Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Foobar

The Future Of Housing?

Recommended Posts

Some of us --not all-- are experiencing the rough side of the housing market, being priced out; and for me this is certainly educational and frustrating. Statistics are quoted daily on situations domestically and around the world and if you're not experiencing those statistics they become fairly meaningless. I find my current situation is squeezing out my political/social apathy and I'm more attuned to news articles and official data (as I think you all are). I am conscious though that my situation is a hell of a lot better than say a child working in a tanning factory in India and I'm on a different scale of social injustice on that matter. Make Poverty History

Anyway here is my question to you:

According to a lot of posters on this website: today's losers will become tomorrow's winners. So as far as I can see there will always be losers and winners. This is quite clear in my mind as a couple of my friends have bought fairly recently and I am sitting unable to buy. If the market continues to fall I will see my good friends get into financial difficulty, but then I would be able to buy: a bitter sweet situation.

How as a society do we go forward responsibly ensuring people have equal access to housing without the huge risk that is involved today? Also if the numbers of people in financial trouble is rising shouldn't we be setting up a website to help and educate on that? Can we tease out the main causes of such social injustice and look to eliminate them? Or will our opposites in 5years time be starting up a "housepriceboom" website?

Do we really want speculation and greed become our daily lives? Even if you are winning from that situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really believe there is a win-win situation. The recession coming is a neccessary adjustment. Just a shame that GB can't have the guts to tell us this instead of dicking around with interest rates. Life cannot always be about the wholesale avoidance of pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really believe there is a win-win situation. The recession coming is a neccessary adjustment. Just a shame that GB can't have the guts to tell us this instead of dicking around with interest rates. Life cannot always be about the wholesale avoidance of pain.

I'm not necessarily thinking of a win-win, but something where we don't have great peaks and troughs and adjustment means ruining someones life? I guess a more responsible banking system combined with better government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

simple.

build a correct proportion of local authority housing. as its always had to be.

I agree on that.

However I think there's a new class of people who don't qualify for social housing because they earn too much and can't afford housing unless it's a dodgy shared ownership scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on that.

However I think there's a new class of people who don't qualify for social housing because they earn too much and can't afford housing unless it's a dodgy shared ownership scheme.

I think dodgy share ownership schemes have by and large replaced new social housing stock in government priorities. One returns housing to its rightful economic level (ie. affordable and secure), the other props up the ridiculous inflations that makes homeowners feel good about nothing real. Concrete or spin? You decide!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

simple.

build a correct proportion of local authority housing. as its always had to be.

To this I would also add, don't let public housing be a free market. For example let anyone own only one place that is local authority, and anyone who owns private housing is ineligible for one. Public housing can only be sold to someone else eligible. No restrictions on private housing- if you can afford 10, fair play to you. That way the free market is available for those who want to "invest" (speculate) in it, but those who just want a place to live are provided for.

I've not thought through how that should work, but it seems practical and is done is several countries in Asia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think dodgy share ownership schemes have by and large replaced new social housing stock in government priorities. One returns housing to its rightful economic level (ie. affordable and secure), the other props up the ridiculous inflations that makes homeowners feel good about nothing real. Concrete or spin? You decide!

Here's an option for the government and could bridge the gap, if they taxed the profits from buy-to-lets and gains on housing (that the owner doesn't live in) and put that into shared ownership, that would go some way to adjusting the balance. Trouble is I just think that we'll all be paying for the shared ownership schemes through our council tax in years to come. The councils are just acting like eager first time buyers stretching the public purse for something that is not worth the money they are paying.

There's supposed to be a law in economics that says if the participants in a market can't afford (or won't pay) the price that is being asked then a) that is the wrong price and B) that price should adjust in order to find buyers. The government in their wisdom have ignored this fundamental principle in combination with the banks who are cutting each others throats to lend large amounts of --currently-- cheap money.

To this I would also add, don't let public housing be a free market. For example let anyone own only one place that is local authority, and anyone who owns private housing is ineligible for one. Public housing can only be sold to someone else eligible. No restrictions on private housing- if you can afford 10, fair play to you. That way the free market is available for those who want to "invest" (speculate) in it, but those who just want a place to live are provided for.

I've not thought through how that should work, but it seems practical and is done is several countries in Asia.

