BillW wrote: Ted. wrote: BillW wrote: guy smiley wrote:
Not sure how that would lower the price of houses.
I didn't say it would. Nice deflection though.
What is it that makes you think that anybody in parliament has got the knowledge and expertise to build houses cheaper than the professionals do it?
hmmm... the professionals are running a tidy little duopoly on supply costs and creaming the consumer blind. Great read in last weekend's Herald on that. What the govt could do is award large contracts to other companies large enough to run their own supply chains and slash costs, introducing serious competition to the market.
So there's that.
Source supplies from countries with lower wages, less compliance costs and no health and safety rules.
Yeah, like pinus radiata. Or portland cement. Hang on, maybe you mean greywacke aggregate. Ok, ok, it must be the steel reinforcing and roofing materials... the gib?
Great for the Simple House (Acceptable Solution)
, but they will need to dot their i's and cross their t's before they will be granted consent(s). Great when you need to bung up a bunch of dwellings in a hurray and your clientele isn't too fussy about having the same house as a bunch of other people. Not great for when you start hitting different wind zones, for e.g. All the same, I am a fan for keeping our building materials suppliers honest and maybe even encourage them not to gouge the locals to the extent they have been doing for many many years - everyone like a competitive market, right?
Manufactured houses are going to be pretty much the norm anyway. It's a good thing in some respects as their does not seem to be a will to fix our broken trade training regime. Semi skilled people in a managed environment, under the supervision of the minimum number of LBP's; no weather to bother about and with as much automation as can be thrown at it, surely has to bring costs down and even out the quality - note: that doesn't necessarily mean high quality, just less very poor quality, which is the best we can hope for when the minimum standards our performance based building codes are, by default, maximum standards when applied to the majority of builds (hey, they get a CCC, so why go further than, say a 15 year durability for brand new cladding..... with normal
maintenance of course, which incidentally is not defined anywhere in the Act or Code).
Ok, that went off piste rather quickly. It's a subject that is dear to my heart.