Politics NZ Politics

Who will get your vote in this years election?

  • National

    Votes: 17 26.2%
  • Labour

    Votes: 13 20.0%
  • Act

    Votes: 7 10.8%
  • Greens

    Votes: 9 13.8%
  • NZ First

    Votes: 5 7.7%
  • Māori Party

    Votes: 3 4.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 11 16.9%

  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
Taxpayer's Union, I think this shady group had an influence on the election result.

 
For those of you with young children, this should really concern you.... it's been estimated that by 2045 (only 22 years), the deposit to buy the average first home in Auckland will be over $1 million as the homes normally purchased by first home buyers are predicted to be worth over $5 million.
 
For those of you with young children, this should really concern you.... it's been estimated that by 2045 (only 22 years), the deposit to buy the average first home in Auckland will be over $1 million as the homes normally purchased by first home buyers are predicted to be worth over $5 million.
At least we will have minimum wage at $50 hr by then! that's 100 grand a year 🤣
 
For those of you with young children, this should really concern you.... it's been estimated that by 2045 (only 22 years), the deposit to buy the average first home in Auckland will be over $1 million as the homes normally purchased by first home buyers are predicted to be worth over $5 million.
Jacinda would of called 5 million dollar homes, affordable homes! 🤣
 
For those of you with young children, this should really concern you.... it's been estimated that by 2045 (only 22 years), the deposit to buy the average first home in Auckland will be over $1 million as the homes normally purchased by first home buyers are predicted to be worth over $5 million.
It's actually madness eh. And you look around and see how much land there is (outside the main centres)
 
I remember when the mental image of a million dollar home used to be a giant mansion 😅

Good times!
Think of it this way.... Mark Hotchin's old mansion on Paritai Drive is worth an estimated $35-45 million in today's money. If prices increased 5 times in the next 22 years, that place would be worth between $175-225 million.

1699238332216.png
 
For those of you with young children, this should really concern you.... it's been estimated that by 2045 (only 22 years), the deposit to buy the average first home in Auckland will be over $1 million as the homes normally purchased by first home buyers are predicted to be worth over $5 million.
It’s all relative to new build costs.

The reason our prices are as they are is because that’s the cost to build a new house (including land)

If we hold build costs and land availability is it is today, house prices won’t be able to rise as new housing would undercut house price increases.

If we continue to restrict supply, have huge compliance build cost increases with wage costs rising without productivity gains, houses will continue to increase in unaffordability.

It’s all regulation controlled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kos
It’s all relative to new build costs.

The reason our prices are as they are is because that’s the cost to build a new house (including land)

If we hold build costs and land availability is it is today, house prices won’t be able to rise as new housing would undercut house price increases.

If we continue to restrict supply, have huge compliance build cost increases with wage costs rising without productivity gains, houses will continue to increase in unaffordability.

It’s all regulation controlled.
Thank you David Seymour
 
Weird to see Seymour, a proponent of free speech, getting butthurt about Chloe saying "From the River to The Sea"
Would you have been happy if she had used the Germany phrase Endlösung der Judenfrage because many Jews consider From the River to The Sea as the total destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people as the Germans meant by the Final Solution meant getting rid of the Jews from Europe.

Perhaps she should have investigated the origin of the phrase before she used it and not tried to defend herself by saying a Jewish leader had used it before him when the context he was using was quoting a verse from the Torah which talks about water flowing from the Jordan river to the sea.

It's a phrase which both Hamas and Zionists use in their claims over the land of Israel/Palestine. The context and the intent is key.

“Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea,” says the organisation’s 2017 constitution.

The founding charter of Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party states: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”

 
Would you have been happy if she had used the Germany phrase Endlösung der Judenfrage because many Jews consider From the River to The Sea as the total destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people as the Germans meant by the Final Solution meant getting rid of the Jews from Europe.

Perhaps she should have investigated the origin of the phrase before she used it and not tried to defend herself by saying a Jewish leader had used it before him when the context he was using was quoting a verse from the Torah which talks about water flowing from the Jordan river to the sea.

It's a phrase which both Hamas and Zionists use in their claims over the land of Israel/Palestine. The context and the intent is key.

“Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea,” says the organisation’s 2017 constitution.

The founding charter of Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party states: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”

I would have been happy if if Seymour expended that same energy condemning the violent brutality of what's been happening. But he's made no comment except attacking another MP.
 
Would you have been happy if she had used the Germany phrase Endlösung der Judenfrage because many Jews consider From the River to The Sea as the total destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people as the Germans meant by the Final Solution meant getting rid of the Jews from Europe.

Perhaps she should have investigated the origin of the phrase before she used it and not tried to defend herself by saying a Jewish leader had used it before him when the context he was using was quoting a verse from the Torah which talks about water flowing from the Jordan river to the sea.

It's a phrase which both Hamas and Zionists use in their claims over the land of Israel/Palestine. The context and the intent is key.

“Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea,” says the organisation’s 2017 constitution.

The founding charter of Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party states: “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”

The article itself references that the phrase can be interrupted numerous ways...

Really quite odd for a vocal proponent of free speech to be bothered by... while showing absolutely no concern on the topic.

Meanwhile children are literally being slaughtered in the region and Inruin Inruin is dropping laughing emojis like the glib man child he is.

I found this article and particular quote interesting

“It’s important to remember this chant is in English and it doesn’t rhyme in Arabic, it is used in demonstrations in Western countries,” he said. “The controversy has been fabricated to prevent solidarity in the West with the Palestinians.”
 
The article itself references that the phrase can be interrupted numerous ways...

Really quite odd for a vocal proponent of free speech to be bothered by... while showing absolutely no concern on the topic.

Meanwhile children are literally being slaughtered in the region and Inruin Inruin is dropping laughing emojis like the glib man child he is.

I found this article and particular quote interesting

“It’s important to remember this chant is in English and it doesn’t rhyme in Arabic, it is used in demonstrations in Western countries,” he said. “The controversy has been fabricated to prevent solidarity in the West with the Palestinians.”
So, since she was at a pro-Palestine rally, what context do you think she meant? Especially, when you consider the view she has continuously used that the state of Israel shouldn’t exist and that things return back to 1948. The Greens party policy is that they want “an end to Israeli occupation of Palestinian Territories”…. but all of Israel was Palestinian Territory prior to 1948 meaning they (and she) is advocating for the end of Israel.
 
The article itself references that the phrase can be interrupted numerous ways...

Really quite odd for a vocal proponent of free speech to be bothered by... while showing absolutely no concern on the topic.

Meanwhile children are literally being slaughtered in the region and Inruin Inruin is dropping laughing emojis like the glib man child he is.
Glad you bought up children being slaughtered. Perhaps Chloe could be more vociferous about what is happening in her own backyard with yet another infant killed. Eerily silent...

The laughing emoji is because I found it quite funny that you post about freedom of speech looking for a bite and then get all up on your soap box about the actual conflict and Seymour.

It's ironic that you use your freedom of speech to post how butt hurt you are with Seymour using his freedom of speech about how butt hurt he is with Chloe using her freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of what you say.

It's telling that the Green party can't or won't come out and explain what she was meaning by her comments. Quite scary watching the ranting, vitriol from an extreme left wing politician.
 
Back
Top