Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Ft Plays Another Blinder!

Recommended Posts

After their ace the other day, the FT is now knocking them out of the park:

FT plays another blinder.JPG

Everybody rush out and buy one! :D

I'm in 2 minds about the free market in housing.

Having a completely free market traps us in a cycle of boom and bust just as the semi-free market we currently have.

For example if houses crashed down to say an average value of £100k a piece the cash rich would swoop in and buy up lots of the stock, forcing the price back up until equilibrium (or overshooting into another boom). Rinse and repeat.

I'm coming more round to legislation to ensure that everyone can have decent housing at an affordable price - the British have not proven themselves to be capable of approaching property ownership sensibly!

How you'd do this I don't know - perhaps a register meaning that every property has to be registered to a named individual or couple and that only one house can be owned by each individual.

The need for a supply of rental properties could be satisfied by publically owned rental associations. If people wanted to invest in property they could do so by putting money into property bonds that build these houses and receive portions of the rent.

If people want to invest they should do so in businesses not in poor peoples shelter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in 2 minds about the free market in housing.

Having a completely free market traps us in a cycle of boom and bust just as the semi-free market we currently have.

For example if houses crashed down to say an average value of £100k a piece the cash rich would swoop in and buy up lots of the stock, forcing the price back up until equilibrium (or overshooting into another boom). Rinse and repeat.

I'm coming more round to legislation to ensure that everyone can have decent housing at an affordable price - the British have not proven themselves to be capable of approaching property ownership sensibly!

How you'd do this I don't know - perhaps a register meaning that every property has to be registered to a named individual or couple and that only one house can be owned by each individual.

The need for a supply of rental properties could be satisfied by publically owned rental associations. If people wanted to invest in property they could do so by putting money into property bonds that build these houses and receive portions of the rent.

If people want to invest they should do so in businesses not in poor peoples shelter.

Hey, don't be a spoil sport. When this crash has done its damage my small speculative gold position will hopefully have become very profitable. I plan to use the proceeds to swoop in and buy at distressed property prices from all those evil failed BTLers and crooked banks and become a real landlord (not an overleveraged idiot!). Of course, I will be a good landlord and ensure my tenants (I will mainly be providing a service to desperate ex-home owners who no one will lend to since they defaulted) get good terms and conditions and well maintained properties to live in.

A fully-funded life of pursuing my love of travel and day time drinking beckons, don't wish to ruin it for me just because bad BTLers and banks have messed up the current housing market!

Edited by General Congreve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in 2 minds about the free market in housing.

Having a completely free market traps us in a cycle of boom and bust just as the semi-free market we currently have.

For example if houses crashed down to say an average value of £100k a piece the cash rich would swoop in and buy up lots of the stock, forcing the price back up until equilibrium (or overshooting into another boom). Rinse and repeat.

I'm coming more round to legislation to ensure that everyone can have decent housing at an affordable price - the British have not proven themselves to be capable of approaching property ownership sensibly!

How you'd do this I don't know - perhaps a register meaning that every property has to be registered to a named individual or couple and that only one house can be owned by each individual.

The need for a supply of rental properties could be satisfied by publically owned rental associations. If people wanted to invest in property they could do so by putting money into property bonds that build these houses and receive portions of the rent.

If people want to invest they should do so in businesses not in poor peoples shelter.

To do this would be pretty simple. Legislate - maximum LTV 80%, maximum loan 3.5x single income, 2.5x joint. Any loans at the point of origination that are above this criteria are illegal, and thus unenforcable in a court of law. Remove tax incentives that favor BTL/landlords over resident homeowners.

Will this happen? not in our lifetimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in 2 minds about the free market in housing.

Having a completely free market traps us in a cycle of boom and bust just as the semi-free market we currently have.

In a free market the banks who leveraged too high would have lost their money, and those with accounts would be hurting.

Wouldn't take long to dampen down the cycle if banks making high risk loans and taking big bonus payments didn't have any deposits.

Edited by northwestsmith2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a free market the banks who leveraged too high would have lost their money, and those with accounts would be hurting.

Wouldn't take long to dampen down the cycle if banks making high risk loans and taking big bonus payments didn't have any deposits.

This is not what has happened historically with or without government assurance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, don't be a spoil sport. When this crash has done its damage my small speculative gold position will hopefully have become very profitable. I plan to use the proceeds to swoop in and buy at distressed property prices from all those evil

And so the cycle of damaging property based parasitism continues - that's his point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in a crash the cash rich would swoop in and buy up the lot?

this is 8ollox.

heres why.

in 2007, when NR and the system crashed, the FSCS was 35K.

at the time only 1% of savers had more than the limit in savings.