I quite like that argument, having two domains one where there is under government control and another where the speculators can do their thing and inflate their egos and bank accounts. I really don't mind if people earn lots of money by speculating it's when it messes with the fundamental needs of everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's supposed to be a law in economics that says if the participants in a market can't afford (or won't pay) the price that is being asked then a) that is the wrong price and B) that price should adjust in order to find buyers. The government in their wisdom have ignored this fundamental principle in combination with the banks who are cutting each others throats to lend large amounts of --currently-- cheap money.

NICE. In other words this whole thing has been delayed by years by government screwing around with the market. If essential workers can't afford to live where they are needed there is something fundamentally wrong and shared ownership is just dicking around at the edges.

I quite like that argument, having two domains one where there is under government control and another where the speculators can do their thing and inflate their egos and bank accounts. I really don't mind if people earn lots of money by speculating it's when it messes with the fundamental needs of everyone else.

This is already going on and in my opinion is the real problem. 25 years ago you could expect to get a council house if you didn't care about owning. Now its not the case and the private market is dealing with managing the cost through high and unregulated voids. You can only access social housing nowadays if your either completely on the skids or know the coup. From my observation this has pushed rental prices up generally. Those who are socially able are thrust into the market that demands what it can for an essential commodity has no sense of social responsiblility and just withholds if it can't pull what it wants. But there are no very low income earners pressures to offset the effect (even more so since keyworker housing). so the rest of us are pushed into a market with inadequate earnings but as long as we don't starve that is OK who cares? not labour. not the tories. what is left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so the rest of us are pushed into a market with inadequate earnings but as long as we don't starve that is OK who cares? not labour. not the tories. what is left?

What about a new party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an option for the government and could bridge the gap, if they taxed the profits from buy-to-lets and gains on housing (that the owner doesn't live in) and put that into shared ownership, that would go some way to adjusting the balance. Trouble is I just think that we'll all be paying for the shared ownership schemes through our council tax in years to come. The councils are just acting like eager first time buyers stretching the public purse for something that is not worth the money they are paying.

Oddly enough, profits on buy-to-lets and capital gains on properties that you don't live in are already taxed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to a lot of posters on this website: today's losers will become tomorrow's winners. So as far as I can see there will always be losers and winners.

Um, you have just described Capitalism. We live in a Capitalist Society.

If the market continues to fall I will see my good friends get into financial difficulty, but then I would be able to buy: a bitter sweet situation.

Why would it be bitter-sweet? Are your friends sitting at home worrying about you? I doubt it.

Do we really want speculation and greed become our daily lives? Even if you are winning from that situation?

No, but... you are worrying about others when the others could not gie a stuff about you. Something I know is very hard to learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, you have just described Capitalism. We live in a Capitalist Society.

We don't live in a capitalist society. We live in a mixed economy. Which I have to say I am grateful for until it looses its rudder - which it has at the moment. The current politicians (government, opposition, who cares?) have the vision of a mole, and the coordinated thinking of a startled rabbit, so their policy is all over the place, addresses everything and nothing, and is undertaken in an entirely ad-hoc fashion in response to local VI pressures and small and unrelated insights (take 24 hour drinking and the drug and alcohol policy as a cue). Someone needs to form a bottom line and work towards it.

Why would it be bitter-sweet? Are your friends sitting at home worrying about you? I doubt it.

No, but... you are worrying about others when the others could not gie a stuff about you. Something I know is very hard to learn.

It is hard to learn. Its true though. I like to take people at face value though. Love is love, contempt is contempt, self-interest is directly expressed. So the really hard bit is when people who genuinely consciously care about me urge me into the over-inflated housing market because they are worried about my lack of housing stability, but with their own unconscious fear that they might loose out if people like me don't get in soon hanging out like the results of unzipped flies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly enough, profits on buy-to-lets and capital gains on properties that you don't live in are already taxed.

Sorry, I meant to say tax at a much higher rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How as a society do we go forward responsibly ensuring people have equal access to housing without the huge risk that is involved today?

Hard money.

If people can't borrow 500k on a 25k income to buy a one-bed flat, then prices will have to fall to what they can really, actually afford. And with hard money, prices will likely be stable or reducing over time, not increasing by a factor of a hundred or more in forty years.

The whole problem is due to easy credit and the inflation of the money supply that brings with it. Unfortunately governments love money supply inflation, so only a catastrophe will bring an end to the monetary printing press.

Edited by MarkG

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.

  • 302 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.