-
@jc I'm hoping that is the worst case for our home reno borrowing. We are in a fortunate position in terms of debt, and we aren't going for a huge amount. But it will be interesting to see if we slip through and get approved immediately, or we go down the audit route.
-
You blokes voted for Saint Jackie Jackie, Kirwan, twice. Child poverty would end by 2027 she said. More free doctors, child minding/feeding at school, fabulous pay rises for teachers she said. World's best new housing creation she said, grand new subsidies for those who cannot afford to go to work.
What did you get? About seven new welfare houses, 350,000 to 400,000 people on taxpayer funded fortnightly money for nothing, 4% unemployment, GDP 1.9% - continuing a 7-year trend south - government debt at NZD$102,080 million / 30% of GDP and nowhere to go!
What did you think would happen?
The smart young things, who assess their political leaders on some sort of empathy scale (which doesn't pay the rent), were always going to arrive at the point I am reading about here now. They are about to get a fabulous surprise, difficulties they never contemplated, a shock to their aspirations. Whether they pay attention or not is anyone's guess.
You will get the opportunity to give her another go in just two years.
-
@gt12 said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
My thoughts about returning to NZ were already pretty bad, but this might be the point that pushes me to say fuck it. They seriously look at whether you have Netflix etc? Really? Fuck me.
Yep. The girl and I had seperate accounts so our broker ( who was outstanding ) suggested we can one of them quick smart which we did
-
@paekakboyz if you have equity already, its more this is how much we want to give you.
My neighbour has thier house next door, 18 months ago bought a rental, and then have bought another, all based on the equity in the existing property, no deposit or anything, just we can loan you x for your 2nd rental property.
Changes to the H & S Act, along with other compliance stuff over the years, has seen alot of people who owned thier own businesses sell up or exit the industry sooner than they had planned, and some were able to retire, while some went and worked for someone else to avoid having to deal with all the compliance as a business owner/director.
THe company I work for, bought acquired a local business, all the staff came over, but one guy retired within 2 months (he was the catalyst for the acquisition as he was wanting to retire) another retired during the 1st lock down and the other 2 within a year (all had been planned exit from the industry) all because they didnt want to have to deal with the certification and compliance side of things that had been in the pipelines for many years, most of which is overkill and based on the assumption that all the consumers in our industry are stupid.
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
You blokes voted for Saint Jackie Jackie, Kirwan, twice. Child poverty would end by 2027 she said. More free doctors, child minding/feeding at school, fabulous pay rises for teachers she said. World's best new housing creation she said, grand new subsidies for those who cannot afford to go to work.
What did you get? About seven new welfare houses, 350,000 to 400,000 people on taxpayer funded fortnightly money for nothing, 4% unemployment, GDP 1.9% - continuing a 7-year trend south - government debt at NZD$102,080 million / 30% of GDP and nowhere to go!
What did you think would happen?
The smart young things, who assess their political leaders on some sort of empathy scale (which doesn't pay the rent), were always going to arrive at the point I am reading about here now. They are about to get a fabulous surprise, difficulties they never contemplated, a shock to their aspirations. Whether they pay attention or not is anyone's guess.
You will get the opportunity to give her another go in just two years.
Not sure why this directed at me, thought Iโd been pretty clear who I voted for.
-
It is directed at "you blokes", the voters, and attached to cogent comments you made identifying the subject it is focused on ... "government was warned by two different groups what the impact of their legislation would be ...".
My treatise is not to you individually. Perhaps I should have addressed it to "youse".
I haven't especially noticed voting (or other) characteristics of individuals here because I am afraid to attend often, having been warned off by one of the Fern's brightest - for being old I gather - it makes him feeeel uneasy and causes him to swear a lot, in a tough way.
I have been aware of what your government has been cooking up - it's in the papers.
Thirty or more years ago I watched Kerry Packer bark back at a Senate hearing into paying tax:
"I am not evading tax in any way shape or form. Now, of course, I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their head read. Because, as a government, I can tell you, **you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra**."
That had an impact - I started paying closer attention to what fools who couldn't run a chook raffle were doing with millions and billions; and keeping track of government borrowings. It was alarming.
