Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Wurzel Of Highbridge

Renting In Retirement.

Recommended Posts

Whilst generation rent are paying rent they are less likely to be able to save for retirement and assuming the government continue their rentier policies and restrictive planning policies, the number of renters will grow over the next 30 years.

There is currently estimated to me 9 million renters, if policy does not change over the next few decades then this number is likely to swell to over 30 million.

When generation rent reaches retirement the government will have to step in an pay those rents.

What is the most likely outcome over the next 30 years?

1, Planning is relaxed, house are built by expanding existing areas and affordability returns.(housing boom)

2, The situation will continue to deteriorate and the UK will end up being a banana republic.

3, Deteriorating living conditions for the average person will lead to population decline, thus easing the situation.

4, Population declines for other reason.

5, Shiny new towns are build with thousands of houses.

6, Hyperinflationary bust leading to strict lending and lower prices.

7, Other

Currently there is a deficit of 100,000+ homes that need building every year, so over 30 years that will be a deficit of 3 million homes or about the size of all the Properties in Ireland.

I think we can all agree that the current trends in both property (land) prices and supply is unsustainable against a backdrop of population growth.

The easy way out for politicians would be expansion of existing areas and relaxing of planning policies. Since no political party wants to upset the nimbys (of whom 99% are boomers with nice properties) I would think that policy would not be relaxed until the 3 party system has disintegrated. Looking at the current level of political support it may only be a decade before this happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently there is a deficit of 100,000+ homes that need building every year, so over 30 years that will be a deficit of 3 million homes or about the size of all the Properties in Ireland.

There are around a million empty homes in the UK. Charging 200% council tax for any empty home would go a way to alleviating the housing shortage.

The easy way out for politicians would be expansion of existing areas and relaxing of planning policies.

We could just confiscate all the land held by members of the royal family and redistribute it

Whilst generation rent are paying rent they are less likely to be able to save for retirement and assuming the government continue their rentier policies and restrictive planning policies, the number of renters will grow over the next 30 years.

It goes further than that. The government protects the banking system. And the easiest way for the banking system to make more money is to sell larger mortgages. Rising interest rates, a reversion to 3x salery mortgages with a 15% minimum deposit and house prices would fall 20-30%. But that would hurt the banking system so it will never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is currently estimated to me 9 million renters, if policy does not change over the next few decades then this number is likely to swell to over 30 million.

We already have 9m rented homes and we could have say 2.4 people in each home on average. So we could already have say 21m people in rented homes.

According to the ONS, as of 2011, there were approximately 26.3m households in the UK.

• Of these, 66% are home owners, made up of 32% who own their home outright and 34% who have a first-charge mortgage.

• The remaining 34% are private or social tenants.

This means that today around 8m own their homes outright, 9m own their homes with a mortgage and 9m rent

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/cp/mmr-datapack2012.pdf

Clearly any policy to help people with mortgages e.g. low rates, is pandering to a minority as only 9m homes out of 26m have one. Plus lots of those mortgages could be near the end of their term.

Help people with mortgages really just equals help bankers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are around a million empty homes in the UK. Charging 200% council tax for any empty home would go a way to alleviating the housing shortage.

It goes further than that. The government protects the banking system. And the easiest way for the banking system to make more money is to sell larger mortgages. Rising interest rates, a reversion to 3x salery mortgages with a 15% minimum deposit and house prices would fall 20-30%. But that would hurt the banking system so it will never happen.

Seems to be a catch 22:

1, Building more will cause the banks to go bust.

2, Reducing prices will make the banks bust.

The thing is that millions more homes will be required over the next 30 years otherwise people will be living on the streets. Something will have to give at some point.

Housing benefit is already unsustainable, as time ticks along the problem grows.

I think that U-turn Daves experiment with the bedroom tax may have seemed like a good idea to him, but now everyone can see that shuffling people between a limited number of homes will not work.

Surely the only solution left is to build? The have tried housing people in B&B's and tried reducing waiting lists etc. ultimately the problems are still growing.

Does anyone think that a big 'homes for working people' social building scheme could swing an election yet or could it be antoher 10 years before the pressure builds to that point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly any policy to help people with mortgages e.g. low rates, is pandering to a minority as only 9m homes out of 26m have one. Plus lots of those mortgages could be near the end of their term.

Help people with mortgages really just equals help bankers?

Something has to give at some point, U-Turn Dave has tried shuffling people out of London, tried shuffling them between homes.. It looks like the shuffling policy must be at the end of the road.

Could the step be building?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are around a million empty homes in the UK. Charging 200% council tax for any empty home would go a way to alleviating the housing shortage.

We could just confiscate all the land held by members of the royal family and redistribute it

It goes further than that. The government protects the banking system. And the easiest way for the banking system to make more money is to sell larger mortgages. Rising interest rates, a reversion to 3x salery mortgages with a 15% minimum deposit and house prices would fall 20-30%. But that would hurt the banking system so it will never happen.

Confiscation doesnt work, the international and domestic welfare recipients have that legally cornered. It would result in sanctions and for any developed nation that would likely result in hyperinflation within 12 months.

The legalese route would be to impose confiscation through taxes which are sovereign, whilst behaviourally no different to confiscation,expropriation, nationalisation,deprivation CEND the legalese is all important when it comes to sanctions

Edited by Maria Gorski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the step be building?

