A couple of years ago millionaire landlords were chuckling in glee how they had an annual $400,000 rental revenue stream off the back of about eight rental properties and how they had made it to easy street just by owning houses.
While others went to work every morning, these Landlords slept in and smiled smugly, head on pillow.
They were legends in their own minds and even wrote books about how smart they were.
You too could be a greedy landlord and have the easy life.
Many of the houses they rented out were far from weather tight and 6000 children go to hospital every year to be cured at tax payer expense.
The National government were satisfied about that because their priority was really about the voting intention of the landlord voting block.
You know, the club.
Shit most of them were landlords too, as you know.
Two classes of people, the “have houses to rent” and the “have not even one house at all”.
There’s about 600,000 rental properties in New Zealand and 35% of New Zealand families live in a rental property.
A quick bit of maths suggests there are likely to be less than 200,000 landlords out of a total voting electorate of over 2 Million – so it’s about 9%-10% roughly.
They are mostly National voters anyway.
It’s not like pissing them off will shift the polls much.
So how about a three year rent freeze after the 2020 election?
That would fit nicely with the new CGT.
The howls of greedy pillow heads would be like a symphony on the air.
New Zealanders would be healthier and all would be able to enjoy a bit of relief from the scourge of the greedy.
Today you can hear the greedy swearing how Landlords could always punish the tenants and greedily recoup the costs of even the most basic health improvements to their revenue producing assets – like putting in a heater or underfloor insulation.
Not giving a shit about the health of others has played a part in all of this housing crisis business, deep down in the guts of it.
The best way to deal with this unfair exploitation of tenants is for government to clamp down with a rent freeze for maybe three years.
Simply ratcheting up the rents to cover any pesky costs would not be possible and instead a tiny portion of that $400,000 annual revenue stream might have to be used to reinvest in the asset – paid for by the Landlord who was creaming it anyway.
Rent’s have roughly doubled in the past ten years.
But wages have not kept up.
Isn’t it time to let them catch up?
Gerard Otto is an activist and a writer.
Suppose that the longer a deal is struck on rents. The longer it takes to stimulate the housing market. And the deeper the housing crises need not be.
Hi Gerard,
It would be more productive and environmentally sustainable for Government to offer better options for property owners to get these subsidies to make all properties more healthy.
*For better insulation like using wool underlay and wool carpeting.
*Double glazing of windows.
*This would also stimulate more jobs.
*Also sheep farmer incomes would rise and assist them to cope with lowering ‘climate change emissions’.
*These improvements would effectively be helping to slow Climate change and will slow the rate of increasing dampness, rain and extreme weather event that cause more dampness and mould in homes.
Think Gerard is just trying to buy time. If the desire is for a proper rent cap then state housing. No need to reinvent the wheel.
Consider the laws of demand & supply.
There is already a house supply shortage so freezing the rent will not encourage more houses to be available for the rental market. Much more likely is that it will discourage supply and less houses will be available.
Well I think the housing crises is an example of how money turns people into despicable human beings.
Comments are closed.