Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Tired of Waiting

Lib Dem Mp Simon Hughes Joins Mayor Boris Johnson Supporting Land Lords

Recommended Posts

.

Lib-Dem MP Simon Hughes joins Mayor Boris Johnson supporting Land-LORDS

As we all know, a strong factor that will push rents down in the next few years will be a reduction of government support for Land-LORDS, via the reduction of Housing Benefits. That should also pressure some BTLers into selling, accelerating the house prices correction.

A few weeks ago I was surprised by Green Party MP Caroline Lucas (a self described "socialist") siding with Land-LORDS, in favour of high Housing Benefits for BTLers (despite it pushing up rents, for all), and against the coalition plans to gradual reduction of the top limit for LHA.

Now the Lib-Dem MP Simon Hughes, supposedly on the LEFT of the LibDems, is doing the same. Hughes has joined Mayor Boris Johnson, and is pressing the government to dilute the reduction of LHA.

Perhaps we should explain to Simon Hughes that a reduction of rents will benefit millions of working, tax-payers, private tenants.

I'll paste some news links below, and Simon Hughes contact details here: http://www.simonhughes.org.uk/contact

Tory Mayor Boris Johnson said the changes were “draconian” and Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes has urged the coalition to “slow down”. (...) Research by the Chartered Institute of Housing

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-23858395-simon-hughes-ministers-face-rebellion-on-plan-to-slash-housing-benefit.do

Another: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23857705-housing-benefit-cuts-will-harm-capital-says-boris-johnson.do

Another: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23859448-george-osbornes-child-poverty-pledge-fails-to-consider-cuts-in-benefits-cuts.do

Many more:

Google: boris-johnson housing-benefits http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=20&hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1B3GGGL_enGB259GB260&q=boris-johnson+housing-benefits&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Google: simon-hughes housing-benefits http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=&q=simon-hughes+housing-benefits&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enGB259GB260&ie=UTF-8&aq=2&oq=

Older thread: "Landlords Supported By Brighton's Green Mp Caroline Lucas" : http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=147156&view=findpost&p=2620575

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update. The left-wing press is swallowing the VI propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

From a VI:

Benefit reforms 'will make 200,000 homeless'

The coalition government’s controversial housing benefit reforms will push homelessness figures up to the worst level in three decades, the National Housing Federation predicts.

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/whats-the-benefit?/benefit-reforms-will-make-200000-homeless/6510868.article

From The Guardian

Housing benefit cuts will leave poorest £600 worse off

Housing benefit changes will hit unemployed people hardest, and pensioners and low-paid workers will also be affected

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/23/housing-benefit-cuts-hit-poorest

Benefit cuts: 750,000 risk losing homes in south-east, associations warn

Tough new rules capping housing benefit likely to create new generation of rough sleepers, National Housing Federation says

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/jul/23/housing-benefits-homeless-budget-deficit

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to get countering this argument.

Exactly.

And I think we have a chance, as these morons (the left) are acting against the interests of the working poorer - private tenants. We can show that to them. I think forum members should write to Simon Hughes.

And to The Guardian, preferably to their Editors, that should have at least some broader view of politics and economics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

And I think we have a chance, as these morons (the left) are acting against the interests of the working poorer - private tenants. We can show that to them. I think forum members should write to Simon Hughes.

And to The Guardian, preferably to their Editors, that should have at least some broader view of politics and economics.

+1.

And have spent the last hour writing email letters to guardian, Simon Hughes, local papers etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its short termism. it affects all political classes. The left (a group in which you could fit me I think) are worried that the less well off will be hit hard by the reduction. In the short term they will - that is clear. In the longer term rents will go down and this is a good thing for the less well off (your analysis and mine are the same).

The answer is simple. We need to bring back the Fair Rents Act that (uber right) Thatcher did away with. However, even the so-called "left" now buy into the "free market" BS that has poisoned the world. Of course (and I bet you will agree with me again) there can be no "free" market when the bottom is propped up by the taxpayer.

But don't hold your breath. The real issue - the one they never talk about - is the need (at any cost, to any group of people) to prop up house prices. An HPC will kill the UK stone dead. The poor, the middle class, the workers, whomever, all will be slaughtered to feed the great god of HPI. Poor old pensioners relying on astronomical rent from some young workers for their flight money to Tuvalu and to buy a new Discovery. I'm sure you can fit me in the box marked "environmentalist" as well but I would be a long time voting Green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1.

And have spent the last hour writing email letters to guardian, Simon Hughes, local papers etc.

Well done, and thanks for posting the email addresses, to facilitate things for all. I'll paste that post of yours here:

<letters@guardian.co.uk>, <letters@observer.co.uk>,

Letters page of your local rags too.

