Housing Crisis Worse That At The Time Of Cathy Come Home

[olde guto]

Ken Loach who directed Cathy come home says crisis is worse than it was 50 years ago and it's worse than a horror story

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03/17/ken-loach-cathy-come-home-homes-for-britain-housing-crisis-rally_n_6889178.html

[canbuywontbuy]

...and yet we were on course in 2009 to fix the housing crisis (15% drop in prices that year alone) with 4.5% interest rates - what happened? Interest rates dropped to 0.5%, zombie mortgages reanimated, young people shut out of the market, rises celebrated.

[steve99]

...and yet we were on course in 2009 to fix the housing crisis (15% drop in prices that year alone) with 4.5% interest rates - what happened? Interest rates dropped to 0.5%, zombie mortgages reanimated, young people shut out of the market, rises celebrated.

But as any right thinking person should now know, in fact it should be in their dna after all the evidence we have had over the last few decades, that everything is run by both sides of politics for the 1%'ers. Whats good for them is what we will get regardless of whoever is govt at the time, or how bad that is for the majority. Only when things break does it change but then very quickly the government comes to the rescue for the rich and greedy. ITs the laws of physics apparently, and god (Tories go to church) and nature etc.

Similar to Thatcher destroying half of Britains manufacturing and pushing up real unemployment in those areas to 30%++ in order to please the 'city' and beat unions (people) at any cost rather than engaging them into a modern productive enterprise. Big boyz want, big boyze get, a bit like bitty bitty from 'Little britain'

[TheCountOfNowhere]

The "crisis" is not a crisis if you ask me...its been deliberately orchestrated to keep prices ( of houses, consumer goods etc ) high.

This is how it's going to be until we get a collapse or people stand up against the bankers and either unlimited immigration or lack of building.

We appear to be limited freedom slaves.

Edited March 18, 2015 by TheCountOfNowhere

[John51]

I watched 'Cathy Come Home' again last year. It hasn't aged well imo. Dumb woman falls in line with even dumber husband which results in her having a crap life. What a surprise.

[R K]

Redwood was on C4news with Loach last night.

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Complete ideological failure even on his own terms.

Bunch of f&ckwits.

Edited March 18, 2015 by R K

[zugzwang]

35 years of deregulation, privatisation and globalisation have got us to this point. The City of London first undermined and then corrupted the Conservative Party with neoclassical, free market dogma in the late seventies and before extending its hold over Westminster in the decade that followed by turning the Labour Party into a pale imitation of the Tories.

[Guest]

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Did he say how?

[long time lurking]

Redwood was on C4news with Loach last night.

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Complete ideological failure even on his own terms.

Bunch of f&ckwits.

Tow much demand with mortgage numbers knocking on the door of the monthly lows of 2009 ....could not make it up

[PaulParanoia]

Tow much demand with mortgage numbers knocking on the door of the monthly lows of 2009 ....could not make it up

Redwood was on C4news with Loach last night.

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Complete ideological failure even on his own terms.

Bunch of f&ckwits.

And the correct way to reduce demand is to remove the props, HTB, cheap credit etc.

[long time lurking]

And the correct way to reduce demand is to remove the props, HTB, cheap credit etc.

With all that there is no demand ( or should that be credit worthy buyers at these prices) 41k mortgages last month IIRC mid 30`s was the lows of 2009 the highs of pre 2007 was 100k plus

[PaulParanoia]

With all that there is no demand ( or should that be credit worthy buyers at these prices) 41k mortgages last month IIRC mid 30`s was the lows of 2009 the highs of pre 2007 was 100k plus

With approvals so low, the demand must be coming from BTL and other 'investors'. So maybe the question should be ... how to reduce the demand in the BTL sector.

[TheCountOfNowhere]

Redwood was on C4news with Loach last night.

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Complete ideological failure even on his own terms.

Bunch of f&ckwits.

Thats like saying, people are drinking too much water, we must restrict their water supply.

#****s

[pipllman]

I saw the redwood piece yesterday

He is right actually

The market (especially at certain levels in certain parts of central London) is so far removed from a normal market now by ZIRP, HTB etc. that it really does need those artificial stimulants of demand removing - all of them.

Let the market be a market

[righttoleech]

The sickening BTL phenomenom goes from strength to strength. The insurance market now concentrates its advertising on landlords, and the HUTH presenters almost shoot their loads when the greedy objects of their adulation boast of their 'portfolio'. I noticed an article in The Sunday Times recently headlined 'How Many Flats Do You Own'? The days of renting out a bedsit to supplement a pension are passé. The name of the game is the creation of a lower order. Price em out and bleed em dry. Meanwhile those in the right place at the right time to exploit those less fortunate are hailed for their acumen. The propaganda behind BTL is winning but nothing is forever.

[R K]

I saw the redwood piece yesterday

He is right actually

The market (especially at certain levels in certain parts of central London) is so far removed from a normal market now by ZIRP, HTB etc. that it really does need those artificial stimulants of demand removing - all of them.

Let the market be a market

A market response to increased demand (real people needing houses) is to increase supply at a higher price.

