Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[marv.]

A handout that's being partially paid for by kid's school lunches

pretty weak and diminutive take dude, by which reasoning i’m sure you’ll agree the taking away of school lunches is equally as likely to pay directly for pay rises for beneficiaries in april.

i don’t like the government an more than you do but you just being angry at two separate things doesn’t connect them.

people need to be housed. not everyone is able to or even wants to buy their own home and until the state can house all renters, landlords are necessary.

try take a deep breath every once in a while and remember that spitting is gross.

 

[miket12]

Are we supposed to believe that spitting on the ground in protest is more offensive than cutting benefits, axing free school lunches and period products, giving $3b to landlords and promoting smoking?

The government announced that they will be putting in the next budget the funding to continue the period products to schools.

Also, while ACT want the school lunches scrapped, National want them to continue. Under the coalition agreement, the future cost effectiveness of the program is being reviewed. Nowhere have either party said it would be axed.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

They should all stay off social media. The young ones in particular. Its a vacuous echo chamber of 'influencers' (ffs!) With unrealistic, filtered lives that kids think are real, getting paid dollars to spread their crap and if a kid today in a group of peers is different or not buying into it the social engineering, they're bullied, made to feel hopeless and helpless by their circle of 'friends' or other keyboard warriors they don't even know.
Take away their phones until they're old enough to understand its not a weapon (both sides) and lets see if it makes a difference.
One of the few policies I agree with re schools but another area parents have to step up.
Everyone sits and asks why when some young person takes their life...8 times out of 10 their cell ph can tell you if you look.

Facts. Food, sleep, exercise.

I don’t know if anyone here as had experience with interrogation, maybe police, but the one of the goals is to put the subject into a suggestive state. Food and sleep deprivation. Now think what happens when you you constantly feed kids shit food, ruin their sleep, don’t make them exercise? They exist in a continuous suggestive state.

Now pump them with sexual innuendo, criminal themes and aggressive fantasies, and what do you think will happen? This is the shit getting fed to your kids.


View: https://youtu.be/6PK7ZW4auI4?si=KzUHGZeqR7DCe97g

 

[MaybeTop8]

pretty weak and diminutive take dude, by which reasoning i’m sure you’ll agree the taking away of school lunches is equally as likely to pay directly for pay rises for beneficiaries in april.

i don’t like the government an more than you do but you just being angry at two separate things doesn’t connect them.

people need to be housed. not everyone is able to or even wants to buy their own home and until the state can house all renters, landlords are necessary.

try take a deep breath every once in a while and remember that spitting is gross.

Nothing about spitters coming from me, and not arguing landlords aren't necessary.

Equally, the megalandlords and real estate industry have clearly had an undue influence on the policies of this government though, to the detriment I believe of everyone else. They're not the only industry that's been able to do that either, which again, points to how corrupt in particular this coalition is. In my opinion of course.

 

[miket12]

Nothing about spitters coming from me, and not arguing landlords aren't necessary.

Equally, the megalandlords and real estate industry have clearly had an undue influence on the policies of this government though, to the detriment I believe of everyone else. They're not the only industry that's been able to do that either, which again, points to how corrupt in particular this coalition is. In my opinion of course.

Oh dear….. the mega landlords myth strikes again.

 

[Juno]

Oh dear….. the mega landlords myth strikes again.

There are mega landlords, highlighted in the article I posted some time ago re mega mall and aprtment building around them thats in the plans (some already happening) in aukland and other places. He's not talking about the Mum & Dad property investors or not even those that are out on their own or under an LLC investing in multiple properties residential and/ or commercial who could do with a break like any local or smaller investor and be encouraged to invest further.
But, Mega landlords are not a myth and guess who will benefit the most? Those conglomerates know how to write off profits, minimise tax and yes, benefit from any reform. Bright lines or any other reforms won't impact them hardly or if at all. Provisional tax, hell, you can't collect it if your books show no profit.

 

[miket12]

There are mega landlords, highlighted in the article I posted some time ago re mega mall and aprtment building around them thats in the plans (some already happening) in aukland and other places. He's not talking about the Mum & Dad property investors or not even those that are out on their own or under an LLC investing in multiple properties residential and/ or commercial who could do with a break like any local or smaller investor and be encouraged to invest further.
But, Mega landlords are not a myth and guess who will benefit the most? Those conglomerates know how to write off profits, minimise tax and yes, benefit from any reform. Bright lines or any other reforms won't impact them hardly or if at all. Provisional tax, hell, you can't collect it if your books show no profit.

The over 300 so-called mega landlords with over 200 houses CTU and Labour parrot on about is wrong and there is only one private person and seven companies/trusts with over 200 dwellings. Any article talking about over three hundred mega landlords has fallen for a myth…. hook, line and sinker.

Don’t believe me? The number of entities with over 200 dwellings doesn’t relate to the people who own over 200 dwellings but relates to the bonds property managers have registered with tenancy services on behalf of their clients…. they don’t own over 200 properties, they manage over 200 properties.

Also, the “mega landlord” you mentioned building near a mall won’t benefit from the changes in the mortgage interest deductibility because owners of newly built properties were still always able to deduct mortgage interest of their tax bills both under the old and new governments settings.

 

[marv.]

they pulled the numbers straight out of their ass.

Labour claimed 346 landlords owned 200+ properties, but official data can prove only one

The Government has hit out at Labour for using misleading figures.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[Rizzah]

Lol, anyone owning 10+ residential properties should be considered a mega landlord. Because we currently have a narrative that most are mum and dad investors so we can't possibly introduce a CGT. How many own more than 10? If we don't know, we should.

