House tax writeoffs aid families

Unfortunately, the high price of houses in most of the major cities makes it almost impossible for someone on a smaller wage to ever afford to buy a home to live in. The shortage of residential housing, with growing population numbers, the lowest interest rates for borrowing for years and easy monetary policies at banks, also help to drive house prices upwards.

Current Reserve Bank LVR restrictions and bank “investor category” policies are gradually slowing the market but not fast enough for some. The two-year ownership legislation does try to prevent people flicking properties off for a very quick capital gain tax-free, but perhaps that should be extended to 10 or more years. At least that may help provide stable rental accommodation for those unable to afford to buy homes.

The Labour Party’s proposal to remove negative gearing benefits seems a reasonable option if trying to reduce price increases driven by investment buying.

Susan Broad wrote about their tax writeoffs in Friday’s letters — of being taxfree for several years when she used the current gearing policy to house her sons at university, while also qualifying them for student allowances. I’m not sure how this worked legally, but I do wonder what she was thinking while she happily took advantage of negative gearing to subsequently make the most of the tax savings and probable capital gains that the taxpayer helped provide them with.

If she really thought it was such a rort, it seems awfully smug to now support its removal — we’re all right, Jack, and have done really well out of it, but the rest of you can go fly a kite in future?

We would all like the opportunity to help our children by providing them a place to live while they are at university, or even more, to help them into a home afterwards. Negative gearing is one way we can try and afford to do it and I believe firmly that we should still be able to.

If Labour is successful in the next election and does remove negative gearing, what happens to those who have already bought properties with the express purpose of trying to help their children, not just into university digs, but also into long-term housing? Perhaps Labour could also consider an option to exclude those who have their children living in their “investment” homes, as distinct from those who are really “investing” and avoiding paying taxes for financial gain. A family use gearing exception? C. Pearce, Pt Chevalier.

Double standard on suicide

Lizzie Marvelly discusses sensibly the need for the Government to improve its assistance to help suicidal people through their unbearable suffering. At the same time, members of Parliament are promoting bills that would make it legal and proper to assist people with unbearable suffering to commit suicide. No wonder there is frustration on the country’s suicide prevention panel.

Tony Molloy, Morrinsville.

Population out of control

I read a lot about global warming and its causes but I have not read anything about the real cause.

The real cause of global warming is the sheer number of people.

World population 1950: 2.5 billion. World population 2005: 6.5b. World population 2050: 9.5b.

All these people want food, houses, jobs and to reproduce. They also want to get from one place to another.

All these people breathe out carbon dioxide.

The end result is more land is cleared, more animals are farmed, more crops are harvested and less greenery to turn carbon dioxide into oxygen.

The only cure is the one that no one is able to face or even write about. What to do about all the people here now and how to stop the world from suffocating itself to death?

My suggestion is to start at home — New Zealand.

Decide what is our optimum population and do whatever is necessary to maintain that population. Stop just building more houses, more motorways. Stop clearing land to farm more animals. Limit the number of motor cars.

Create a benchmark for the world to hold up as an example. Let other countries smother themselves.

A challenge to Gareth Morgan: Don’t worry about cats — save New Zealand.

David Bentham, Browns Bay.

Politics of religion?

Jon Gambrell’s very informative article about Iran’s elections was spoiled by its title (“Iran: People, power and the politics of religion”). I have a problem with “politics of religion” here. The article is not about religion in general, but Islam (Shia Islam in particular). And, although there are elections, Iran is an Islamic theocracy.

In the Christian and post-Christian democracies of the West, Christianity is just a lobby — sometimes a powerful lobby, as in the US, but still just a lobby. The only reason I can think of for a story about an Islamic theocracy being dumbed down to being about “religion” is the widespread reluctance to criticise Islam — whether for reasons of political correctness or from fear of reprisal. If you’re not prepared to criticise Islam, so be it, but please don’t drag other religions and their adherents into it.

Gavan O’Farrell, Lower Hutt.

Wedding excess

I see that Pippa Middleton’s wedding is costing about $463,692 and that is 10 times more than the average Kiwi celebration; if this really is the case it’s no wonder more young just live together and don’t get married. No one on an average wage could ever afford an “average Kiwi celebration”.

A. Bell, Silverdale.

Leadership vacuum

Bill English and Andrew Little must be the most bland party leaders in the history of our politics. The media is struggling to set one or both of them afire and so wake up their hibernated voters. As a result the media has turned to Donald Trump to stop our heads nodding during the news.

Bill has tried to enhance his image with his walk/run video and shearing sheep while Andrew has binned his cardigan and thrown away his glasses. Meanwhile, Kingmaker Winston struts around the land tongue-lashing all and sundry, gaining more votes week by week. It’s not what one says that makes an impression, it’s how it is said.

Health, education, immigration and housing are the main election challenges — could we please have something definitive from both leaders or was I comatose when it all happened?

Reg Dempster, Albany.

Trump and WikiLeaks

For the duration of Donald Trump’s presidency, maybe Julian Assange and his WikiLeaks are superfluous to requirements? Heather Mackay, Kerikeri.

Presidential witchhunt

I wholeheartedly agree with the comment by Gabrielle Gregory in the Weekend Herald titled “Mean to Trump”. The amount of malice and spitefulness towards President Trump is beyond comprehension. Fake news has taken over genuine news in people’s psyches. It is incredible how many journalists and others in New Zealand have jumped on the bandwagon and joined the witchhunt. Role models for young people?

Carl Rosel, Freemans Bay.

Fighting shop robberies

There are reports of Auckland shop owners being attacked and robbed almost daily. We are witnessing an uprising against civilised society by a small, noxious subculture. It needs to be put down. Less namby-pamby sentencing would be a good start.

Peter Culpan, Waitakere.

Land value blowout

Traditionally the ratio of house value to land value has been approximately 1:3 and for this ratio to alter, the house or the land would have to increase at a faster rate than the other. Land will always rise at a faster rate as it is the vital component.

Auckland (and New Zealand) has a land value blowout, which can only be caused by demand. The only cure will be to lessen this demand — which will not happen — until New Zealand has an alternative urban centre offering the economic advantages of Auckland.

Now you all know the cause and solution, solve it. Not hard at all, eh?

Gerald McCully, Forrest Hill.

Assange’s future

Julian Assange should have handed himself to US authorities five years ago, received a long sentence, and then probably would have been pardoned after 10 years. As it is, he’s “imprisoned” in the London Ecuadorean embassy, and the US will chase him for life.

Rod Matthews, Victoria.

Government for all

Our centre-right Government has spent the past several years so focused on economic growth (especially through immigration) and cost-cutting to produce Budget surpluses (and possible tax cuts) that it has not dealt effectively with many social issues: homelessness and unaffordable housing, underfunded hospitals and mental health services, inadequate community policing, etc.

With the election breathing down its neck it is now having to play catch-up. Yes, New Zealand can boast of a more thriving economy than most OECD countries, but we also have the highest suicide rate, a growing methamphetamine industry and a seriously struggling underclass. Things are not good for everyone in this increasingly unequal society. It is truly time to move to the left, and not just with an expedient preelection Budget. We need a new Government that works for all of us.

B. Darragh, Auckland Central.