70% of houses are owner owned.

1% of savers have over 35K

and secondly, bulk purchasers are having to be "bribed" with incentives for bulk purchase....therefore they are not buying.

These are two signs that cash buyers are not into multiple properties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And so the cycle of damaging property based parasitism continues - that's his point

There is always a need for some rental property that is in a decent condition and properly managed. Not everyone wishes to buy a house, certainly not in their twenties, when they may wish to maintain a more flexible lifestyle through renting. The only reason I bought in 2002 was because property values were accelerating away from me and I thought I may never end up owning a house if I waited any longer. I would rather have rented at the time, but felt my hand was forced by rising prices.

As things turned out, because I took the plunge when I did and the bubble exceeded my wildest expectations, it turns out I made the right choice at that time, given the circumstances. If property prices had been stable in 2002 I would never have bought and it would have made no odds to my future whether I rented or bought at the time.

Once we get our crash and all the BTL scum have been washed out of the system, house prices have corrected and speculation has been wrung from the market, there should be enough houses at reasonable prices for those that wish to buy and live in them and a few left over to buy and rent out for those that wish to become decent landlords (not bubble chasing BTL flippers), who can cater to the needs of those that wish to rent as a lifestyle choice, not because they cannot afford to buy and have no other option.

My intentions are purely philanthropic and about providing the lifestyle choice of renting in a stable and affordable housing market. It'll just be a bonus that I hopefully won't have to work for a living while all the BTL scum that have gone broke will have to work for the rest of their unfortunate days as penance for their part in the boom.

Those that wish to buy will be able to afford to, those that wish to rent as a choice will be able to, those that attempted to profit from a sociopathic boom will get their just deserts and I'll get a cushy life. Everyone's a winner, so stop being such a whiner.

Edited by General Congreve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To do this would be pretty simple. Legislate - maximum LTV 80%, maximum loan 3.5x single income, 2.5x joint. Any loans at the point of origination that are above this criteria are illegal, and thus unenforcable in a court of law. Remove tax incentives that favor BTL/landlords over resident homeowners.

Will this happen? not in our lifetimes.

I don't think a shed load of legislation is the answer. I think the problem could be resolved with one simple rule:

You bought it, YOU pay for it.

i.e. if you can't afford something then you and the idiotic lender take full responsibility and consequences if it all goes wrong.

It's based upon the anti-airbag principle. If instead of an airbag fitted to the steering wheel of your car there was a 12 inch spike that exploded out and through your skull in the event of a crash, just how careful would you drive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a true free market it would be your human right to buy something like this

223.jpg

£21,015 according to the ad

http://www.logcabinkits.co.uk/Log-Houses.php

I could possibly buy that outright with the money ive got saved for my deposit, it would be quite nice to have a roof over my head with no mortgage to pay and its a lot better than my current living situation. Not much land available where i live though and what is available is at a ridiculous price so with no place to put it ill have to keep on saving for a "normal" house.

I wonder why BTLers havent thought of putting these in the back gardens of the propertys they own to maximize their income, saying that i bet a few of them already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder why BTLers havent thought of putting these in the back gardens of the propertys they own to maximize their income, saying that i bet a few of them already have.

Planning permission.

Even if you bought the expensive land that's round where you live, you wouldn't be allowed to build that log house on it.

Over the years there have been several people who have built their own houses, mostly hidden away on farmland that they own, but without the correct "permission". They got bulldozed.

If you can live there for 4 years without anyone knowing, you get to keep it. If not, you get bulldozed.

Edited by DementedTuna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a free market the banks who leveraged too high would have lost their money, and those with accounts would be hurting.

Wouldn't take long to dampen down the cycle if banks making high risk loans and taking big bonus payments didn't have any deposits.

In a free market, depositor protection could also be backed by insurance. Proper insurance, not CDS sort of crap where the counterparty is as likely to fail as the risk itself.

A bit of scrutiny from Big Insurance would help moderate risk levels as the premium rises, and would be a whole lot fairer than having the prudent banks bail out the gamblers through a flat-rate statutory scheme. Plus the flexibility to offer different kinds of account with different levels of protection.

The law's place is then relegated to ensuring they don't mislead customers.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 311 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.