 

[Rizzah]

Clowns worried that Labours numbers are wrong are completely missing the point.

 

[Juno]

The over 300 so-called mega landlords with over 200 houses CTU and Labour parrot on about is wrong and there is only one private person and seven companies/trusts with over 200 dwellings. Any article talking about over three hundred mega landlords has fallen for a myth…. hook, line and sinker.

Don’t believe me? The number of entities with over 200 dwellings doesn’t relate to the people who own over 200 dwellings but relates to the bonds property managers have registered with tenancy services on behalf of their clients…. they don’t own over 200 properties, they manage over 200 properties.

Also, the “mega landlord” you mentioned building near a mall won’t benefit from the changes in the mortgage interest deductibility because owners of newly built properties were still always able to deduct mortgage interest of their tax bills both under the old and new governments settings.

The 'mega landlord' isn't just building properties near the malls, they also are building & owning the malls. Housing is just part of their business. Thats a lot different to housing being your sole business.
And property managers just manage your properties, they don't own them. The owner pays them to do what is the shit jobs of being a landlord. Well, at least mine do.
Met a successful business man a long time ago and asked him what was the secret to his success & he told me his business never made any money. I asked him what does that mean and he told me that was for him to know and me to find out

 

[miket12]

Lol, anyone owning 10+ residential properties should be considered a mega landlord. Because we currently have a narrative that most are mum and dad investors so we can't possibly introduce a CGT. How many own more than 10? If we don't know, we should.

We don’t know because there isn’t a register showing how many dwellings are owned by landlords. The
closet we have is how many bonds are registered… but the majority of those are registered by property managers representing multiple landlords. Any number of how many landlords own more than one property is a pure guess.

 

[miket12]

The 'mega landlord' isn't just building properties near the malls, they also are building & owning the malls. Housing is just part of their business. Thats a lot different to housing being your sole business.
And property managers just manage your properties, they don't own them. The owner pays them to do what is the shit jobs of being a landlord. Well, at least mine do.
Met a successful business man a long time ago and asked him what was the secret to his success & he told me his business never made any money. I asked him what does that mean and he told me that was for him to know and me to find out

I’ll try again. The numbers of mega landlords repeatedly used in the media isn’t based on ownership but how many entities have registered bonds with the tenancy tribunal. When the CTU say there are over 300 mega landlords based on bond numbers, they are totally misleading the public.

The bond for our rental property isn’t registered in our name but in the property managers name… Just as they’ve registered hundreds of other properties not owned by them, but other owners. Yet, their name would appear on the bond register hundreds of times… so the CTU consider them a mega landlord even though the company we use own no properties.

And again, the changes to the mortgage interest deductibility will not effect those building large developments as they were always able to claim them.

 

[Worried2Death]

The 'mega landlord' isn't just building properties near the malls, they also are building & owning the malls. Housing is just part of their business. Thats a lot different to housing being your sole business.
And property managers just manage your properties, they don't own them. The owner pays them to do what is the shit jobs of being a landlord. Well, at least mine do.
Met a successful business man a long time ago and asked him what was the secret to his success & he told me his business never made any money. I asked him what does that mean and he told me that was for him to know and me to find out

Did he mean he never paid any tax

 

[Juno]

I’ll try again. The numbers of mega landlords repeatedly used in the media isn’t based on ownership but how many entities have registered bonds with the tenancy tribunal. When the CTU say there are over 300 mega landlords based on bond numbers, they are totally misleading the public.

The bond for our rental property isn’t registered in our name but in the property managers name… Just as they’ve registered hundreds of other properties not owned by them, but other owners. Yet, their name would appear on the bond register hundreds of times… so the CTU consider them a mega landlord even though the company we use own no properties.

And again, the changes to the mortgage interest deductibility will not effect those building large developments as they were always able to claim them.

I'll try again
I'm not talking about bonds or tenancy numbers at the tribunal, te mea te mea te mea.
Yes, they've f***ed up the numbers and should be called on it. They need to do proper due diligence before spouting off - all of them.
Politicians, any of them, are rarely experts in any field. They may sometimes be on the right track but often don't see the forest for the trees. Bit like all of us, no?

 

[MrFrankWhite]

All politicians numbers are bullshit.

 

[dean]

The 'mega landlord' isn't just building properties near the malls, they also are building & owning the malls. Housing is just part of their business. Thats a lot different to housing being your sole business.
And property managers just manage your properties, they don't own them. The owner pays them to do what is the shit jobs of being a landlord. Well, at least mine do.
Met a successful business man a long time ago and asked him what was the secret to his success & he told me his business never made any money. I asked him what does that mean and he told me that was for him to know and me to find out

Who are these landlords that own malls and houses.
The two don't mix, completely different.
Malls here are usually owned by Westfield, they develop them.
They are not residential landlords.

 

[marv.]

Clowns worried that Labours numbers are wrong are completely missing the point.

not an issue to you that they’re outright lying to get everyone angry and cause even more division?

or was it just a little whoopsie?

 

[Juno]

Who are these landlords that own malls and houses.
The two don't mix, completely different.
Malls here are usually owned by Westfield, they develop them.
They are not residential landlords.

Look again. And look deeper.
When did the rule get written that developers can't also be landlords?
If I can find it I'll repost the article.

 

[dean]

Look again. And look deeper.
When did the rule get written that developers can't also be landlords?
If I can find it I'll repost the article.

I don't need to look deeper. You can't say who the mall developer and house developer and holder of same houses is.
Developers can be landlords, hardly any are.