1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. NZ.GENERAL

  • NAct1st Off Track Again

    From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 7 13:10:29 2024
    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/05-07-2024/the-problem-with-chris-bishops-plan-to-flood-the-housing-market

    A good analysis of the unfocussed craziness of the current government
    that doesn't want to spend any money unless it makes donors more
    wealthy. I am not sure how local governments can be forced to demand
    costs for subdivisions they don't want but are required to offer that
    are anything less than full costs including roads, 3 waters,
    footpaths, power infrastructure and generous natural reserves - but
    with a few contingency reserves added that should be enough for
    Councils to be able to discourage unwanted development.

    The government is determined not to spend any more money than it can
    get away with for social housing - in fact it wants government owned
    social housing to provide a good return on capital! It achieved a
    "Profit" in the Key/English years from selling off quite a few and
    passing that money on to government as a "dividend" - leaving New
    Zealand with 1500 fewer state owned houses when they were replaced
    than had been there when Key was first elected.

    They can't even see a track let alone put a foot on it . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 7 01:22:19 2024
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/05-07-2024/the-problem-with-chris-bishops-plan-to-flood-the-housing-market
    Only you would post an artcile from such a shady and untrustworthy publication.

    A good analysis of the unfocussed craziness of the current government
    that doesn't want to spend any money unless it makes donors more
    wealthy. I am not sure how local governments can be forced to demand
    costs for subdivisions they don't want but are required to offer that
    are anything less than full costs including roads, 3 waters,
    footpaths, power infrastructure and generous natural reserves - but
    with a few contingency reserves added that should be enough for
    Councils to be able to discourage unwanted development.

    The government is determined not to spend any more money than it can
    get away with for social housing - in fact it wants government owned
    social housing to provide a good return on capital! It achieved a
    "Profit" in the Key/English years from selling off quite a few and
    passing that money on to government as a "dividend" - leaving New
    Zealand with 1500 fewer state owned houses when they were replaced
    than had been there when Key was first elected.

    They can't even see a track let alone put a foot on it . . .
    You don't know what a track is!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 8 08:47:25 2024
    On Sun, 07 Jul 2024 13:10:29 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/05-07-2024/the-problem-with-chris-bishops-plan-to-flood-the-housing-market

    A good analysis of the unfocussed craziness of the current government
    that doesn't want to spend any money unless it makes donors more
    wealthy. I am not sure how local governments can be forced to demand
    costs for subdivisions they don't want but are required to offer that
    are anything less than full costs including roads, 3 waters,
    footpaths, power infrastructure and generous natural reserves - but
    with a few contingency reserves added that should be enough for
    Councils to be able to discourage unwanted development.

    The government is determined not to spend any more money than it can
    get away with for social housing - in fact it wants government owned
    social housing to provide a good return on capital! It achieved a
    "Profit" in the Key/English years from selling off quite a few and
    passing that money on to government as a "dividend" - leaving New
    Zealand with 1500 fewer state owned houses when they were replaced
    than had been there when Key was first elected.

    They can't even see a track let alone put a foot on it . . .

    While I share concerns about how the Government's housing plans will
    work, I don't care for pointless speculation based entirely (it seems)
    on political ideology (an ideology that if it did not come from Labour
    or the Greens, it will never work/is doomed to be a disaster.

    It is worth remembering that so far everything the Government has
    actually got started on has been well-signaled in the coalition
    agreements. Those ideologically opposed to our Government therefore
    have to look hard to find something to object to.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)