C'mon.

Let's point out low rents are good!

I've just sent mine to the observor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its short termism. it affects all political classes. The left (a group in which you could fit me I think) are worried that the less well off will be hit hard by the reduction. In the short term they will - that is clear. In the longer term rents will go down and this is a good thing for the less well off (your analysis and mine are the same).

The answer is simple. We need to bring back the Fair Rents Act that (uber right) Thatcher did away with. However, even the so-called "left" now buy into the "free market" BS that has poisoned the world. Of course (and I bet you will agree with me again) there can be no "free" market when the bottom is propped up by the taxpayer.

But don't hold your breath. The real issue - the one they never talk about - is the need (at any cost, to any group of people) to prop up house prices. An HPC will kill the UK stone dead. The poor, the middle class, the workers, whomever, all will be slaughtered to feed the great god of HPI. Poor old pensioners relying on astronomical rent from some young workers for their flight money to Tuvalu and to buy a new Discovery. I'm sure you can fit me in the box marked "environmentalist" as well but I would be a long time voting Green.

I am not sure it will affect benefits recipients much at all, as all falls will be gradual and simultaneous, and LandLORDS will not have an alternative. The private rental market is surprisingly small, and will not be able to replace supported tenants. Rents will fall. No doubt about that. And not in some "long term". rents will fall WITH the reduction of LHA.

The main long-term problem we have in Britain is the absurd planning restrictions of house building. That curbed supply for decades. And in the past 5-7 years, demand was boosted by too much and too cheap credit. Prices could only go up, of course.

Edit: On the political-economic side of it, looks like the new government gets it, that HP are too high. Look at this:

News: http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/mortgages/coalition-ready-to-let-property-values-fall/1015197.article

HPC Thread: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=147307&view=findpost&p=2624404

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. Would landlords seriously rather have an empty property producing nothing over a property producing slightly less than it did before?

It's only going to really hurt the idiotlords who've paid over the odds, have no contingency funds for repairs etc The piss poor landlords who probably shouldn't be landlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. Would landlords seriously rather have an empty property producing nothing over a property producing slightly less than it did before?

Nope. That's why they're making a fuss over the brakes being applied to the gravy train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. Would landlords seriously rather have an empty property producing nothing over a property producing slightly less than it did before?

Exactly. This reduction from the 50th to the 30th percentile will probably reduce HB by ... what? 50£/month? (BTW, we should find some info about that). Most landlords will have no option but to reduce the rent.

This VI group, "Charted Housing" malarkey is actually representing (private) Housing Associations - they are LandLords!

What astonishes me is the LEFT wing (LibDem Simon Hughes AND the Guardian) swallowing this, whole, uncritically! The lazy b@stards morons!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only going to really hurt the idiotlords who've paid over the odds, have no contingency funds for repairs etc The piss poor landlords who probably shouldn't be landlords.

Exactly!

And as some landlords may be forced to sell, it will help also the correction of house prices, down to more affordabel levels, particular in this segment, benefiting FTBers.

And the logic of it all is so simple, so obvious, that I really can't understand the left being against this correction. Mind boggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. That's why they're making a fuss over the brakes being applied to the gravy train.

That is why we have to counteract some of this "fuss". We have a chance, because the interest of the Guardian and Simon Hughes is to please their bases. And if they think for just a minute, about our arguments, they should get it. We have to write to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. Would landlords seriously rather have an empty property producing nothing over a property producing slightly less than it did before?

Depends on whether or not they seek income or capital gains. In recent years the capital gains have been the driving force. This is understandable when property has risen so much in such a short time. Even with CGT at a realistic level (as opposed to "we don't want the tax thanks") the income is far beyond anything that you could make by working or running a business or indeed doing anything socially useful. The modern Western economy is based wholly on speculation. Production has moved to Asia and the fear is now that speculation no longer will work and Asia will become the dominant force in the world. Thankfully, the Asians also seem keen on speculation :)

To answer your question look at the commercial property market. By leaving buildings empty you can prop up the prices and maximise your "investment". The few that are empty are holding up the rest of the portfolio. That the banks and others have done this is well known and proven beyond doubt.

Whether or not the combined interests of the BTL brigade can be put into action in this way or whether they are too fragmented remains to be seen. However, sell-off will nave the same effect as it removes the rental from the market and re-introduces it as owner occupied. My own view FWIW is that this will fail in the UK with the flats market but probably prop up houses for some considerable time. Time will tell I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

Edit: On the political-economic side of it, looks like the new government gets it, that HP are too high. Look at this:

....

