Is growth a good thing?

[Davo36]

Arguing against urbanization is like denying climate change. It's happening regardless of what you want to be true.

No one is arguing against urbanization.

We're talking about various countries populations.

[Davo36]

Not yet.
Why don't you spell it out for me.

I don't think I can. I don't think anyone can. You take a position and then firmly close your mind.

But you do this for your self in the next 2 lines you write.

[Davo36]

* some = 5 million people in Sydney out of 8 million in NSW.
They live there by choice.
And they aren't trying to move to NZ.

Why are you now changing the argument to cities instead of countries?

Also this is what is called a straw man argument.

You make a claim that has nothing to do with what we're talking about then go "See! I told you so!"

Here's my random argument: Well, you know the number of kiwis (the birds) are decreasing right? See I told you so!

[Davo36]

Oh and Bob, you have been saying for years and years that house prices in NZ never go down.

Still sticking with that?

[Bob Kane]

Why are you now changing the argument to cities instead of countries?

Sorry.
Back on topic then.
Why don't thousands of aussies come to NZ to live?
NZ has a smaller population than Australia so our country must be better.

[Bob Kane]

Oh and Bob, you have been saying for years and years that house prices in NZ never go down.

Still sticking with that?

I've been waiting years for you to supply some examples of:
1. The year NZ house prices went down
2. The amount of the price drop
3. How long before the prices went back up again.

I gave one example many years ago.
Can you supply more examples?

[Davo36]

You have been waiting and not seeing for years.

Here's one from today: https://www.interest.co.nz/property/...lumes-slightly

However in the country's largest real estate market, Auckland, November's median of $867,000 was up slightly compared to October's $864,500, but down 1.5% compared to November last year.

The figures show that median prices are continuing to rise around much of the country, but have remained largely flat in Auckland since dropping back slightly from the record high of $900,000 set in March last year.

But of course you'll see that as a gain somehow.

Do you look up at the sky and see blue? I believe it's pink, and nothing anyone will say will change that. Blue is a colour that doesn't exist in NZ.

If you think it does, prove to me that it does.

[Bob Kane]

You really don't comprehend statistics at all, do you.
Years ago I asked you to name a year that house prices went down.
You came back with 1988 if I remember correctly.
Only problem was house prices didn't go down in that year.
When I pointed that out to you, you responded with a bellowing attack on me.
You should have just found out the actual year house prices went down.
And again now I've asked you to name any year that house prices have gone down.
You can't, can you?
Instead you bellow and bluster about the pink sky.
You seem to have firmly entrenched views but when questioned, you cannot explain why you have those firm views and resort to personal attacks.
Do you lack confidence?

[Davo36]

No I lack patience.

No point continuing this discussion with you.

[Perry]

I can't recall if it was '88, but around then, I remember that GVs went down - and, to my surprise and delight - the dollars demanded in Rates went down, too. (If pressed, I could look it up when I get home)

But generally, the overall trend is dollar numbers for property is the oft-mentioned double every ten years.

But, as Bob points out, that's a change in price, not a change in value.

A number-cruncher acquaintance of mine says that the main factor is because the gummint increases the money supply by 7% annually.

I must ask him how he sees that relating to the CPI and the 'official' figure.

[Wayne]

A number-cruncher acquaintance of mine says that the main factor is because the gummint increases the money supply by 7% annually.

I must ask him how he sees that relating to the CPI and the 'official' figure.

Wouldn't that create inflation - increasing money supply 7% per annum?

[Bob Kane]

That's why they do it (so I'm told).
They are trying to get a bit of inflation and increasing M3 should help do it.

Here's an economics 101 question:
If the money in circulation was fixed and the population increased, would things get better or worse?

[Perry]

A number-cruncher acquaintance of mine says that the main factor is because the gummint increases the money supply by 7% annually.

I must ask him how he sees that relating to the CPI and the 'official' figure.

Wouldn't that create inflation - increasing money supply 7% per annum?

It does. And that's why they want a CGT. So they can collect a tax in real dollars that's levied on an illusion of their making. Something for nothing for the gummint.

[Wayne]

It does. And that's why they want a CGT. So they can collect a tax in real dollars that's levied on an illusion of their making. Something for nothing for the gummint.

Oh dear !