Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ticket2ride

Housing The Defining Economic Issue Of Our Times

Recommended Posts

'Housing has become the defining economic issue of our times'

In Britain, Kevin Cahill, a journalist, calculated that, in 2002, 69% of the land was in the hands of 0.6% of the population. Government statistics show that since then the concentration has intensified. Between 2005 and 2011 the number of landholdings in England had fallen by 10%, while the average size of holdings had risen by 12%. This could be one of the fastest consolidations of ownership since the Highland clearances. The British have enough land and housing; it is just that, increasingly, most of it is owned by a smaller and smaller elite.
As a first step, we should at the very least be enacting policies such as levying a land value tax on, at a minimum, all undeveloped developable land that is worth above £2m in value. This would swiftly encourage new building and raise funds for the government for housing investment.
Edited by ticket2ride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A land tax only makes sense if it's used to finance an unconditional citizens' income, otherwise it will just end up wasted in the public service for fat cat pay-checks, non-jobs, public sector pensions and vanity projects that nobody needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A land tax only makes sense if it's used to finance an unconditional citizens' income, otherwise it will just end up wasted in the public service for fat cat pay-checks, non-jobs, public sector pensions and vanity projects that nobody needs.

Other people have argued that a CI would simply be recaptured by the rentiers in the form of higher rents anyway.

The only way out is to build so much new stuff that the attraction of property as an investment is undercut- but that will never happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another sensible housing story from the Guardian again. They are starting to make a habit of this! :P

Don't worry, the Guardian will resume normal service once Labour are back in. Thirteen years of Labour HPI completely passed them by! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other people have argued that a CI would simply be recaptured by the rentiers in the form of higher rents anyway.

The only way out is to build so much new stuff that the attraction of property as an investment is undercut- but that will never happen

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see, we have a housing crisis bought about by population growth, ultra low interest rates, unbalanced tenancy rights, a lack of social house building and insane planning controls. The solution to that is to introduce a new tax? That's beyond idiotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, the Guardian will resume normal service once Labour are back in. Thirteen years of Labour HPI completely passed them by! :lol:

Precisely.

The WORST of HPI happened under Niueue Labbia.....

G IDIOT BROWN was in charge of the Worst EVER economic disaster this country has EVER known..... He was COMPLETELY hoodwinked by the Banksters who were WARPING everything with their PLANNED DESTRUCTION of individual fair ownership of homes

via their ORGANISED PONZI SCAM ---

POWERED BY

PREDATORY LIAR LOANS

THE GREATEST FRAUD & ROBBERY OF THE AVERAGE MAN IN ALL HISTORY.

Edited by eric pebble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A land tax only makes sense if it's used to finance an unconditional citizens' income, otherwise it will just end up wasted in the public service for fat cat pay-checks, non-jobs, public sector pensions and vanity projects that nobody needs.

No, you are conflating two separate issues. Whilst I agree with you about each issue, they are not contingent.

Of course a proportion would be wasted, but that is true anyway, for all taxes. Currently 100% of the land value tax is squandered by landlords on landlords, which is such a disgusting thought most people refuse to think it.

Allowing government to collect some of this existing tax, isn't a radical suggestion. It's a very small change, which isn't perfect, but much much. better.

Your argument is really just an argument against all taxes and all state spending, which I support (with caveats) but that's big leap from where we are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precisely.

The WORST of HPI happened under Niueue Labbia.....

G IDIOT BROWN was in charge of the Worst EVER economic disaster this country has EVER known..... He was COMPLETELY hoodwinked by the Banksters who were WARPING everything with their PLANNED DESTRUCTION of individual fair ownership of homes

via their ORGANISED PONZI SCAM ---

POWERED BY

PREDATORY LIAR LOANS

THE GREATEST FRAUD & ROBBERY OF THE AVERAGE MAN IN ALL HISTORY.

I love your subliminal messages Eric :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WORST of HPI happened under Niueue Labbia.....

With Osborne in charge, that's like asking which half of a turd smells the worst.

Actually, I'll defend Brown. At least he had the excuse of ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=196840

Should be mixed with this thread?

Page 196 of the book, there is a graph showing an increasing number of rooms per person in the UK. He uses this as justification for not building, but many rooms have come about from the subdivision of rooms. His argument is the inequality in the allocation of these rooms is the problem.

But if he were to look at dwelling space per person in the UK, he would see there is a shrinking amount of housing space per person.

Can't pick much else fault with the book yet.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   218 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.