win if you use a logic based defence and could demonstrate proof that you hadn't actually failed to comply with most or all of the code clauses (compliance by way of historical use... the proof is in the pudding)

back when I was a Yoof , we studied the building code and had a few projects to design using said code , wind loadings etc
Now if a few like minded "engineers" designed ( read copied and but to the loading code " then built ,,,,Then told said council to F , off

depending on mind set of said council , there might actually be a chance ....

How fked up is that , cheaper and better ( all round ) to break the law !

We need Judas Priest here stat .....


Stephen

coffee time .....

[BoristheBiter]

I'd love to see a breakdown of costs next to each other as it may give a clearer idea of why these things aren't as affordable.

Because everyone wants it now and doesn't want to work/save for it.

[mashman]

Because everyone wants it now and doesn't want to work/save for it.

Of course, that's it, how could it be anything but

[Indiana_Jones]

Well I've never had a loan to buy a TV etc, if I want one I'll save for it and get what I can afford (as I have done)

-Indy

[slowpoke]

I know we did , but a big part of me just wants to build it then say ..........F...K em

my house my decisions , f off

Stephen

All well and good....as long as it remains your house. It's a big call to say this where I'm gonna live (and battle red tape) for the rest of my natural life. It's either live there forever or be prepared to walk away from 100's of thousands of dollars invested because nobody is gonna take a risk (or get a loan) on something not built remotely to code. Can't say I blame them either.

[Brian d marge]

All well and good....as long as it remains your house. It's a big call to say this where I'm gonna live (and battle red tape) for the rest of my natural life. It's either live there forever or be prepared to walk away from 100's of thousands of dollars invested because nobody is gonna take a risk (or get a loan) on something not built remotely to code. Can't say I blame them either.

that comes down , is a house a home

I said to me old man who is 70 , and was complaining about 600 dollars for compliance for the bathroom ( and he has built a few houses , )

I said If you sell the house then pay the 600 , if not fk em and keep the 600 , put the connection , the one the inspector had to look at , in an easy to get to place , like me mums rose garden ......

Stephen

[BMWST?]

back when I was a Yoof , we studied the building code and had a few projects to design using said code , wind loadings etc
Now if a few like minded "engineers" designed ( read copied and but to the loading code " then built ,,,,Then told said council to F , off

depending on mind set of said council , there might actually be a chance ....

How fked up is that , cheaper and better ( all round ) to break the law !

We need Judas Priest here stat .....

Stephen

coffee time .....

Coucil has no say on the matter.An Engineer can present his own calculatuions to the council as an alternative solution to the building code

[scumdog]

Coucil has no say on the matter.An Engineer can present his own calculatuions to the council as an alternative solution to the building code

And get paid big bucks to do so.

Even if his calculation is flawed...

[flyingcrocodile46]

Coucil has no say on the matter.An Engineer can present his own calculatuions to the council as an alternative solution to the building code

Or as a Verification method (i.e VM1 or VM4 for typical engineering calcs) ... which the BCA's (councils) may not refuse to accept, unless they find fault in the calculations and then if the calculation is corrected they must accept it and can be compelled to relatively easily through determination by the DBH (now MoBIE.. [snigger] goes well with their FAP scheme).

They can also be compelled to accept non verified Alternative solutions in the absence of compliance with the Acceptable solutions of the building code (providing you know how to describe in reasonable detail the basis on which you believe your alternative solution will satisfy the requirements of the building code, and the proposal is actually workable).

The BCA must give specific reasons (detailing the nitty gritty of what they take issue with) as to why they wont accept your proposal and following that, (providing you can subsequently demonstrate that your proposal is able to satisfy the requirements in the identified areas) they then must accept or decline.

Once you are declined you can go to determination (via the DBH, which typically involves genuine expert investigation/assessment and reporting by a member of the DBH panel of technical experts ) and providing you are right (not just being a dumbass) they will be directed to accept the proposal (though this is often only after additional identified shortcomings in technical details of the proposal are also addressed).

It's just a matter of infinite patience and per$everance