U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Australia and New Zealand
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2019, 10:55 PM
 
2,389 posts, read 3,056,211 times
Reputation: 1905

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarisaMay View Post
It was explained to me once by a friend who had an export business that although many of our work conditions are similar to European ones, that our trading partners are mostly Asian, which have poorer conditions and less welfare. We cannot compete economically if our exports are too expensive.
That's not true at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarisaMay View Post
But whether or not that is correct, to have welfare systems like that you require a very high tax rate but also compliance to a high tax rate. It does not work if there is a lot of tax avoidance. As we have had long periods of Liberal governments, the push has been to lower tax rates, not increase them.
Government revenue as a % of GDP has barely moved over the last 40 years, they've just changed the composition of the tax base (GST/CGT/FBT etc). Liberal governments have tended to have a higher tax take than the ALP, largely because of the prevailing economy when they've been in power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2019, 02:03 AM
 
2,218 posts, read 3,039,044 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCC_1 View Post
I'd suggest a failure of social policy if almost half of the population live in government housing.
Well not social policy, that is or should be reactive to reality on the ground, but a sign of failed economic policy, where housing is no longer affordable. I wonder if you support Singapore' s government intervention policy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 02:34 AM
 
2,218 posts, read 3,039,044 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
You think that we are all like you? - seeking the smothering embrace of "daddy state" and happily supporting leaders who would kill and whip their way to their better world. Well, we're not -he represents much of what I think is wrong with the world.

Poorly constructed housing isn't an accurate portrayal of the issues of the last 30 years. Houses built prior to about the late 80s, had design issues that largely effected those with poor house keeping skills. Leaky house was a continuation of a similar crisis that played out in the US and Canada, and could be broadly described as a too rapid embrace of new design and materials, in a de- regulated market -tended to affect more upmarket houses and apartments, as isn't seen as an issue of poverty.

The housing market is a bit lopsided, but I see that deliberately maintaining a low house price, so as to be affordable for the poorest, isn't the best for the economy, or the country.

One could argue that NZ has struggled to gain ground in the last 30 years, but I've become more inclined to think that that is a much about geography as anything -however well a product or service is developed here, there's always going to be somewhere better to conduct the business. I think I prefer the grass roots economy myself, and NZ s becoming a nation of investors.

I'm am actually in favour of the welfare state, but primarily through education, assistance and intervention. Welfare for work capable should always be a step down from the lowest level of worker.

I think the private sector can crow all it wants about ideology, but government should not be using it's resources to promote ideology.
As you ask, what I think is that you are confused on a few fronts. Where ever did you get the impression that I supported the authoritarian Lee? While Lee did introduce rattan he did not 'kill his way' as you put it to a 'better world'. His style in large parts, very well received by conservatives by and large. Not all aspects as his housing policy would be regarded as too much akin to socialism and to little 'free market.


NZ and many Aussie houses, remain of poor value. I guess the old manta of replacement every forty odd years ensures their shed like structures (as seen in many a European eye) along with poor quality build.
Affordable housing? Long time since I've heard that term. within the Aussie context, without government intervention in the market, either nothing would be affordable due to inflated pricing, or due to no one buying without such incentives, much would be available as the market found its value.


Yes a lot to do with geography and small population and Britain's loosening of apron strings forty plus years ago. But also a deliberate policy by government at the time to introduce policy that would decline living standards and remove protections. The result was declining living standards for many and as I say a second world economy.


Government should be using its resources, to ensure the betterment of citizens living in the country. Not providing welfare for corporates and fellow travellers while tightening the tap on help to its people. A government after all is place to govern for all, not just manage an economy and few citizens as consumers and allowing undue influence by unelected forces.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
16,437 posts, read 12,852,262 times
Reputation: 5215
Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour View Post
As you ask, what I think is that you are confused on a few fronts. Where ever did you get the impression that I supported the authoritarian Lee? While Lee did introduce rattan he did not 'kill his way' as you put it to a 'better world'. His style in large parts, very well received by conservatives by and large. Not all aspects as his housing policy would be regarded as too much akin to socialism and to little 'free market.


NZ and many Aussie houses, remain of poor value. I guess the old manta of replacement every forty odd years ensures their shed like structures (as seen in many a European eye) along with poor quality build.
Affordable housing? Long time since I've heard that term. within the Aussie context, without government intervention in the market, either nothing would be affordable due to inflated pricing, or due to no one buying without such incentives, much would be available as the market found its value.


Yes a lot to do with geography and small population and Britain's loosening of apron strings forty plus years ago. But also a deliberate policy by government at the time to introduce policy that would decline living standards and remove protections. The result was declining living standards for many and as I say a second world economy.


