Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Tired of Waiting

" London Needs 600,000 New Homes To Avoid Housing Crisis"

Recommended Posts

London 'needs 600,000 new homes to avoid housing crisis'

By Philip Thornton, Economics Correspondent

Almost 400,000 new council homes will have to be built in London at a cost of some £9bn to avert a housing crisis, a leading lobby group warns today.

The investment in social housing would have to be accompanied by up to 200,000 new private sector dwellings, according to the business lobby group London First.

LINK: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/london-needs-600000-new-homes-to-avoid-housing-crisis-656755.html

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All they have to do is forcibly spread the wealth and population fraud around the country more to attract the flies that like to profit from it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's the population of greater london? 13 million?

600,000 homes would house 1.5 million+ people, maybe 2 millions, putting the undersupply at the 10-15% mark. does not explain the house price boom on its own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There ya go, social housing again. People are finding it difficult to say 'housing' without sticking 'social' on the front end.

Houses and properties can be built by the private sector you know. Increasing the supply of something will cause the price to fall,and leaving it to the market will mean no extra tax to pay for it as well, plus the saving on the admin to decide who is going to get this subsidy.

As for the people filling these 600,000 places, presumably this is all immigration? I rarely hear of swathes of English people flooding to the capital these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cut immigration...I mean, bankers dont need council houses, nor do foreign magnates and insurance dealers.

watching a customs program the other day, some bod was caught smuggling ciggies, and when caught, he said he would be killed if he went back to India...not by the regime, but by the criminal gang he was working for....the customs bods asked him, in that case, whether he was claiming asylum...to which he said...yes.

I have no idea why the home office cant issue a list of countries where the citizens MAY be in danger....and if you havent come from there, asylum isnt an option. India, for example, doesnt appear to be a place where a citizen is in great danger of death by press gang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you noticed the article's date?

My statement still stands and the date shows how the conning, cunning Govt members of the day deliberately ignored the building projections to help force more in private accomodation ie their BTL's!

Not only did they not build houses for the current population (on purpose) they kept lying about the millions of immigrants they were letting in by the back door!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah this is a great idea.

I suggest they build them in Blackburn or Burnley though... London is a bit full...

doing the same thing by building a high speed railway line to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's the population of greater london? 13 million?

600,000 homes would house 1.5 million+ people, maybe 2 millions, putting the undersupply at the 10-15% mark. does not explain the house price boom on its own.

Sure. I just wanted to point out that the housing crisis is much more Labour's than the present government's fault.

(I know this should be obvious for all, but alas it is not.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There ya go, social housing again. People are finding it difficult to say 'housing' without sticking 'social' on the front end.

Houses and properties can be built by the private sector you know. Increasing the supply of something will cause the price to fall,and leaving it to the market will mean no extra tax to pay for it as well, plus the saving on the admin to decide who is going to get this subsidy.

I fully agree with you there.

As for the people filling these 600,000 places, presumably this is all immigration? I rarely hear of swathes of English people flooding to the capital these days.

cut immigration...I mean, bankers dont need council houses, nor do foreign magnates and insurance dealers.

(...)

(...)

Not only did they not build houses for the current population (on purpose) they kept lying about the millions of immigrants they were letting in by the back door!

By coincidence, in another thread:

(Though it will be better to discuss this topic in that thread, and not here, just to keep things tidy.)

I am glad to see so many posters genuinely trying to be balanced and sensible in a thread like this. That is why I decided to post some important numbers here. I think there is a chance for a calm discussion:

Say there are a million people travelling into central London every morning. We don't conclude that in a year London will have 365 million people, do we? Of course not, because we all think NET, naturally. These people travel back out at the end of the day. Obviously.

Then why so many people forget to think NET when talking about immigration?

There are some 6 to 7 million foreign born people living in Britain. But there are some 5.5 to 6 million UK citizens living abroad. The NET number is probably just over 1 million. In a population of 60 million, this is not much relevant.

If you doubt these numbers please feel free to Google it.

I've used these search strings:

"uk OR British nationals OR born" " living abroad"

"foreign nationals OR born" " living in Britain"

I don't know if the UK government has official numbers for UK citizens living abroad. In a quick search I couldn't find it. If someone finds it, please do post the link here. Though the government may not even have these numbers, as they don't count people out.

But back to housing costs: The main cause of our high house prices was too much and too cheap credit boosting effective demand, and on the other side supply blocked by hysterical planning restrictions. NET migration had a very minor role in it.

By the way, we should always use NET numbers, and not forget about it when thinking about migration. A very important example in another area is its impact on the NHS. As the avergae age of immigrants is probably lower than the average age of our expats, the NET impact on the NHS is probably positive. (I guess it is Spain who should complain about it!)

And for people who also include UK born descendants of immigrants in their concerns, they should balance it out by considering the descendants of UK nationals that have emigrated in the past. NET, remember?

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's the population of greater london? 13 million?

600,000 homes would house 1.5 million+ people, maybe 2 millions, putting the undersupply at the 10-15% mark. does not explain the house price boom on its own.

No. We don't need 600,000 new homes. We need 2 million less people.

We can kick them out or use them in a war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in outer London near the green belt and I have never gotten any use out of that land. There are plenty of parks and green spaces within London and I can take my kids on walks to say Hampstead Heath on footpaths or around the London loop.

I say cover half the green belt with housing and give all that land planning permission at the same time which should limit the gains to the landholders. Either that or find a way to get rid of 2 million people.

And no social housing so scrap the section 106 agreements while they are at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in outer London near the green belt and I have never gotten any use out of that land. There are plenty of parks and green spaces within London and I can take my kids on walks to say Hampstead Heath on footpaths or around the London loop.

I say cover half the green belt with housing

and the other half with parks. I agree 100%. What is the point of the London "green belt" if only a few cows can use it?!

and give all that land planning permission at the same time which should limit the gains to the landholders.

(...)

Actually the London Boroughs should just compulsory purchase the lot, change the zoning laws, and auction them off.

Use the proceeds 50 / 50, to lower council tax / improve services.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. We don't need 600,000 new homes. We need 2 million less people.

We can kick them out or use them in a war?

eat them in a pie?

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.