pig Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 We're not talkign about nuclear weapons. Of course there will, the bricks and mortar won't vanish into thin air. No we're talking about economic and political collapse. Not the best outcome for a neo-liberal experiment ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverwhere Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Yes its all over-valued. We're in a speculative bubble - pretty much the whole point of this website. Planning is a factor but not THE main factor. Agreed, I don't think planning is the main factor in this particular speculative bubble but it does lay the foundation for manipulating supply and allowing the development of a fertile ground in which speculative bubbles can flourish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Well yes of course. What I am querying is would there actually be a 'free-market' left at the end of the collapse ? No. At least not in any way we would currently recognise. After a collapse it would be highly regulated to prevent any such thing happening again. That is in those nations where democracy survived. Some nations would of course fall into despotism or similar. Basically it would be a rerun of the 1930's. Now just as then the hardships that occur would give rise to extremist political movements and governments. In fact we can already see it happening in the euro countries. I think though that the madness of the world wars is drilled in enough, that another hitler won't arise, and if he did he would not be able to start a world war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I don't give a monkeys about council housing. I would rather not be taxed, so the government can pick winners and losers with my money, and have a nice client state of people beholden to the state. Council housing is not the solution. I would rather have cheap housing for all, which would happen through liberalisation of the market. This is how it works everywhere other than here. The UK's problem is statism, pure and simple. It is ridiculous that you have to ask permission from the government to shelter yourself, especially in a democracy. That this is considered normal is frankly insane. It is similarly ridiculous to assert that the solution to this entirely self inflicted misery is for the government to provide houses for certain people with their own money. I think you've proved my point, we stopped building council housing because of the neo-liberal "the free market does it better" mantra. That's exactly what I was saying was it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 No we're talking about economic and political collapse. Not the best outcome for a neo-liberal experiment ? There's that word again, neo-liberal. Are we talking about planning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I think you've proved my point, we stopped building council housing because of the neo-liberal "the free market does it better" mantra. That's exactly what I was saying was it not? No. You're talking complete bunk. The government stops me from building a house. Not shadow neoliberals or free marketeers. If we had a free market we wouldn't have licenses for shelter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okaycuckoo Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) http://blogs.r.ftdata.co.uk/ftdata/files/2013/02/Housing-completions-by-type.jpg Actually looking at it again, private builds seem to be at their highest historically when public builds are high as well. Ooh, I don't think your graph shows that. Looks like an aggregate collapse since 1970. And housing associations? I laffs! Edited May 21, 2014 by okaycuckoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexw Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) No. You're talking complete bunk. The government stops me from building a house. Not shadow neoliberals or free marketeers. If we had a free market we wouldn't have licenses for shelter. i did not say they are stopping you. I said we stopped building council housing because of the "free market does it better" mantra. Whether we have a free market or not is irrelevant on that point. It is the justification that has been used/invented to prevent more council houses being built, and on that I am entirely correct. Heck your own posts show this to be the case. And personally I would prefer a mixed approach. Let those who want to build their own houses build them. But for where it's a choice of either the gov paying HB or housing them itself I say build the damn council housing. In the long run it'd work out cheaper. Edited May 22, 2014 by alexw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 i did not say they are stopping you. I said we stopped building council housing because of the "free market does it better" mantra. Whether we have a free market or not is irrelevant on that point. It is the justification that has been used/invented to prevent more council houses being built, and on that I am entirely correct. Heck your own posts show this to be the case. And personally I would prefer a mixed approach. Let those who want to build their own houses build them. But for where it's a choice of either the gov paying HB or housing them itself I say build the damn council housing. In the long run it'd work out cheaper. It does do it better - if you let it. I'm not particularly tribal - hence my sod the lot UKIP vote tomorrow/today. I'm not really interested in apportioning blame. What I do know is that statism is the problem, and therefore more statism is unlikely to be the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rentbug Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Hang on so you think that the current housing crisis is purely due to the free market in houses? Nothing to do with restrictive planning laws, bank bailouts, ultra low interest rates, help to buy and numerous other price-propping schemes. Not to mention the fact that the housing boom was centrally planned in the first place to stave off recession as admitted by Eddie George: This thinking makes me laugh. (Sorry - not picking on you at all mate - just a very good example to let me ask the question) Why is there a housing crisis? I don't see any crisis anywhere. There really is not any housing crisis - it is a media cosntruct. Housing is no more in crisis than the market for tea or plastic water buts. The planning regulations, bank bailouts, ZIRP, HTB and other numerous price propping schemes are working, prices are propped, people are spending the "profit" through MEW and mortage lenders are coining it. Any time soon the lobbyists for housebuilders will get their way and we will build hundreds if not thousands of new houses and they will all be - overpriced, small, poorly built, lacking in parking, This over priced tat will be "snapped up by investors" Please will some one explain to me what this imaginary housing crisis is. I don't see it. The