Government should be using its resources, to ensure the betterment of citizens living in the country. Not providing welfare for corporates and fellow travellers while tightening the tap on help to its people. A government after all is place to govern for all, not just manage an economy and few citizens as consumers and allowing undue influence by unelected forces.
Only because of the price - I've never heard of the mantra of replacement every 40 years, and don't accept that quality is low. I haven't found Europeans as a whole, to have a good understanding of quality construction, other than those with expertise - many do espouse ideas and concepts that aren't particularly relevant or appropriate , and there can also be a degree of snobbery around products in which higher quality or design, don't deliver increased performance or savings.

Housing still is affordable, but it takes a different mindset of a generation or two ago - motivation and discipline are more essential now,and by and large I'm seeing that a lot in younger people. At the same time, the price of low motivation and discipline, is worse than it was 40 years ago. Inability to keep up with immigration numbers is the single biggest factor is housing becoming overpriced. Tax structures for investment properties have been lax imo, but ultimately supply has been the issue.

I don't think there was a deliberate policy to lower living standards, There was a policy to stop people subsidising state owned businesses, against which they were trying to compete. The underclass has grown, but even their living standards have increased. Second world economy isn't particularly relevant, as I think geography is still the main factor at play here, and geographical proximity to large populations and trade routes, will always be the key advantage - Switzerland and Singapore would be different nations, if they were out out in the Pacific.

Government should be concerned with helping those unable to help themselves, and not seeking to be so generous with the money of others, that it increases the number of people who become dependent on government.

Last edited by Joe90; 01-07-2019 at 12:07 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 04:11 PM
 
2,218 posts, read 3,039,044 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
Only because of the price - I've never heard of the mantra of replacement every 40 years, and don't accept that quality is low. I haven't found Europeans as a whole, to have a good understanding of quality construction, other than those with expertise - many do espouse ideas and concepts that aren't particularly relevant or appropriate , and there can also be a degree of snobbery around products in which higher quality or design, don't deliver increased performance or savings.





Housing still is affordable, but it takes a different mindset of a generation or two ago - motivation and discipline are more essential now,and by and large I'm seeing that a lot in younger people. At the same time, the price of low motivation and discipline, is worse than it was 40 years ago. Inability to keep up with immigration numbers is the single biggest factor is housing becoming overpriced. Tax structures for investment properties have been lax imo, but ultimately supply has been the issue.

I don't think there was a deliberate policy to lower living standards, There was a policy to stop people subsidising state owned businesses, against which they were trying to compete. The underclass has grown, but even their living standards have increased. Second world economy isn't particularly relevant, as I think geography is still the main factor at play here, and geographical proximity to large populations and trade routes, will always be the key advantage - Switzerland and Singapore would be different nations, if they were out out in the Pacific.

Government should be concerned with helping those unable to help themselves, and not seeking to be so generous with the money of others, that it increases the number of people who become dependent on government.
Whether you wish to accept it or not , that is how it is. Germans in particular, find Australian/NZ houses shed like and quality poor. Snobbery? Of course does exist, but house and postcard snobbery very high in Australia around products and design. There is a very high awareness of performance and savings and design in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands and Denmark. The countries, I am more familiar with.


Lets clarify any confusion that appears with your reply. Housing prices in Australia, remain among the least affordable in the world. So much so, that there is a distinct danger that the economy could seriously be impacted, if the present down turn, turns into a deflationary, bubble bursting exercise not seen in Australia in living memory. Is NZ any different? High house prices, low wages.? I'm not on the ground there but note a lot of similarities and throw Canada into the mix as well. UK another.


Houses in Australia and I expect NZ, appear often unfinished. Poorly insulated, too often corners cut in material use .


I'm saying the policy led to the growth of a substantial under class in the NZ context, as a result of policy. Whether that was the aim such policy set out with that in mind, but the results of such reckless policy, would not have been hard to ascertain. Cutting dole payments for example, were clearly aimed at the most vulnerable, resulting in clearly entrenching an under class.
The general low pay scale in NZ saw world high numbers of New Zealanders quit those shores for abroad. Some 10% of that country's born, now reside outside. Few countries can match those figures.
Very easy to make excuses, with regards to geography and I think Second World economy title, is entirely relevant. It addresses certain delusions, especially what foreigners may perceive NZ to be.
Even today, NZ is used as a back door entry into Australia by many migrants who use that method to gain entry to Australia, their main target.


Government generous with others money? Certainly are with corporate welfare and being rorted by tax avoiding business. Sustaining an over inflated housing market with incentives, not taking the law to banks and financiers that swindled people making them welfare cases, nor business employing people on short term contracts, minus benefits, that will ensure it very difficult to 'get ahead'.
Dependency and the management of people some think a deliberate ploy in controlling and making an industry in itself.

