Cunliffe's constituent Liu?

[Brian d marge]

Sorry but many hunter gatherer societys dont have a medium of exchange and actually are rather happy
The tide changed when we started to grow things

As for belgium lordy lordy that was funny

What was it one month no government and life went on as per usual

Hahahahaaaaaa

[oldrider]

Old adage: "When you are up to your arse in alligators it is hard to remember that the origional intention was to drain the swamp"!

We set out to get rid of FPP (First past the post) and ended up with MMP! (and got swamped with expensive unaccountable MP's)

Unaccountable: https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=un...=np&source=hp&

How will an overdose of unaccountable MP's ever get to correct an ailing financial system let alone solve anything else?

Did anyone see where the alligators came from? ------- They are part and parcel of MMP! ----- We got shafted good with that one!

We need less government - not more!

All we really need is a few (no more than twelve) fully accountable quickly and easily replaceable (at any time) high performing publicly elected individuals to govern us!

So much to do such little inclination!

[Ocean1]

houses have been getting bigger but they have been getting cheaper to build and the ( I think ) the biggest cause of unaffrodability is due to the relaxation of the credit market in early 1980s ,

Sorry, you're going to have to dumb that down some for me. You work fewer hrs per metre of house nowdays but cheaper loans make them more unaffordable?

As far as I can make out from that report cheap mortgages was the major factor in reducing the cost of home ownership over the last couple of decades.

As for unaffordable, who exactly is it that is deciding if the price of the house they want to buy is affordable? The owners wasn't it? The ones that decided whether they could afford it or not?
Which is precicely as it must be, if you find anyone else deciding who should pay for what and how much then look around, you're in mashland. You get used to the whining. Eventually. Well, OK, you don't, but it's the least of your worries while visiting there. Mind the hammers underfoot.

[Brian d marge]

Struggling people today are way better off than struggling people were even when I was a kid ... believe it or not!

IMHO the world does not owe anybody anything except a fair and proper system!

And believe it or not the only thing that it would cost to give it to them is to remove the power of those that currently control it for their own ends!

fixed it for ya

We may have been even better of if more sharing and caring went on , and the evil fkers at the top werent there

See Belgium ....haahahaha

Stephen

[Robert Taylor]

Old adage: "When you are up to your arse in alligators it is hard to remember that the origional intention was to drain the swamp"!

We set out to get rid of FPP (First past the post) and ended up with MMP! (and got swamped with expensive unaccountable MP's)

Unaccountable: https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=un...=np&source=hp&

How will an overdose of unaccountable MP's ever get to correct an ailing financial system let alone solve anything else?

Did anyone see where the alligators came from? ------- They are part and parcel of MMP! ----- We got shafted good with that one!

We need less government - not more!

All we really need is a few (no more than twelve) fully accountable quickly and easily replaceable (at any time) high performing publicly elected individuals to govern us!

So much to do such little inclination!

As for you my conscience is clear because I voted for FPP. It was pretty obvious what Mickey Mouse Politics was going to do. The people at large asked for it, they sure got it!

[Ocean1]

Facts, like what? Oh we've never had it so good because the facts say so? In which case there shouldn't be 3.5 billion people are in poverty.

Says who?

Actually WHO says the number of poor is declining. Dramatically. Even after redefining "poor" to mean something much better off.

And yes, the facts do say so. Your ignorance is the only reason you believe different.

Come back with some facts. It won't make you less of a man to apologise.

[mashman]

Any organised society needs an exchange medium/system (especially highly organised ones involving divisions of labour) ours happens to be a monetary system ... but any other system will do just as well.

The issue is not with the system, but with human behaviour and desires .. some people want to get to the top and will fight there way there and make it - even the so-called Communist systems (actually left-wing dictatorships) prove that .. as do all other systems. Even the animal kingdom has dominant group leaders who fight for that position ..

So, the issue is not with the monetary system, but with human beings .. and fuck it, I'm sick of trying to change them ... the stupid fuckers just keep on doing whatever ... that's probably why I'm a cynical old fucker ...

Try, ugh, there's no real word that I can think of that describes it... try, trust. I take your point about the monetary system, I really do, I would have thought, well, did think similar in the not too distant past.

I have to disagree with the system not being responsible. I agree that there will always be people that are striving for something and will do anything to get their way... however, their motive and credentials is the amount of money they have . The evidence is splattered all over the forum... and at work... and in the cafe etc... It's influence is everything to the point where financial collapse will irrevocably change us and may even lead to WW3. NOW, heh, you say the system is not the problem. So why is it when that very same system runs out of money, society "implodes" (it's in the news a lot). That will prove that human behaviour changes accordingly with the system. We are not animals.

It ain't humans that are the problem, they're just doing what they know how to do given the current information available and their immediate environment.

Just my 2c.

[Brian d marge]

Sorry, you're going to have to dumb that down some for me. You work fewer hrs per metre of house nowdays but cheaper loans make them more unaffordable?

As far as I can make out from that report cheap mortgages was the major factor in reducing the cost of home ownership over the last couple of decades.

