On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:17:51 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/13/2016 7:06 PM, Liberty wrote:

"back to the topic of the thread - political plans to build houses! "
Rich you are posting twaddle.
The topic was
"Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths"

Rich only adds to the merriment with his solid denial of the basics..
Liebor have claimed that they will build thousands of 'affordable' houses. >> Average price of land and building around $500,000..
That is NOT affordable but it's what the market is...

First there are two ways of making something afofordable - lower the
price or increase the income.
Second it appears that you do not accept that the market would be
influenced by building a lot of houses - strange how the "free-market'
Nats rely on government handouts to landlords (WFF, accomodation
supplements) to increase profits . . .

National also claim that they plan exactly the same as Labour
(although their number for capital varies from $1 billion to $1.9bn to
$2 billion depending on which Minister you talk to), . . . Are you
saying National is lying?

On 14/07/2016 10:12 a.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:17:51 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/13/2016 7:06 PM, Liberty wrote:

"back to the topic of the thread - political plans to build houses! "
Rich you are posting twaddle.
The topic was
"Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths"

Rich only adds to the merriment with his solid denial of the basics..
Liebor have claimed that they will build thousands of 'affordable' houses. >> Average price of land and building around $500,000..
That is NOT affordable but it's what the market is...

First there are two ways of making something afofordable - lower the
price or increase the income.
Second it appears that you do not accept that the market would be influenced by building a lot of houses - strange how the "free-market'
Nats rely on government handouts to landlords (WFF, accomodation supplements) to increase profits . . .

National also claim that they plan exactly the same as Labour
(although their number for capital varies from $1 billion to $1.9bn to
$2 billion depending on which Minister you talk to), . . . Are you
saying National is lying?

The party politicians are shuffling the deck chairs.
Auckland is just a bloated country town.
They need to get over the everyone gets a drafty bungalow phase of development and build some serious public terrace housing, close to the CBD. They won't because Auckland houses aren't primarily homes, they are financial instruments.

Anyway this guy talks some sense.

http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/14-07-2016/a-non-homeowners-guide-to-the-bubble-that-is-going-to-take-you-all-down/

On 14/07/2016 10:12 a.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:17:51 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/13/2016 7:06 PM, Liberty wrote:

"back to the topic of the thread - political plans to build houses! "
Rich you are posting twaddle.
The topic was
"Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths"

Rich only adds to the merriment with his solid denial of the basics..
Liebor have claimed that they will build thousands of 'affordable' houses. >>> Average price of land and building around $500,000..
That is NOT affordable but it's what the market is...

First there are two ways of making something afofordable - lower the
price or increase the income.
Second it appears that you do not accept that the market would be
influenced by building a lot of houses - strange how the "free-market'
Nats rely on government handouts to landlords (WFF, accomodation
supplements) to increase profits . . .

National also claim that they plan exactly the same as Labour
(although their number for capital varies from $1 billion to $1.9bn to
$2 billion depending on which Minister you talk to), . . . Are you
saying National is lying?

The party politicians are shuffling the deck chairs.
Auckland is just a bloated country town.
They need to get over the everyone gets a drafty bungalow phase of >development and build some serious public terrace housing, close to the CBD. >They won't because Auckland houses aren't primarily homes, they are
financial instruments.

Anyway this guy talks some sense.

http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/14-07-2016/a-non-homeowners-guide-to-the-bubble-that-is-going-to-take-you-all-down/

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:53:28 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:30:46 +1200, Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:

george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/11/2016 7:44 PM, Liberty wrote:

2,000,000,000 capital / 100,000 number of houses = $20,000. Labour can >>>>>> build a house for $20k…. Labour maths

Labour housing policy is doomed to fail.

Liebors claims will work right up to when they regain power.
Then watch just how quickly the 'housing problems' and 'homelessness' >>>>> disappear...

I'm sure then that the Labor friendly news media would then put a
positive spin on the homeless and housing problems..

