Emotive and inflamatory -- shame on you Stuff.co.nz

[DazRaz]

Sorry Daz, still don't follow.

If the 0% deposit means low profit on the rental, how is that 0% going to earn anything as a bank deposit.

If they were to purchase a rental, eventually they would have to start paying the mortgage back and principal payments would be made. Instead of paying top-up money to repay principal, they could be putting money into a saving / investment account. Next to no interest at first, and after many years of compounding interest it gets better.

[speights boy]

Daz; a fair explanation.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my query.

[VincyV]

Keys , Peter Lewis - well thought out actions from both of you -- well done and thank you.

We wait, but not with bated breath !

Wayne too late to change the link--edit option is off. Greatly appreciated if any of the mods would fix.

(Done - Mods)

[flyernzl]

Oh yea of little faith - received a reply to my letter from Richard yesterday.

He says:
"The tone of the piece was meant to be quite tongue-in-cheek, rather than an attack on money-grubbing landlords."

Sure didn't come across like that.

"The focus and scope of the article was solely on the subject area of the financial difficulties that tenants face. It's impossible to cram in everything at once."

Maybe, but a bit more balance would have been nice.

[eri]

when michael laws said he would shoot rabid journalists before they infected others

he was talking tongue-in-cheek

but they were still so upset they made a complaint to the broadcasting authority

so apparently it's only funny if they are the ones putting the boot in

but both LLs and media perform essential roles in society

if media could stop prostituting themselves to advertising

more people would find it easier to live within their means

and there would be less need for LLs

[DazRaz]

Perhaps they should have flagged it as a humour piece. There was no way to tell from reading the article.

[VincyV]

If he response verbatim was "rather than an attack on money-grubbing landlords" , he is still being a sly smart-ass because he has repeated his characterisation of landlords as "money grubbing" again -- that is not really tongue-in-cheek that is being devious.

I await his next "explanation"

[DazRaz]

To be honest, those two guys have a persecution complex. They received some honest suggestions on how to make their site better and give it a chance of working. They were not able to take constructive criticism and left in a huff. Later, they wrote a blog piece on how landlords tried to shut them down as supposedly we were running scared.

Later, it was discovered that most of their tips on tenants advice was copied verbatim from a site giving advice for New York tenants and the advice was wrong and dangerous when applied to New Zealand law. The had trouble distinguishing between Tenancy Services and the Tenancy Tribunal.

If you join their site, you find that most of their posts are their own and there are very few of them. They seem to have no following and best just ignored. It is annoying that their site name is so close to DHB's Tenancy Services. Shame stuff gave them any mention at all.

[JABlog]

Firstly its the crown that has set the rules and regulations so who are we to argue. Secondly we all agree its a business, so if you dont like the way I run my business the you have 2 choices accept my terms or take a hike. Simple really. I dont see them moaning to Apple for charging $1K for a gadget yet they moan about someone giving them a roof over there heads and enough laws to cover the tenants that sometimes I wonder if its all worth it. Go and ask the landlords who have lost serious money and have sleepless nights because the tenants have taken off leaving behind their debt and destruction. Why dont you wite about that ?

[JABlog]

To be honest, those two guys have a persecution complex. They received some honest suggestions on how to make their site better and give it a chance of working. They were not able to take constructive criticism and left in a huff. Later, they wrote a blog piece on how landlords tried to shut them down as supposedly we were running scared.

Ahh I remember now- didn't they write a thread here and they wished they hadn't - can anyone find it in here?

[drelly]

Ahh I remember now- didn't they write a thread here and they wished they hadn't - can anyone find it in here?

Check the third post on this thread. I put a link to it.

[McDuck]

Firstly its the crown that has set the rules and regulations so who are we to argue. Secondly we all agree its a business, so if you dont like the way I run my business the you have 2 choices accept my terms or take a hike. Simple really. I dont see them moaning to Apple for charging $1K for a gadget yet they moan about someone giving them a roof over there heads and enough laws to cover the tenants that sometimes I wonder if its all worth it. Go and ask the landlords who have lost serious money and have sleepless nights because the tenants have taken off leaving behind their debt and destruction. Why dont you wite about that ?

I see where you’re going with your reasoning, but you have to be a bit careful.
Apple ipads are a luxury item, (not essential for society to function), while housing is an essential item.
Because of the essential nature of shelter, it has special government concessions and expectations.

[eri]

^
and auckland council are currently working on ways to

change the tenancy rules to give tenants more security

i think that may mean

make it harder to remove problems tenants

[TheLiberalLeft]

Can local govt overrule that sort of country-wide legislation? Seems not in their mandate to me.

[eri]

our left wing councils

are looking at ways to expand their mandate into every area where they feel our right wing gov. has dropped the ball

education, job creation, and rewriting laws to achiever "equal outcomes" by somehow magically ignoring the drivers of good outcomes

responsibility, good planning, hard work, solid families etc

as for inflammatory anti-landlord media reporting

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/8233403/Quake-hit-Christchurch-families-still-living-in-squalor

though i am a bit confused as the end of the article seem to suggest her mother is charging her $300 a week for the garage and that as she feels this is too much, for too little, so she is looking for more for less???

seriously, wouldn't beneficiaries with small children be doing everyone a favor by moving away from chch for a few years and freeing up iy's limited resources for contributing to the rebuild?