government has got the feel good factor going nicely just ready for the election. The older generation that have made loads of theoretic paper gains from HPI are spending their pension on caravans and tat keeping the economy going. Young people are working stupid hours for paltry wages to pay the rent keeping labour costs down making the UK "competitive" and they all are desperate to buy into the HPI myth so no unrest. In fact the only "unrest" is a few dimwit idiots thinking voting for a Tory toff commodities broker will somehow upset the establishment ROTFMAO. No. There really is no housing crisis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron78 Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 If we had a free market we wouldn't have licenses for shelter. Do you think the big house builders who now dominate the free-market want you to have that? Unlikely seeing as it would probably collapse their share prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron78 Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Ooh, I don't think your graph shows that. Looks like an aggregate collapse since 1970. And housing associations? I laffs! Hardly collapse in social housing. It actually rises again from 1970 until Thatcher. I wouldn't want a social house build for HB tenants BTW. Let all the BTL landlords enjoy them for a good while yet. Slash HB and put that money into a mass housebuilding project (for people working in or around London initially), with FTB's given preference over anyone else. I just don't think private builds alone can meet the hole we now have. In fact it plainly can't without radical reform to the planning laws. I just don't think the big housebuilders want radical reform - their share prices have all soared as demand has outstripped supply. It would be hugely counterproductive for them and they obviously know that. The Tories are also NIMBY central which is a shame as they're historically the party most likely to cut red tape - no chance they will given their enormous grey support and their close ties to big landowners. Labour *could* social build, but I'll believe that when I see it. Politically we're all pretty shafted. Which brings us back to Thatcher - she got a lot right, and a lot wrong, but she was at least transformative. We desperately lack progressive politics in this country, and a progressive Tory is as rare as hen's teeth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnumerate Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Do you think the big house builders who now dominate the free-market want you to have that? Unlikely seeing as it would probably collapse their share prices. We do not have a free market in housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybernoid Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 (edited) It all would have been OK if New Labour hadn't bailed out the banks - neo-liberal capitalism was working just fine until then. The people are pissed. Pissed that socialism and market interference was used to prop up the insolvent banks and housing market instead of sticking with proven neo-liberal capitalism instead. Of course. I don't think anyone wants any more of that. Except loonies who somehow think this crisis has proved a point about communism being just dandy. Edited May 22, 2014 by cybernoid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybernoid Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 By the by, hats off to campervanman for the provocative thread title and denial of trickle down in the first post, who so far as I could be bothered to look hasn't posted on the thread since ! Some great trolling there, you only have to mention thatcher and the socialists are foaming at the mouth for pages and pages. Light the fuse and stand well back, thats some efficient trolling. Its too easy to get them going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Do you think the big house builders who now dominate the free-market want you to have that? Unlikely seeing as it would probably collapse their share prices. Complete drivel. There is no free market. There is the state. "Big house builders" don't decide who gets the shelter license, the state does. If you believe that the state is corrupted, fine. In which case, giving the corrupted state even MORE control is barking mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy soy Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 + 1 As far as I can see the real issue with neo-liberalism is that it's not actually liberal, it just subsumed the term "liberalism" as a smoke screen for an essentially corporatist agenda. Neo-liberalism likes to say the markets are always right but what it actually believes is the corporations are always right: hence the mix of deregulation and over regulation that massively benefits mortgage lenders and slave-box builders while massively disadvantaging private self-builders. It's not a free market because it's overrun with monopolies, cartels, vested interests and powerful lobbyists. It's not a socialist market because only the losses are being socialised while all the profits are being siphoned off. It's just a b*lls up. This seems to be where we are now, neo liberalism has evolved as it grew and controlled the markets. That's why so many posters are having a hard time figuring it out, they are clinging to the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 This thinking makes me laugh. (Sorry - not picking on you at all mate - just a very good example to let me ask the question) Why is there a housing crisis? I don't see any crisis anywhere. There really is not any housing crisis - it is a media cosntruct. Housing is no more in crisis than the market for tea or plastic water buts. The planning regulations, bank bailouts, ZIRP, HTB and other numerous price propping schemes are working, prices are propped, people are spending the "profit" through MEW and mortage lenders are coining it. Any time soon the lobbyists for housebuilders will get their way and we will build hundreds if not thousands of new houses and they will all be - overpriced, small, poorly built, lacking in parking, This over priced tat will be "snapped up by investors" Please will some one explain to me what this imaginary housing crisis is. I don't see it. The government has got the feel good factor going nicely just ready for the election. The older generation that have made loads of theoretic paper gains from HPI are spending their pension on caravans and tat keeping the economy going. Young people are working stupid hours for paltry wages to pay the rent keeping labour costs down making the UK "competitive" and they all are desperate to buy into the HPI myth so no unrest. In fact the only "unrest" is a few dimwit idiots thinking voting for a Tory toff commodities broker will somehow upset the establishment ROTFMAO. No. There really is no housing crisis. I've been asking - 'and what is meant by housing