Labour/Green will certainly inherit a lot more "Communications" staff
than they left in 2008 - all devoted to feeding politically motivated
stories at taxpayer expense . . .

Cite?
Tony

No cite, Tony - I can;t be bothered looking up articles. There was
talk about the increase in DPMC and also other departments - so you
can either believe me or not; I doubt you will find any evidence to
the contrary.

Communications staff can't stop all stuff-ups of course

http://www.newshub.co.nz/opinion/opinion-loose-lips-sink-ships-mr-joyce-2016071210
(good to see someone else except Paul Henry, but the opther two
"presenters" appear to be channelling those MPs whose job is to be
behind John Key so there is a sympathetic face in the background . .
(Simon someone is notable for that)

and https://nzharold.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/govt-expected-to-announce-further-labour-policies-as-their-own-by-end-of-the-week/

On 7/11/2016 7:44 PM, Liberty wrote:

2,000,000,000 capital / 100,000 number of houses = $20,000. Labour can
build a house for $20k…. Labour maths

Labour housing policy is doomed to fail.

Liebors claims will work right up to when they regain power.
Then watch just how quickly the 'housing problems' and 'homelessness' disappear...
One thing they haven't factored into their costing is how anything run
by government always has costs overruns

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:30:46 +1200, Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:

george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/11/2016 7:44 PM, Liberty wrote:

2,000,000,000 capital / 100,000 number of houses = $20,000. Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths

Labour housing policy is doomed to fail.

Liebors claims will work right up to when they regain power.
Then watch just how quickly the 'housing problems' and 'homelessness'
disappear...

I'm sure then that the Labor friendly news media would then put a
positive spin on the homeless and housing problems..

Labour/Green will certainly inherit a lot more "Communications" staff
than they left in 2008 - all devoted to feeding politically motivated
stories at taxpayer expense . . .

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:43:19 +1200, victor <user1@example.net> wrote:

On 14/07/2016 10:12 a.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:17:51 +1200, george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/13/2016 7:06 PM, Liberty wrote:

"back to the topic of the thread - political plans to build houses! " >>>>> Rich you are posting twaddle.
The topic was
"Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths"

Rich only adds to the merriment with his solid denial of the basics..
Liebor have claimed that they will build thousands of 'affordable' houses. >>>> Average price of land and building around $500,000..
That is NOT affordable but it's what the market is...

First there are two ways of making something afofordable - lower the
price or increase the income.
Second it appears that you do not accept that the market would be
influenced by building a lot of houses - strange how the "free-market'
Nats rely on government handouts to landlords (WFF, accomodation
supplements) to increase profits . . .

National also claim that they plan exactly the same as Labour
(although their number for capital varies from $1 billion to $1.9bn to
$2 billion depending on which Minister you talk to), . . . Are you
saying National is lying?

The party politicians are shuffling the deck chairs.
Auckland is just a bloated country town.
They need to get over the everyone gets a drafty bungalow phase of >>development and build some serious public terrace housing, close to the CBD. >>They won't because Auckland houses aren't primarily homes, they are >>financial instruments.

Anyway this guy talks some sense.

http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/14-07-2016/a-non-homeowners-guide-to-the-bubble-that-is-going-to-take-you-all-down/

and these two as well >http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/11-07-2016/who-said-it-john-key-in-2007-or-andrew-little-in-2016/

That article simply points up the requirements of the leader of the opposition (as John Key was in 2007) to attack the government of the
day with whatever they can find to discredit, and the requirements of
the PM (as John Key is today) to defend the government's position
against said opposition attacks. Most of this is fairly pointless
'beltway bickering' interesting only to the combatants in the chamber.

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:06:36 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 16:18:12 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:51:53 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:53:28 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net >>>>> dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:30:46 +1200, Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/11/2016 7:44 PM, Liberty wrote:

2,000,000,000 capital / 100,000 number of houses = $20,000. Labour can
build a house for $20k…. Labour maths

Labour housing policy is doomed to fail.