Be very careful that this is not wishful thinking on your behalf based on your (rather obvious) political bigotry. Cameron said (although that means nothing as he is a skilled and dyed in the wool liar) he wanted to keep IR low to keep mortgages low.

Both the present and the previous administrations would, I am sure, like to see happy people spending money and a growing vibrant economy that makes us all feel good. If house prices must fall then they should do so slowly and ideally in real terms only not nominal prices. That way the uneducated and generally gormless masses will not see through the banks' hegemony over the economy. A real "crash" is not on the politician agenda - be sure of that - I 100% guarantee it. Whether they can actually avoid it or not is the fun part ("fun" unless you are unlucky enough to live and work in the UK I mean).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is why we have to counteract some of this "fuss". We have a chance, because the interest of the Guardian and Simon Hughes is to please their bases. And if they think for just a minute, about our arguments, they should get it. We have to write to them.

It is not a question of them not "getting it". They absolutely already understand it perfectly. They want to keep house prices high and they realise that cutting housing benefit will cause house prices to fall. They want to maintain this government subsidy to support house prices in order to keep property investors satisfied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be very careful that this is not wishful thinking on your behalf based on your (rather obvious) political bigotry. Cameron said (although that means nothing as he is a skilled and dyed in the wool liar) he wanted to keep IR low to keep mortgages low.

Which would mean landlords could afford to drop rents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(...) based on your (rather obvious) political bigotry. (...)

That was both rude and wrong. I am a liberal, both economically and socially.

And my main ethical goal is the greater good of the greater numbers. I have the impression that in this aspect you are well intentioned. But if you think markets (competently regulated, obviously) are not the best way to achieve this, then you are wrong. And the consequences of you preferred policies would be disastrous for millions, affecting the poor more - as Gordon Brown's incompetence did.

If you hold the belief that any defender of the market economy is "evil", that is bigotry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the uneducated and generally gormless masses will not see through the banks' hegemony over the economy.

Banks or bankers?

And regarding bankers, do you mean the owners (shareholders), or bank's directors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a question of them not "getting it". They absolutely already understand it perfectly. They want to keep house prices high and they realise that cutting housing benefit will cause house prices to fall. They want to maintain this government subsidy to support house prices in order to keep property investors satisfied.

The left (the Guardian and Simon Hughes) want to keep property investors satisfied? And the Tory government doesn't? It doesn't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The left (the Guardian and Simon Hughes) want to keep property investors satisfied? And the Tory government doesn't? It doesn't make sense.

Who knows what motives "the left" have in this, but we know the socialists engineered a massive transfer of wealth to property investors over the past 10 years. From all ends of the political spectrum there is a determination to force house prices up. This includes people like the NHF which is posing as an organisation campaigning for affordable housing. I don't know Simon Hughes' motives for wanting to keep the property bubble going. I would just love to hear him explain. I'm sure the Tory Govt. would love to spend more on keeping it going, but I'm guessing they realise that there has to be a limit on how much they can spend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just emailed Ken Livingstone on his Sat morning radio show about his criticising the reforms. Said I thought that, as a left-winger, he'd be all for preventing private landlords exploiting the use of working people's taxes by paying higher rent for a one bed flat on a council estate in Brent (where he lives) than is necessary just because they can because the broad market rental area means the same would be paid for a flat on the tenth floor of a high rise as it would for a pleasant conversion flat with a garden....and also keeping the LHA person in the benefit trap as they can't afford to pay their extortionate rent if they go into a low paid job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The low paid people I know are more agitated and upset over housing benefit than any other political issue. They loathe it with a passion. I suspect they're far better informed than the guardian which in any case is awash with hypocrisy (tax status, columnists with BTL empires etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<br />I just emailed Ken Livingstone on his Sat morning radio show about his criticising the reforms. Said I thought that, as a left-winger, he'd be all for preventing private landlords exploiting the use of working people's taxes by paying higher rent for a one bed flat on a council estate in Brent (where he lives) than is necessary just because they can because the broad market rental area means the same would be paid for a flat on the tenth floor of a high rise as it would for a pleasant conversion flat with a garden....and also keeping the LHA person in the benefit trap as they can't afford to pay their extortionate rent if they go into a low paid job.<br />
<br /><br /><br />

LivingStone is in there - right at the centre of the London property Vi's!

Later this month, Livingstone will launch his long-awaited spatial development strategy in a bid to clarify the hurdles developers need to clear to build landmark schemes in the capital.

Developers are becoming increasingly worried that the arrival of Livingstone and the GLA in addition to other bodies, such as Sir Stuart Lipton's Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment and English Heritage, is making it impossible to please all the parties.

http://www.propertyweek.com/john-prescott-ken-livingstone-in-a-true-story-by-tim-danaher/3005929.article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 259 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.