I am attempting to point up the need for young blokes in their economic prime to study closely how much government is scooping up from them and who it is being spent on.
That's a sight more effective use of their time and energy than furious agreement with strangers on a blog about trivia ... that Morrison is evil, just like Reagan and Trump; and that "Saint Jacinta cares for me and others - look at her sad face under the fez/hijab/Apache feathers" she has adopted for this week to maximise a headline opportunity; and so on.
Your government, your bellicose, snarling "foreign minister" this week for example, is a huge problem for New Zealand. The several political parties clearly know nothing about commercial management, yet they distract you so easily on incidentals such as repatriation of your exported criminals and who should speak what language. The most productive group is a mere 20% of your 5 million people - too low a proportion doing the work of regularly providing for the rest.
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
It is directed at "you blokes", the voters, and attached to cogent comments you made identifying the subject it is focused on ... "government was warned by two different groups what the impact of their legislation would be ...".
My treatise is not to you individually. Perhaps I should have addressed it to "youse".
I haven't especially noticed voting (or other) characteristics of individuals here because I am afraid to attend often, having been warned off by one of the Fern's brightest - for being old I gather - it makes him feeeel uneasy and causes him to swear a lot, in a tough way.
I have been aware of what your government has been cooking up - it's in the papers.
Thirty or more years ago I watched Kerry Packer bark back at a Senate hearing into paying tax:
"I am not evading tax in any way shape or form. Now, of course, I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their head read. Because, as a government, I can tell you, **you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra**."
That had an impact - I started paying closer attention to what fools who couldn't run a chook raffle were doing with millions and billions; and keeping track of government borrowings. It was alarming.
I am attempting to point up the need for young blokes in their economic prime to study closely how much government is scooping up from them and who it is being spent on.
That's a sight more effective use of their time and energy than furious agreement with strangers on a blog about trivia ... that Morrison is evil, just like Reagan and Trump; and that "Saint Jacinta cares for me and others - look at her sad face under the fez/hijab/Apache feathers" she has adopted for this week to maximise a headline opportunity; and so on.
Your government, your bellicose, snarling "foreign minister" this week for example, is a huge problem for New Zealand. The several political parties clearly know nothing about commercial management, yet they distract you so easily on incidentals such as repatriation of your exported criminals and who should speak what language. The most productive group is a mere 20% of your 5 million people - too low a proportion doing the work of regularly providing for the rest.
Believe me, no one is tough on the fern. Donโt worry about it
-
@mn5 said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
It is directed at "you blokes", the voters, and attached to cogent comments you made identifying the subject it is focused on ... "government was warned by two different groups what the impact of their legislation would be ...".
My treatise is not to you individually. Perhaps I should have addressed it to "youse".
I haven't especially noticed voting (or other) characteristics of individuals here because I am afraid to attend often, having been warned off by one of the Fern's brightest - for being old I gather - it makes him feeeel uneasy and causes him to swear a lot, in a tough way.
I have been aware of what your government has been cooking up - it's in the papers.
Thirty or more years ago I watched Kerry Packer bark back at a Senate hearing into paying tax:
"I am not evading tax in any way shape or form. Now, of course, I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their head read. Because, as a government, I can tell you, **you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra**."
That had an impact - I started paying closer attention to what fools who couldn't run a chook raffle were doing with millions and billions; and keeping track of government borrowings. It was alarming.
I am attempting to point up the need for young blokes in their economic prime to study closely how much government is scooping up from them and who it is being spent on.
That's a sight more effective use of their time and energy than furious agreement with strangers on a blog about trivia ... that Morrison is evil, just like Reagan and Trump; and that "Saint Jacinta cares for me and others - look at her sad face under the fez/hijab/Apache feathers" she has adopted for this week to maximise a headline opportunity; and so on.
Your government, your bellicose, snarling "foreign minister" this week for example, is a huge problem for New Zealand. The several political parties clearly know nothing about commercial management, yet they distract you so easily on incidentals such as repatriation of your exported criminals and who should speak what language. The most productive group is a mere 20% of your 5 million people - too low a proportion doing the work of regularly providing for the rest.