Liebors claims will work right up to when they regain power. >>>>>>>>> Then watch just how quickly the 'housing problems' and 'homelessness' >>>>>>>>> disappear...

I'm sure then that the Labor friendly news media would then put a >>>>>>>> positive spin on the homeless and housing problems..

Labour/Green will certainly inherit a lot more "Communications" staff >>>>>>> than they left in 2008 - all devoted to feeding politically motivated >>>>>>> stories at taxpayer expense . . .

Cite?
Tony

No cite, Tony - I can;t be bothered looking up articles.

So why make the silly claim in the first place?




There was

talk about the increase in DPMC and also other departments - so you
can either believe me or not; I doubt you will find any evidence to
the contrary.

I don't need any evidence to the contrary - you are the one making claims and
you made it up and cannot provide evidence. You lied again.

In asserting, without proof, that I am lying, you are yourself making
an assertion without proof - I don't mind your saying that it is
unproven in this thread - but your lying about my statement is just
defensive lying. You used to be better than that, Tony.

Communications staff can't stop all stuff-ups of course

http://www.newshub.co.nz/opinion/opinion-loose-lips-sink-ships-mr-joyce-2016071210
(good to see someone else except Paul Henry, but the opther two
"presenters" appear to be channelling those MPs whose job is to be
behind John Key so there is a sympathetic face in the background . . >>>>> (Simon someone is notable for that)

and
https://nzharold.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/govt-expected-to-announce-further-labour-policies-as-their-own-by-end-of-the-week/

Irrelevant of course since you are changing your own subject!
Tony

I was bring the discussion back to the topic of the thread - political
plans to build houses!

"back to the topic of the thread - political plans to build houses!"
Rich you are posting twaddle.
The topic was
"Labour can build a house for $20k…. Labour maths"

Indeed that statement was twaddle, bit it did nevertheless relate to
plans to build houses - and that is a triumph for good reason in
itself; even National are now talking of doing something.

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:51:53 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 22:53:28 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:

Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:30:46 +1200, Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> >>>>> wrote:

george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:

On 7/11/2016 7:44 PM, Liberty wrote:

2,000,000,000 capital / 100,000 number of houses = $20,000. Labour can >>>>>>>> build a house for $20k…. Labour maths

Labour housing policy is doomed to fail.

Liebors claims will work right up to when they regain power.
Then watch just how quickly the 'housing problems' and 'homelessness' >>>>>>> disappear...

I'm sure then that the Labor friendly news media would then put a >>>>>> positive spin on the homeless and housing problems..

Labour/Green will certainly inherit a lot more "Communications" staff >>>>> than they left in 2008 - all devoted to feeding politically motivated >>>>> stories at taxpayer expense . . .

Cite?
Tony

No cite, Tony - I can;t be bothered looking up articles. There was
talk about the increase in DPMC and also other departments - so you
can either believe me or not; I doubt you will find any evidence to
the contrary.

I don't need any evidence to the contrary - you are the one making claims and
you made it up and cannot provide evidence. You lied again.

In asserting, without proof, that I am lying, you are yourself making
an assertion without proof - I don't mind your saying that it is
unproven in this thread - but your lying about my statement is just
defensive lying. You used to be better than that, Tony.

Communications staff can't stop all stuff-ups of course

http://www.newshub.co.nz/opinion/opinion-loose-lips-sink-ships-mr-joyce-2016071210
(good to see someone else except Paul Henry, but the opther two
"presenters" appear to be channelling those MPs whose job is to be
behind John Key so there is a sympathetic face in the background . .
(Simon someone is notable for that)

and
https://nzharold.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/govt-expected-to-announce-further-labour-policies-as-their-own-by-end-of-the-week/

Irrelevant of course since you are changing your own subject!
Tony

I was bring the discussion back to the topic of the thread - political
plans to build houses!