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

Priced Out Of Paris

Recommended Posts

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a096d1d0-d2ec-11e2-aac2-00144feab7de.html#axzz2WSyQOXWl

This was on the front page but resonated as my wife wants to move back to the smoke. We lived in Paris a decade ago before moving out to the sticks to raise a family. She kept her job in the city though. We rented a flat in the 6th district which cost us 1050 euros a month. A similar flat is for rent today at slightly over 1500 euros. A 40% increase in rents in a decade. A two bedroom flat will cost around 2000 euros a month. A senior civil servant will take home around 4000 euros a month as a comparison. A school teacher 1500 month.

But things don't stop there. To rent a flat you have to have a steady job and have been in work for some time, preferably as an unsackable civil servant or have your company or parents stand guarantee for your rent. As a general rule your salary has to be 3x the rent. You may have to spring up to 3x the monthly rent in agency fees. Some people are asked to stump up the three years rent in advance as well.

France typically had 3 year leases and unfurnished properties. You may have to install everything bar the bathroom at your expense and make good when you leave. However recent uncertainty in housing policy has meant that landlords (the French small landlord is very present in Paris) have moved to offering furnished lets, like the UK, you only get a short lease (12 months) and will often be chucked out before the summer, the flat let to tourists then re-let to other mugs in the autumn. A bit galling after paying thousands in agency fees.

We asked about schools in the 6th and 7th districts. The state ones all seem to have places but the private schools (which are a bit weird in France) have long waiting lists or are impossible to get in to. Private schools are frequently "nominally" catholic but receive big subsidies from the govt. You can only really get in to the Paris ones by the famous "piston" - that is you have to have connections, political or otherwise. They are a sort of private reserve for the nomenclature and other notables. At least they've stopped rich people getting subsidized council housing. When we were in Paris Jacques Chiracs daughter lived opposite in a house with private gardens for which she paid the same as us - one of the Paris cities council houses for the well connected.

Edited by davidg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our great, global cities are turning into vast gated citadels where the elite reproduces itself

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/a096d1d0-d2ec-11e2-aac2-00144feab7de.html#axzz2WSyQOXWl

In 2154, the elites live in the space station

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elysium_(film)

http://www.itsbetterupthere.com/splash/

Edited by easy2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why we can't have nice things...

I'm more and more convinced that the number one financial hazard is excessive wealth inequality, married with a lack of safeguards to prevent the elite grabbing life's essentials (and consequently driving the price out of reach of anyone else). I don't really give a damn if only the super-rich can afford Faberge eggs, micro-pigs and Lamborghini Countachs, but they are a destructive distortion when you move away from luxuries.

I suppose we could just 'decide' that only the super-rich can afford anywhere closer than the suburbs to the big cities, but we could equally decide to institute LVT and seriously hammer second-home ownership (I'd even argue for including foreign properties).

Aside from anything else, the super-rich have rarely produced value that matches their wealth - and you don't have to be a socialist to see problems with that, even framed in terms of straight-forward economics, fairness be damned.

Finally, it's a death-spiral, and particularly vicious one in that, the worse the imbalance gets, the more social unrest, thus re-enforcing the drive in the super-rich to acquire even more to isolate themselves from the fall-out of their own actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Paris is nice for tourists, but living there would suck a$$.

Because of costs? Apart from that, while it might not be to every one's taste, I can't imagine what could be so awful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of costs? Apart from that, while it might not be to every one's taste, I can't imagine what could be so awful.

There are many lovely European cities that aren't Paris.

Plus the loony politics, insane tax rates, and all the French people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a bunch of rich actors run around playing poor people killing rich people. :D

Seriously, though - looks good and the best science fiction mirrors present society's concerns and District 9 was a great movie.

Edited by StainlessSteelCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why we can't have nice things...

I'm more and more convinced that the number one financial hazard is excessive wealth inequality, married with a lack of safeguards to prevent the elite grabbing life's essentials (and consequently driving the price out of reach of anyone else). I don't really give a damn if only the super-rich can afford Faberge eggs, micro-pigs and Lamborghini Countachs, but they are a destructive distortion when you move away from luxuries.

I suppose we could just 'decide' that only the super-rich can afford anywhere closer than the suburbs to the big cities, but we could equally decide to institute LVT and seriously hammer second-home ownership (I'd even argue for including foreign properties).

