Labour to 'support' ftb's

[geometric]

Labour (Blair, Prescott) have been talking about helping ftb's for a couple of weeks now. Apparently Prescott is to make a statement on this tomorrow. I dont know what mechanisms they will use but presumably some sort of tax break.

For non-property-owners this is really bad news as it amounts to an artificial support of the market prior to the election. So I guess that the market will not be allowed to self regulate, game over, the speculators win.

Comments ?

[Topher Bear]

The only way the government can really help FTBers is to announce that the price of all property is immediately and irrivocable cut in half!

Why is it that everyone always says (that everyone not being the HPC lot, but journo's politicians etc.) "FTBs are being priced out the market, especially key workers, because house prices have risen by huge amounts...we must help them out" and how do they want to help us out "by providing an extra form of lending, give them more money, force builders to build more smaller properties, so that they can move into tiny boxes with huge debt millstones round their necks" Why do they never think about their original point.. "house prices have risen so much...", that is the real issue that needs to be addressed, not artificial sticky plasters, which far from help heal the wound, actively make it worse!

Sorry, rant over!

Tony Blair....go home...to the US, since thats where the love of your life lives!

Topher Bear

[Sledgehead]

Labour (Blair, Prescott) have been talking about helping ftb's for a couple of weeks now. Apparently Prescott is to make a statement on this tomorrow. I dont know what mechanisms they will use but presumably some sort of tax break.

For non-property-owners this is really bad news as it amounts to an artificial support of the market prior to the election. So I guess that the market will not be allowed to self regulate, game over, the speculators win.

Comments ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

These w**kers can't help themselves. The more they intervene the more they'll feel the need to (just like Iraq). Another term and this country will need four Tory terms of intensive economic care (which they'd call neglect, which I'd call free markets).

[Dicky]

These w**kers can't help themselves. The more they intervene the more they'll feel the need to (just like Iraq). Another term and this country will need four Tory terms of intensive economic care (which they'd call neglect, which I'd call free markets).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If they really want to help FTB's, just put stamp duty up to 20% for second home purchases, nobody really needs two houses.

[Time to raise the rents.]

Labour (Blair, Prescott) have been talking about helping ftb's for a couple of weeks now. Apparently Prescott is to make a statement on this tomorrow. I dont know what mechanisms they will use but presumably some sort of tax break.

For non-property-owners this is really bad news as it amounts to an artificial support of the market prior to the election. So I guess that the market will not be allowed to self regulate, game over, the speculators win.

Comments ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This could be one of those unexpected shocks. Not all shocks mean bad things for property you know!

[Time to raise the rents.]

Or is it just another silly govt scheme that'll go wrong for the people that get involved?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...rescott?source=

Prescott unveils £60,000 homes plan

26 September 2004

A scheme to provide first-time buyers with new homes for about £60,000 was unveiled at Labour's conference.

Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott said he wanted to put surplus public land to better use.

Some of the land could be set aside for first-time buyers to get homes they could not otherwise afford.

"We own the land. We don't sell it off. We keep it in trust and lease it for essential new housing."

Under the scheme, first-time buyers would meet the cost of building the house, but not the full cost of the land helping to keep prices down.

Mr Prescott said he was instructing English Partnerships, the regeneration agency, to run a competition for developers.

"I want them to build high quality homes at about £60,000. That's less than a third of the market price.

"When the owner sells, we keep the land in the name of the people. It's not an asset giveaway. We recycle the subsidy."

The announcement came as Mr Prescott bemoaned the rising cost of building homes for first time buyers, insisting: "It's been a gravy train for some and it's got to stop. We must get these costs down."

Mr Prescott also announced that the Government would be allocating more than £500million in public-private funding for councils to build new homes for rent or sale.

[OnlyMe]

Crikey, that'll put the cat amongst the pigeons.

If you are a first time buyer now what would your first reaction be - give up on trying to get a £100K+ loan and get yourself signed up on the waiting list I would have thought. I know it is only a small number of homes, but that's hardly the point, the chance is seen to be there.

[Get A Grip]

I don't get it, either these new estates will be nice and desirable and so will drift up to full market value over time despite being leasehold, OR they will be the new 'sink estates' and no-one in their right mind will want to live there.

At least it can't be considered as a prop before the election, sounds like a long term thing.

[Dicky]

Just heard Tony bland on Sky news in a Questions & Answers sessions with Joe public declare that by keeping intersts rates low we're helping FTB's. mmmmm very interesting, does this man really know what the **** he's talking about. Intests rates being low is the cause of this mess. okay its not his fault it's the ecomomy and spending patterns that dictate IR's but to say this is somehow a good thing for FTB's is plain stupid. Rant over.

[Time to raise the rents.]

I don't get it, either these new estates will be nice and desirable and so will drift up to full market value over time despite being leasehold, OR they will be the new 'sink estates' and no-one in their right mind will want to live there.

At least it can't be considered as a prop before the election, sounds like a long term thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. If it's a success, the first people in will make a killing as the places rise to full value. It doesn't matter what type of title it's got, as long as it's a guaranteed title. If it's not a guaranteed title, then it's like buying a camper van to live in instead of a home.

Know any other successful govt schemes where people have saved money and felt good about it later?

[Harry Sacks]

Total crap, like everything else they have said and done it will end in total f**cking disaster.

Another badly researched idea vainly trying too win back votes.

Labour>The party for the terminally ignorant.