As for unaffordable, who exactly is it that is deciding if the price of the house they want to buy is affordable? The owners wasn't it? The ones that decided whether they could afford it or not?
Which is precicely as it must be, if you find anyone else deciding who should pay for what and how much then look around, you're in mashland. You get used to the whining. Eventually. Well, OK, you don't, but it's the least of your worries while visiting there. Mind the hammers underfoot.

If you reduce the cost of money the usage goes up. Money needs to find work and since the deregulation and a bucket load of money all looking for something to do

Banks did what banks do , lend it out

The more they lend the more profit they make esp in a fractional reserve system ...( every dollar they have they can lend out 9 or so more

In NZ there is a STRONG almost ingrained need for house ownership ..I mean its most people chance to own an asset. Banks and politicians dont want to upset this apple cart in fact the more people owning houses the better ....

So Houses tend to be the preferable risk for both banks and people

NOW you can add in the supply and demand to this equation, more people ( 30 % i think your link suggested ) looking for a home , a foot on the rung ,

More money available for investment in housing ......

Building consents not keeping up ......

Stephen

ps a house is a home and not an investment and should be affordable to the community that surrounds it ..IMHO

[Ocean1]

Struggling people today are way better off than struggling people were even when I was a kid ... believe it or not!

He don't believe it. Seems likely you're somewhat more of an authority though.

Makes you wonder where the fuck such idiots get their history from.

[mashman]

Says who?

Actually WHO says the number of poor is declining. Dramatically. Even after redefining "poor" to mean something much better off.

And yes, the facts do say so. Your ignorance is the only reason you believe different.

Come back with some facts. It won't make you less of a man to apologise.

Me.

Declining at 1 million per year we should be sweet by the year 11514, give or take. It happens, the measurement is irrelevant.

It certainly isn't ignorance, coz I understand both sides and haven't cherrypicked that which keeps my comfy blanket in the closet. I know better is all.

I'll apologise when I have need to, don't you worry your pretty little head about that... I'll use some facts when you do.

[Ocean1]

If you reduce the cost of money the usage goes up. Money needs to find work and since the deregulation and a bucket load of money all looking for something to do

Banks did what banks do , lend it out

The more they lend the more profit they make esp in a fractional reserve system ...( every dollar they have they can lend out 9 or so more

In NZ there is a STRONG almost ingrained need for house ownership ..I mean its most people chance to own an asset. Banks and politicians dont want to upset this apple cart in fact the more people owning houses the better ....

So Houses tend to be the preferable risk for both banks and people

NOW you can add in the supply and demand to this equation, more people ( 30 % i think your link suggested ) looking for a home , a foot on the rung ,

More money available for investment in housing ......

Building consents not keeping up ......

Stephen

ps a house is a home and not an investment and should be affordable to the community that surrounds it ..IMHO

All of which doesn't change the fact that cheap loans reduced the cost of home ownership, rather than increasing it.

Again: size for size housing in NZ costs no more now than it ever has.

And yet again: if you want cheaper entry level housing then you have to remove the parasitic compliance barriers and make sure the materials market is as free as possible.

[mashman]

He don't believe it. Seems likely you're somewhat more of an authority though.

Makes you wonder where the fuck such idiots get their history from.

Struggling people are struggling people.

S'ok, your ilk usually dies off after a couple of generations.

money related stuff

ps a house is a home and not an investment and should be affordable to the community that surrounds it ..IMHO

cannot bling again.

[Ocean1]

It certainly isn't ignorance, coz I understand both sides and haven't cherrypicked that which keeps my comfy blanket in the closet. I know better is all.

The single most pro-socialist multinational organisation on the planet: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/poverty.shtml

You know fuck all, now fuck off you ignorant cunt.

[Brian d marge]

All of which doesn't change the fact that cheap loans reduced the cost of home ownership, rather than increasing it.

Again: size for size housing in NZ costs no more now than it ever has.

And yet again: if you want cheaper entry level housing then you have to remove the parasitic compliance barriers and make sure the materials market is as free as possible.

Now ya just being stupid

Cheap cost of borrowing the money allowed more people to try to get into the housing market
Supply demand
The value of the assets rose dragging up the price of the less desirable houses

Size of house i have answered


Entry level housing
Reducing the overheads would help also increasing the supply

All was in that link u supplied

Stephen

[Ocean1]

Now ya just being stupid

Cheap cost of borrowing the money allowed more people to try to get into the housing market
Supply demand
The value of the assets rose dragging up the price of the less desirable houses

I'm not the one contradicting myself every second sentence, dude.

Fact: reduced interest rates equal reduced cost of home ownership, not increased cost of ownership.

You already found that house prices per meter are actually cheaper now, what cheap cost of borrowing allowed people to get into was houses twice the size.

And as I also pointed out the people paying for the houses are obviously of the opinion that their choice is affordable, or they wouldn't fucking buy them, would they?

So YET AGAIN: Houses are no more expensive than they've ever been, and according to anyone that currently owns a house in NZ they're affordable.

I'm not asking you to like it, but your own research agrees with that assessment.

Entry level housing
Reducing the overheads would help also increasing the supply

And again, reduced cost of loans reduces overheads. Lots. No such thing as a free lunch Steven, fix the cost of new, smaller houses and the prices of small houses overall will drop.