Last edited by the troubadour; 01-07-2019 at 04:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 04:51 PM
 
2,389 posts, read 3,056,211 times
Reputation: 1905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post

Housing still is affordable, but it takes a different mindset of a generation or two ago
Housing hasn't been "affordable" (an awfully ill-defined term, but comparing today to the 1980s affordability is not too different) since the early 1970s, and that was part of a post-war aberration in the home ownership. Pre-war, housing was only for the wealthy; the idea of the Australian dream being to own a home is out of the 1950s. The rise of two income families, a 30 year decline in interest rates and real wage growth has been the driver of house prices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2019, 07:17 PM
 
2,218 posts, read 3,039,044 times
Reputation: 1315
People appear not to realise just how poor a lot of the population was in Australia, especially between the wars, with the Great Depression severely impacting on Australia, with government intervention after the war helping to create more affluence but from a low base.


Housing really took off as we followed the American suburban sprawl demanding high motor vehicle use assisted by declining public transport.


I would add peer pressure to an extent that made housing take off, but also that it became the stable ingredient of what became known as The Australian Dream, a house on land in the suburbs to raise kids which became the expectation of my generation.


I doubt very much if housing has ever been so unaffordable, to higher earners than recent times in especially our bigger cities. It is only the fact that lending has been easy and cheap, that has sustained the mascaraed, until recently anyway.


The lack of tenure rights, for those renting, certainly compared to other countries, further complicates life for many in rentals. It is somewhat regarded as inferior to rent, even in present climate, even though many are opting to do so, making more economic sense, in a time of falling prices, than to purchase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 12:15 AM
 
13 posts, read 2,818 times
Reputation: 21
The answer is history.

Europeans fought hard for their current social systems and they've had hundreds of years to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 06:27 PM
 
2,218 posts, read 3,039,044 times
Reputation: 1315
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobishere View Post
The answer is history.

Europeans fought hard for their current social systems and they've had hundreds of years to do it.

In part only. The real progressive welfare policy really kicked off after WW2. It was a political response, largely to realties of the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
16,437 posts, read 12,852,262 times
Reputation: 5215
Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour View Post
Whether you wish to accept it or not , that is how it is. Germans in particular, find Australian/NZ houses shed like and quality poor. Snobbery? Of course does exist, but house and postcard snobbery very high in Australia around products and design. There is a very high awareness of performance and savings and design in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands and Denmark. The countries, I am more familiar with.


Lets clarify any confusion that appears with your reply. Housing prices in Australia, remain among the least affordable in the world. So much so, that there is a distinct danger that the economy could seriously be impacted, if the present down turn, turns into a deflationary, bubble bursting exercise not seen in Australia in living memory. Is NZ any different? High house prices, low wages.? I'm not on the ground there but note a lot of similarities and throw Canada into the mix as well. UK another.


Houses in Australia and I expect NZ, appear often unfinished. Poorly insulated, too often corners cut in material use .


I'm saying the policy led to the growth of a substantial under class in the NZ context, as a result of policy. Whether that was the aim such policy set out with that in mind, but the results of such reckless policy, would not have been hard to ascertain. Cutting dole payments for example, were clearly aimed at the most vulnerable, resulting in clearly entrenching an under class.
The general low pay scale in NZ saw world high numbers of New Zealanders quit those shores for abroad. Some 10% of that country's born, now reside outside. Few countries can match those figures.
Very easy to make excuses, with regards to geography and I think Second World economy title, is entirely relevant. It addresses certain delusions, especially what foreigners may perceive NZ to be.
Even today, NZ is used as a back door entry into Australia by many migrants who use that method to gain entry to Australia, their main target.


Government generous with others money? Certainly are with corporate welfare and being rorted by tax avoiding business. Sustaining an over inflated housing market with incentives, not taking the law to banks and financiers that swindled people making them welfare cases, nor business employing people on short term contracts, minus benefits, that will ensure it very difficult to 'get ahead'.
Dependency and the management of people some think a deliberate ploy in controlling and making an industry in itself.
Shed like is subjective and means little in this context. Poor quality doesn't hold much weight either -why buy the best window latches, when cheaper ones will suffice?

Insulation is an issue of houses built up to around the 1990s - back in your good old days. Unfinished houses? - could just be that these Germans aren't used to different design styles/architecture, New houses won't get sign off unless they're finished.

Australia is effectively an extension of NZ, and one with warmer weather. Being bigger and wealthier, it does offer more opportunity, no surprises there. People I know that have moved there, are trading one comfortable lifestyle, for another.

Second world economy isn't relevant -that equates to quality of life, and there is nothing to suggest NZ belongs in some second tear quality of life index. Geography is a valid reason - you seriously think Luxembourg or Denmark.would be the country it is, if it was not in a cluster of other wealthy countries?

The dole isn't a lifestyle option, and there is always work available.

I don't know any one on welfare because some bank swindled their money.. People need to do their research with regards to finance companies -the last crisis will hopefully make people more diligent. Undersupply is the main issue with housing costs, I don't see a bubble, just a bit of retraction. People do get ahead in this era of contract work, but it's not typically those from welfare backgrounds - many of those people have been ruined by the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Australia and New Zealand
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top