Redwood is a disciple of the markets. his own textbook response to increased demand is to build more houses.

he enunciated that wasnt desirable for political reasons and thus he abandoned all pretense that he is a Tory free marketeer (real Tories would understand this and build more houses! In fact thats exactly what they did post war)

he was de facto admitting his ideology has failed and that the best way to resolve it was to remove demand i.e. people.

Falling prices is irrelevant and has very little to do with increasing supply. In fact it has precisely the opposite effect.

Reducing prices (see 2008/9/10 etc) reduces supply i.e. makes the imbalance even worse.

So what you (and others) for some reason keep repeating as some sort of market truth is utter nonsense. Even Redwood could see it was utter rubbish but his political ideology prevents him from admitting it.

If you are really serious about meeting housing demand then you need to increase supply, i.e. build more houses and that will over time reduce real prices.

Since the (land) market is broken - the only way is to do it is by govt intervention on the supply side.

Re-distribution of existing supply has nothing at all to do with increasing new supply to meet demand even though it seems to be a pre-occupation with some people on this site.

Edited March 18, 2015 by R K

[pipllman]

but the first step towards a normal market should be the removal of the artificial demand stimulators

then yes, you are absolutely correct, the market should respond with either increased supply, increased price or some measure of both

but the last thing it should get is HTB3

[R K]

but the first step towards a normal market should be the removal of the artificial demand stimulators

then yes, you are absolutely correct, the market should respond with either increased supply, increased price or some measure of both

but the last thing it should get is HTB3

But markets dont respond to falling prices by increasing supply do they.

As for the idea that a market response to fallin demand is to increase prices, well that isnt even worthy of a response frankly.

Im remaining polite but you are talking utter drivel

[long time lurking]

MMR has made it almost impossible for team liar loan to even move sideways and probably downwards too in a lot of cases, they are zombified by ZIRP, the market is seizing up for most of the country

The BTL market is full of greater fools this is the part of the market Mr banker is concentrating on now...any one would think it`s unregulated

[disenfranchised]

Inability to afford the houses available is preventing the demand resulting in expansion of supply.

There is plenty of demand throughout the south east for 1 bed flats and bedsits to rent at 300-500 a month - the market is unable to meet it, so you end up with the demand being met by beds in sheds and unlicensed HMOs housing 2 or more to a room.

Thats the nature of the crisis in a nutshell - everyone under 40 earning less than 20 grand a year forced to live in student conditions at best and 3rd world conditions at worst.

[pipllman]

But markets dont respond to falling prices by increasing supply do they.

As for the idea that a market response to fallin demand is to increase prices, well that isnt even worthy of a response frankly.

Im remaining polite but you are talking utter drivel

so you think that to correct a market that has been broken by government intervention that has artificially inflated demand is more government intervention, but this time on the supply side?

The truth is that there is no shortage of supply in aggregate

There are some enclaves in the country where more people might want to live if they could afford to, nothing more.

In areas where there is demand for new builds, they are being built. Builders are, understandably, cautious about flooding local markets with new supply in case this unpredictable government does something else that makes their business planning more difficult.

If the current average house price is £300k in an area but the next tranche of buyers can / will only pay £200k then new supply is indeed possible - of houses built to that price point.

[WageslaveX14]

@RK - Demand for housing isn't just about people who want to buy a home to live in, so you can reduce demand without reducing people.

For example, restricting BTL lending would reduce demand. If I have £100k to invest, without a BTL mortgage I can only buy 1 £100k flat. With 25% deposit BTL mortgages, I can buy 4 flats. Reduce the supply of credit and you reduce demand for housing. The implicit and explicit backstopping of lenders (i.e. an anti-free market policy) is one of the biggest drivers of the supply of credit - remove the subsidies and you'll see a drop on demand for housing.

Similarly, by removing tax deductibility of interest payments, shifting council tax onto owners not occupiers, and removing subsidies to lenders to artificially increase lending (which otherwise stoke demand), you decrease both the attractiveness of BTL as an investment and the supply of credit, thereby reducing demand for housing. These are either more consistent or no less consistent with free market principles than the current system.

Don't get me wrong, I disagree with John Redwood on almost every issue, but you can still be a free marketeer and consistently believe in reducing demand for housing.

Edited March 18, 2015 by WageslaveX14

[curious1]

Redwood was on C4news with Loach last night.

Arch Thatcherite supply side free marketeer actually said with a straight face that there was too much demand in the housing market and the solution was to reduce demand.

Complete ideological failure even on his own terms.

Bunch of f&ckwits.

Hah, reduce demand... I guess that's simple. Kill the landlording classes? Maybe he is on to something there....

[Habeas Domus]

Well the other part of a free market is wages.

It would be nice if every time house prices went up by 10% we all got a 10% wage rise.

[Guest]

Well the other part of a free market is wages.

It would be nice if every time house prices went up by 10% we all got a 10% wage rise.

Thereby destroying the value of savings and ensuring that no-one can ever build up enough capital to challenge the established rich. The only way to save would be to buy as many houses as you can as soon as you can.