this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
11 points (100.0% liked)

NZ Politics

561 readers
1 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

 

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Really interesting article which serves as a good background to the current problem with state housing.

Tl;dr: Did National sell off state housing? Yes, but the net loss was only a few hundred. However, if you factor in the proportion of the total housing stoke owned by the state, we are short 43,000 state homes, and that's only for the rather meagre 5.4% of total stock.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Her colleague Chris Bishop even told RNZ that National would “build enough state and social housing” to clear the state-house waiting list – a startling claim given that the list currently sits at 24,717, but one to which he will no doubt be held if his party wins power.

We can but hope.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Indeed. This is good news if they stick to their word.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Has a politician ever ?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Yup, which has resulted in a double-whammy of problems.

  1. There's not enough social housing to keep vulnerable and disadvantaged people in homes.
  2. There's not enough non-private housing to create market pressures that might otherwise change private provision of housing.
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

National's gonna de-nationalise.

That's a wierd sentence.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

The net loss was a few hundred, however the number should have grown with population growth.

Do the nominal loss need to include that growth that didn't happen, whether value it was.

Then, factor in the growth lost every year afterwards too.