crisis' ? till I'm blue in the face. And throwing stuff at the telly when the debate short-cuts to 'we must build more houses'. This is entirely anecdotal, but my understanding (from talking to, 1. a politician 2. somebody who has insight to what politicians are being harangued about 3. A journalist) is that the volume of complaint over the cost of housing is rising exponentially. In fact when they talk about 'Housing Crisis' I take it to be a euphemism for incoherent but increasing volume of various public complaint in the background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pig Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 No. At least not in any way we would currently recognise. After a collapse it would be highly regulated to prevent any such thing happening again. That is in those nations where democracy survived. Some nations would of course fall into despotism or similar. Basically it would be a rerun of the 1930's. Now just as then the hardships that occur would give rise to extremist political movements and governments. In fact we can already see it happening in the euro countries. I think though that the madness of the world wars is drilled in enough, that another hitler won't arise, and if he did he would not be able to start a world war. Thats what I think. My point is, when its argued that 'socialism' was used to prop up the banks as if everything was working fine until then and then those leftys came along and ruined a 'normal' clearing out of bad investments, this is incredibly disingenuous. Bailing out the banks served 'neo-liberalism', kept it propped up literally but also the idea that it 'works', ahem with a bit of help - because this would have been no 'ordinary' bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rentbug Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Complete drivel. There is no free market. There is the state. "Big house builders" don't decide who gets the shelter license, the state does. If you believe that the state is corrupted, fine. In which case, giving the corrupted state even MORE control is barking mad. The state (whatever that means) is corrupted. The governement is run by big business and let's be very clear things like HTB are driven by lobby groups from business. The planning system is done at a local basis to buy votes from the nimby people and benefit council members. I am happy to see government spending as a % of GDP decrease - that is good economics, but belief in the "market" over the state is delusional - the state is driven by the market. That is the system we have, generally is called crony capitalism or corporatism. Even the likes of City AM back that view. Corruption is the issue that needs to be addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EUBanana Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 The state (whatever that means) is corrupted. The governement is run by big business and let's be very clear things like HTB are driven by lobby groups from business. The planning system is done at a local basis to buy votes from the nimby people and benefit council members. I am happy to see government spending as a % of GDP decrease - that is good economics, but belief in the "market" over the state is delusional - the state is driven by the market. That is the system we have, generally is called crony capitalism or corporatism. Even the likes of City AM back that view. Corruption is the issue that needs to be addressed. Right. Which is why free marketeers are all reformists, or should be. Indeed, they should be radicals. Hence why neoliberalism is a bit of a swear word. It's an excuse to lump free marketeers in with crony capitalists. A line which you see INCESSANTLY used to defend an even bigger state. I mean lookit what I was replying to with the above quotation, a fine example on this very page. Blaming free markets for what we have is just black comedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rentbug Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 .. Blaming free markets for what we have is just black comedy. I agree. There is no such thing as a free market. Nor will there ever be. Those that advocate them are failing to understand the real world in which we live, or using the term incorrectly (the more frequent case) to lobby for their own personal gain at someone else's loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron78 Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Complete drivel. There is no free market. There is the state. "Big house builders" don't decide who gets the shelter license, the state does. Big housing was actually called in by the Tories very recently to help redraft planning legislation. How convenient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rentbug Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Big housing was actually called in by the Tories very recently to help redraft planning legislation. How convenient. All governement is like this. The first port of call in any revision of regulation or law is the main body of people affected. Typically this will be the same big businesses that make contributions to party funds. To a lesser extent this was the problem with "old" Labour in the 70s with the Trades Unions. The Labour party was - of course- created by the Trades Union movement in order to form a political party which championed the causes of the working class - previously these people had had no representation in parliament. Despite this the right wing press continued to try to create a falsehood of corruption to smear the Labour party by suggesting it's relationship with the Unions was in some way improper. Quite amusing really if it were not so pathetic (and sadly effective). Blair, famously, broke from the Union stranglehold and accepted huge amounts of money from big business. In so doing he created a two more-or-less-identical party system like the US one. I guess in some ways this could be seen as the outcome of what one might call "Thatcherism" as an ideology rather than a political or economic movement. So to address the OP this is what has failed. (or at least failed the majority). Now we have a system of government for the benefit of big business and the vested interests that fund politics. We have become "Little America". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Jib Fingers Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 No. You're talking complete bunk. The government stops me from building a house. Not shadow neoliberals or free marketeers. If we had a free market we wouldn't have licenses for shelter. Yep. I don't get how we can all agree that the housing market is completely rigged by the government to keep prices high and yet it is somehow an example of how a free market has gone wrong. Can't we just agree that the government is screwing it up and it has nothing to do with free markets whatsoever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.