Believe me, no one is tough on the fern. Donโt worry about it
Oi, Iโll farken have you!
-
@mn5 said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
It is directed at "you blokes", the voters, and attached to cogent comments you made identifying the subject it is focused on ... "government was warned by two different groups what the impact of their legislation would be ...".
My treatise is not to you individually. Perhaps I should have addressed it to "youse".
I haven't especially noticed voting (or other) characteristics of individuals here because I am afraid to attend often, having been warned off by one of the Fern's brightest - for being old I gather - it makes him feeeel uneasy and causes him to swear a lot, in a tough way.
I have been aware of what your government has been cooking up - it's in the papers.
Thirty or more years ago I watched Kerry Packer bark back at a Senate hearing into paying tax:
"I am not evading tax in any way shape or form. Now, of course, I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their head read. Because, as a government, I can tell you, **you're not spending it that well that we should be donating extra**."
That had an impact - I started paying closer attention to what fools who couldn't run a chook raffle were doing with millions and billions; and keeping track of government borrowings. It was alarming.
I am attempting to point up the need for young blokes in their economic prime to study closely how much government is scooping up from them and who it is being spent on.
That's a sight more effective use of their time and energy than furious agreement with strangers on a blog about trivia ... that Morrison is evil, just like Reagan and Trump; and that "Saint Jacinta cares for me and others - look at her sad face under the fez/hijab/Apache feathers" she has adopted for this week to maximise a headline opportunity; and so on.
Your government, your bellicose, snarling "foreign minister" this week for example, is a huge problem for New Zealand. The several political parties clearly know nothing about commercial management, yet they distract you so easily on incidentals such as repatriation of your exported criminals and who should speak what language. The most productive group is a mere 20% of your 5 million people - too low a proportion doing the work of regularly providing for the rest.
Believe me, no one is tough on the fern. Donโt worry about it
True. I wear slippers before winter.
-
Look, really MN5, I am touched that you care enough to reach out - a new warm term I have learned from my life coach, who is helping me through the fear. However ...
I have counselled a couple of the local supermarket check out technician-ettes when they ask "How are you?"
Lovely young things that they are I suggest that when they see an old bloke approaching they must assume that he either:
a) lived a miserable life and doesn't care much for people, or
b) he lives alone and no-one has spoken to him for a week and a half, he "might think you really care and stand here boring you witless for a half hour!"
They must take control I say, by making an assertion - "What a fabulous morning!" responding to it themselves "Lovely breeze out there" and moving him along "That'll be 3 and sixpence thanks".
Now, you do seem to be a nice chap, have you got some time to hear about the old days?
(Ooohhh! Little Ash Barty was 6-4, 2-5 but now she's back near square. Better go!)
-
In an example of the calibre of journalism at One News, the last paragraph states:
Reserve Bank data showed that in November 2021 there was $9.1 billion in lending. In December, when the new law came into force, it dropped to $7.9b.
Sounds terrible, but Bernard Hickey has slightly more analysis here:
Reserve Bank figures out yesterday showed there was still $7.9b of new lending in the month of December, which was down 13% from November, but in line with the $8.3b average for the rest of 2021 and above the $7.2b seen for the last two years. New first home buyer lending of $1.56b was down just 10% from November and in line with the monthly average for 2021.
-
@godder said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
In an example of the calibre of journalism at One News, the last paragraph states:
Reserve Bank data showed that in November 2021 there was $9.1 billion in lending. In December, when the new law came into force, it dropped to $7.9b.
Sounds terrible, but Bernard Hickey has slightly more analysis here:
Reserve Bank figures out yesterday showed there was still $7.9b of new lending in the month of December, which was down 13% from November, but in line with the $8.3b average for the rest of 2021 and above the $7.2b seen for the last two years. New first home buyer lending of $1.56b was down just 10% from November and in line with the monthly average for 2021.
Have had multiple real estate agents tell me that buyers had dropped (by as much as 30%) from December. January has been the same. Real world impact.