Aside from anything else, the super-rich have rarely produced value that matches their wealth - and you don't have to be a socialist to see problems with that, even framed in terms of straight-forward economics, fairness be damned.

Finally, it's a death-spiral, and particularly vicious one in that, the worse the imbalance gets, the more social unrest, thus re-enforcing the drive in the super-rich to acquire even more to isolate themselves from the fall-out of their own actions.

The thing that this article didn't mention was the degree to which cities such as Paris and London are massively subsidised. It's not just a question of the super-rich monopolising access to the big cities, it's that the people who are paying for those cities are being excluded. The death-spiral that you mention really is a death-spiral because how much longer are the middle/upper classes going to agree to hand over a big portion of the income in taxes in order to create a pleasant environment for the world's super rich, who likely don't even pay any taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this is why we can't have nice things...

I'm more and more convinced that the number one financial hazard is excessive wealth inequality, married with a lack of safeguards to prevent the elite grabbing life's essentials (and consequently driving the price out of reach of anyone else). I don't really give a damn if only the super-rich can afford Faberge eggs, micro-pigs and Lamborghini Countachs, but they are a destructive distortion when you move away from luxuries.

I suppose we could just 'decide' that only the super-rich can afford anywhere closer than the suburbs to the big cities, but we could equally decide to institute LVT and seriously hammer second-home ownership (I'd even argue for including foreign properties).

Aside from anything else, the super-rich have rarely produced value that matches their wealth - and you don't have to be a socialist to see problems with that, even framed in terms of straight-forward economics, fairness be damned.

Finally, it's a death-spiral, and particularly vicious one in that, the worse the imbalance gets, the more social unrest, thus re-enforcing the drive in the super-rich to acquire even more to isolate themselves from the fall-out of their own actions.

Indeed, the super-rich don't just tend to buy a cup of coffee - but attempt to buy up the entire global harvest so they can make even more money from it. I admire the megalomaniacal level of ambition in a way - but most decent people would regard it as rather unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who the hell wants to live in the North of France exactly?

Yes, Paris is nice for tourists, but living there would suck a$$.

Why would people want to live in Paris? Well, anyone who wants a job basically. Like London, Paris has sucked entire categories of jobs out of the rest of the country. This isn't new - there was a celebrated book about it called "Paris and the French desert", published in... 1947.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would people want to live in Paris? Well, anyone who wants a job basically. Like London, Paris has sucked entire categories of jobs out of the rest of the country. This isn't new - there was a celebrated book about it called "Paris and the French desert", published in... 1947.

Unfortunately true. What's interesting is some of the "tribes" living there. Like the Bretons who cluster around Gare Montparnasse or people from Tignes who work as staff in one of the luxury hotels in the center. I think that Paris is something like a third of the economy by GDP and a lot of the GDP in the regions is generated by the government with a lot of non-jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would people want to live in Paris? Well, anyone who wants a job basically. Like London, Paris has sucked entire categories of jobs out of the rest of the country. This isn't new - there was a celebrated book about it called "Paris and the French desert", published in... 1947.

I can understand people wanting to live in a city if they have plenty of energy, are young can get high paid employment for a period long enough to be able to get enough cash together to be able not to live in a city. Why anyone would want to live in a city long term is a mystery to me. I watched the BBC2 documentary about London traffic last night and I could not imagine spending more than 5 minutes in such an environment .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand people wanting to live in a city if they have plenty of energy, are young can get high paid employment for a period long enough to be able to get enough cash together to be able not to live in a city. Why anyone would want to live in a city long term is a mystery to me. I watched the BBC2 documentary about London traffic last night and I could not imagine spending more than 5 minutes in such an environment .

High paid employment? I don't think you're getting my point: a lot of the people who move to Paris do so not for the theatres, art exhibitions and nightclubs. But because there's no work in their hometown.

You claim to live in France, surely you must have an idea why all those Brittany-Ferries-Brochure little towns are emptying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High paid employment? I don't think you're getting my point: a lot of the people who move to Paris do so not for the theatres, art exhibitions and nightclubs. But because there's no work in their hometown.

You claim to live in France, surely you must have an idea why all those Brittany-Ferries-Brochure little towns are emptying?

I think we agree with the reasons why people go there, it's just that I can't imagine anyone living in a city for any longer than is absolutely necessary.

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.

  • 245 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.