[Sledgehead]

Intests rates being low is the cause of this mess. okay its not his fault it's the ecomomy and spending patterns that dictate IR's but to say this is somehow a good thing for FTB's is plain stupid. Rant over.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You know it's not his intention (fault is another matter - the economic policies of the last 6 years have crippled British business so much low interest rates are the only option), but the fact is he wants to take credit for low IRs:

We must hold firm, in these uncertain economic times, to the new framework of economic management we delivered in 1997 which has given us the lowest interest rates, inflation and unemployment for decades.

Tony Blair, Wednesday January 1, 2003 (Guardian Unlimited)

You sure you wanna forgive him for something we wants to take credit for?

(I've even heard him claim low interest rates to be a manifesto issue)

[Time to raise the rents.]

Here's another link:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour2004/...1313223,00.html

Courtesy of Webmaster.

[Time to raise the rents.]

That's one race you beat me on then Sledge!

I take that back.....the stories are different.

[Sledgehead]

Or is it just another silly govt scheme that'll go wrong for the people that get involved?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...rescott?source=

Prescott unveils £60,000 homes plan

26 September 2004

"We own the land. We don't sell it off. We keep it in trust and lease it for essential new housing."

Under the scheme, first-time buyers would meet the cost of building the house, but not the full cost of the land helping to keep prices down.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds like owning a narrowboat but not the moorings.

This sounds like leasehold / part rent / part own. Presumably they'll want rent for this land? The other thing is, if it were me, I'd like to have freehold of the land and have leasehold the house, as it is only the former that is non-depreciating. Sounds nothing like getting on the prop ladder.

Still, I guess it will compete with rentals, so that should hold down rents IF the projects were of significant size.

Sounds like council housing subsidised by the "owner". Good for the gov, poor for the "owner". Basically it's New Labour trying to do things on the cheap. PFI & PPP all over again.

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

A scheme to provide first-time buyers with new homes for about £60,000 was unveiled at Labour's conference.

They are called Nissan Huts surplus over from WWII.

Erected in a day.

Great investment now classed as Grade II listed.

Or

Prefabs only available in white.

[Time to raise the rents.]

Sounds like owning  a narrowboat but not the moorings.

This sounds like leasehold / part rent / part own. Presumably they'll want rent for this land? The other thing is, if it were me, I'd like to have freehold of the land and have leasehold the house, as it is only the former that is non-depreciating.  Sounds nothing like getting on the prop ladder.

Still, I guess it will compete with rentals, so that should hold down rents IF the projects were of significant size.

Sounds like council housing subsidised by the "owner". Good for the gov, poor for the "owner". Basically it's New Labour trying to do things on the cheap. PFI & PPP all over again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What it sounds like to me is a contract that says you buy the place and have the right to live there forever, we own the land, so when you sell, you pass those conditions on.

The fact is though, that it doesn't matter who owns the land, it only matters if your right to live on it is guaranteed to be free in the future. If it is, and you can sell that right on to another person, it's as good as freehold land, or a share of freehold flat.

Like I said, the initial buyers would make a killing on the sale a few years later if the place was moderately desireable.

There'd be an uproar in which PM Prescott (you never know) would say all the sellers would have to pay their profits back to the state. The state would hire a bunch of solicitors & public servants to administer it until they realise they'd f**ked up and the money wasn't recoverable.

Meanwhile a bunch of public servants, having sold at a vast profit, will spend their winnings on Spanish Villas that crashed in price after UK residents pulled in their expenses to protect their UK assets (which didn't crash ).

[Harry Sacks]

Sounds like council housing subsidised by the "owner". Good for the gov, poor for the "owner". Basically it's New Labour trying to do things on the cheap. PFI & PPP all over again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To the average brainless melon who would contemplate voting for the steaming mass of retards it sound like a fan"f**king"tastic idea.

And,

it comes announced after a weekend of HP bashing in the papers

And,

This government has become so transparent and crass that I honestly belive the only thing they really take seriously anymore is their own comfortable retirements.

[zzg113]

word from the rumour mill is that Gordon Brown holds Tony Blair's understanding of economics in such contempt(and rightly so, it would seem) that any and all economic decisions which are crucial to the country's future are only discussed with him AFTER the press release, and only then if he really, really asks nicely.

[pod]

Know any other successful govt schemes where people have saved money and felt good about it later?

Buying ex-army houses?

Did they mention any timescale of when these houses might be built?

I'm a FTB and wouldn't mind a new £60,000 house!

[Harry Sacks]

Buying ex-army houses?

Did they mention any timescale of when these houses might be built?

I'm a FTB and wouldn't mind a new £60,000 house!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

2099 is the target.

[Time to raise the rents.]

Buying ex-army houses?

Did they mention any timescale of when these houses might be built?

I'm a FTB and wouldn't mind a new £60,000 house!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't get too excited about it.

The word on the street in my town in Sweden is that the council is to release 3 waterfront blocks of land soon.

Rather than sell them to the highest bidder (getting money for the public cause), they're going to sell them to the people at the top of the waiting list at a discount to the market price because they're on the waiting list!

The word then is that the buyers will probably end up putting them on the open market to sell to the highest bidder, robbing the public of the money they should have had, to make a profit for themselves!

Sounds similar to how this scheme might end up. The usual govt mess that they create.

[pod]

Rather than sell them to the highest bidder (getting money for the public cause), they're going to sell them to the people at the top of the waiting list at a discount to the market price because they're on the waiting list!

So what you're saying is find out where the waiting list is, and get on it now...

Where can I sign up...!?

[Dicky]

So what you're saying is find out where the waiting list is, and get on it now...

Where can I sign up...!?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its at the end of the rainbow and while you're there say Hi to Elvis. This whole scheme is just another dome me thinks, pissing tax payers money away.

[zzg113]

Amen Dicky.