-
@kirwan said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
@godder said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
In an example of the calibre of journalism at One News, the last paragraph states:
Reserve Bank data showed that in November 2021 there was $9.1 billion in lending. In December, when the new law came into force, it dropped to $7.9b.
Sounds terrible, but Bernard Hickey has slightly more analysis here:
Reserve Bank figures out yesterday showed there was still $7.9b of new lending in the month of December, which was down 13% from November, but in line with the $8.3b average for the rest of 2021 and above the $7.2b seen for the last two years. New first home buyer lending of $1.56b was down just 10% from November and in line with the monthly average for 2021.
Have had multiple real estate agents tell me that buyers had dropped (by as much as 30%) from December. January has been the same. Real world impact.
Is that from November which is traditional in the industry as December and January are usually quieter than other months, or from the same time in the year before? (which was Hickey's point) Is that their analysis that it's solely that, and not any other factor at all like tightening banks' LVRs limits?
If a borrower has Netflix (to use an example above), why would a lender not consider that to be an ongoing expense for the purposes of assessment of ability to make repayments? How much of the problem is an overcautious approach, and how much is that now that lenders verify applications, it turns out clients are inaccurate in their applications more than was thought, and the new normal is actually accurate?
I suggest that the narrative of "Lending figures have dropped, unintended consequences, how could the government not see this" could just as easily be "Lending figures have dropped because lenders having to verify application information has reduced the poor quality loans being made" or "New legislation takes time for everyone to get comfortable applying".
-
@kirwan said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
@godder said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
In an example of the calibre of journalism at One News, the last paragraph states:
Reserve Bank data showed that in November 2021 there was $9.1 billion in lending. In December, when the new law came into force, it dropped to $7.9b.
Sounds terrible, but Bernard Hickey has slightly more analysis here:
Reserve Bank figures out yesterday showed there was still $7.9b of new lending in the month of December, which was down 13% from November, but in line with the $8.3b average for the rest of 2021 and above the $7.2b seen for the last two years. New first home buyer lending of $1.56b was down just 10% from November and in line with the monthly average for 2021.
Have had multiple real estate agents tell me that buyers had dropped (by as much as 30%) from December. January has been the same. Real world impact.
I am not surprised, steep increases in sale prices cannot be sustained when unemployment has grown, revenues and wages have stalled and migration has fallen away. The markets where I live - Gold Coast and Sydney - have experienced eye watering price increases, but something has pulled the handbrake on in the past couple of months.
It has happened before, going back to the '80s.
The black plague plus protagonist navies circling each other in the South China Sea have eliminated an important group of Asian buyers here. That will remain the case for a bit however that same trend has reversed very swiftly in decades past.
Uncertainty about a leaderless, weakened and vulnerable USA (a whole new experience that!), in the hands of known, ambitious internal interests with unknown targets and strategies is the unnameable in the wood pile.
Most uncertain times and the prediction game is pretty much educated guesswork now.
-
@godder My partner is trying to sell properties from her parents estate.
My impression is real estate agents have become used to not having to actually work for their living and are lowering expectations because they can't be arsed doing their jobs properly.
Their are exceptions but have come across too many who have been creaming it.
She's being told a 1920's bungalow on a full sized section in Westmere won't attain GV (set 4 years ago). I think first home buyers are being affected and that will cascade through but it shouldn't be making a sizeable difference once you get to the 3-4 mill market.
-
@dogmeat said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
@godder My partner is trying to sell properties from her parents estate.
My impression is real estate agents have become used to not having to actually work for their living and are lowering expectations because they can't be arsed doing their jobs properly.
Their are exceptions but have come across too many who have been creaming it.
She's being told a 1920's bungalow on a full sized section in Westmere won't attain GV (set 4 years ago). I think first home buyers are being affected and that will cascade through but it shouldn't be making a sizeable difference once you get to the 3-4 mill market.
That sounds like BS to me. That type of property is like hen's teeth and very sought after. I think you need to find another agent
-
@mick-gold-coast-qld said in Bank Lending/CCCFA:
I have counselled a couple of the local supermarket check out technician-ettes when they ask "How are you?"
Just reply with 'I'm so glad you asked because my piles are acting up awfully"
Bank Lending/CCCFA