I think there are just too many vested interests in keeping house prices inflated.

And the young will just take on more debt, larger mortgages and no savings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently there is a deficit of 100,000+ homes that need building every year, so over 30 years that will be a deficit of 3 million homes or about the size of all the Properties in Ireland.

Sounds like we need to invade Ireland again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can all agree that the current trends in both property (land) prices and supply is unsustainable against a backdrop of population growth.

Just popped back from a little trip in my time machine to make sure the great grandchildren are doing their homework. It turns out a highly resistant flu virus wiped out much of the population in 2041. The problem sorted itself out.

Nature will find a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just popped back from a little trip in my time machine to make sure the great grandchildren are doing their homework. It turns out a highly resistant flu virus wiped out much of the population in 2041. The problem sorted itself out.

Nature will find a way.

At least we have something to look forward to then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Past performance is not a guide to future performance. The value of the investment and the income deriving from it can go down as well as up and can't be guaranteed. You may get back less than you invested."

The hyper house price rises we got in recent years gone by are imo over.....nobody who buys a house today will get rich by just owning it..... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst generation rent are paying rent they are less likely to be able to save for retirement .....

Why do you say this? Because renting is so much more expensive than buying the same property.....?

I'm having difficulty saving for retirement, but that's because I'm renting a far nicer house than I can sensibly afford to rent - but there's no way I could even contemplate buying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you say this? Because renting is so much more expensive than buying the same property.....?

I'm having difficulty saving for retirement, but that's because I'm renting a far nicer house than I can sensibly afford to rent - but there's no way I could even contemplate buying it.

In the long run yes. At first renting and paying a mortgage are about the same but after 10 years the mortgage is far cheaper. And if you have paid of the mortgage by the time you are 50 and work until you are 60 you have 10 years to save as much as you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the long run yes. At first renting and paying a mortgage are about the same but after 10 years the mortgage is far cheaper. And if you have paid of the mortgage by the time you are 50 and work until you are 60 you have 10 years to save as much as you can.

That depends on the interest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just popped back from a little trip in my time machine to make sure the great grandchildren are doing their homework. It turns out a highly resistant flu virus wiped out much of the population in 2041. The problem sorted itself out.

Nature will find a way.

Sadly, all those who perished by the Great Flu were subscribers to the world's most popular web forum, HousePriceCrash.co.uk (paywall).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 year political cycle and generation long structural problem........I choose the path of least resistance!

Essentially that is the problem. No UK government will allow house prices to fall in pound terms, it just will not happen and to ensure it doesn't, enough people will continue to be sucked into the Ponzi to ensure that Daily Express front page headlines are what people want to hear. I'm afraid it is the price you have to pay for remaining a sovereign state. Greater democracy is advocated as being a good thing but when democracy is abused as it is in the UK then all that happens is that democracy produces a society where the population are either part of the majority who have been co-opted into the house price inflation is good (and help to buy will ensure that enough of the post boomer generations will be in on the game) or the other lot who will continue to feed the monster through renting. It will continue to be the UK economy because it can. Save the pound.

Edited by campervanman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So lets assume that more people are renting and for longer periods.

The majority of renters 'under-consume' housing - sharing is a classic example.

Who do the OAPs sell to when they downsize or drop dead?

People are all wetting their pants about London housing.

A quick look at the numbers and whose buying shows there is not a terrific lots selling and those that do sell are going to foreigners - naive, greedy Asians, asset laundering Chinese + Russians.

Get outside the M25 and its a different story.

No and low numbers of FTBs means chains are stuck.

A quick look at rightmove at my home town of Scarborough has a body snatcher feel about it.

Large houses that have been stripped of all personal belongings - photos, trinkets etc - with just that god awful OAP tank-like furniture left in the room for 'demonstration' purposes. Think a p1ss soaked Ikea top floor demo.

You did know that a housing market consists of buyers and sellers? All we've got in most of the UK are sellers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So lets assume that more people are renting and for longer periods.

The majority of renters 'under-consume' housing - sharing is a classic example.

Who do the OAPs sell to when they downsize or drop dead?

People are all wetting their pants about London housing.

A quick look at the numbers and whose buying shows there is not a terrific lots selling and those that do sell are going to foreigners - naive, greedy Asians, asset laundering Chinese + Russians.

Get outside the M25 and its a different story.

No and low numbers of FTBs means chains are stuck.

A quick look at rightmove at my home town of Scarborough has a body snatcher feel about it.

Large houses that have been stripped of all personal belongings - photos, trinkets etc - with just that god awful OAP tank-like furniture left in the room for 'demonstration' purposes. Think a p1ss soaked Ikea top floor demo.

You did know that a housing market consists of buyers and sellers? All we've got in most of the UK are sellers.

And millions who would like to be buyers. H2B will ensure that enough of them join the game without prices falling and low IR's will keep the btl monster going. The UK government, any UK government will keep it going because they can and because they are part of the group of people at the top of the pyramid who gain the most from ensuring the Ponzi doesn't collapse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're all agreed that the only solution for us is the end of the world.

Worth a watch.......keep an open mind, more info and different views, thoughts and opinions the better.

No fear. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   289 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.