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

The More That Buyers Can Borrow, The More House Prices Will Go Up

Recommended Posts

At last! Someone in the MSM that gets it.

[...] for most buyers, a home is a leveraged asset: it’s bought with a mortgage. The bigger the deposit they can put down, the more they can borrow. If they pay less stamp duty, or none, they have more cash for a deposit and can take out a bigger mortgage. That stimulates demand for housing, driving up the price by more than the cut in stamp duty. Yes, at the margin some people will be able to buy a home, whereas they couldn't before, if they’re no longer liable for stamp duty. The wider economic effect, though, is to give another twist to the spiral of asset prices.

It’s ominously similar to the single craziest policy advanced by any of the main parties during this election, namely the Tories’ Help to Buy scheme, which should more accurately be called the “Taxpayer-funded Guarantee to Persuade Young People to Take on More Debt” wheeze. This will help some young people who haven’t got enough cash for a deposit, but the main benefit will accrue to existing homeowners, as demand puts upward pressure on prices.
That’s the inescapable reality behind slogans like Mr Osborne’s and Mr Miliband’s. Whichever party is in power, those who already own property are the winners. Thus the economy continues to suffer from labour immobility because of housing inequality across regions and across generations.
If Labour or the Tories were truly reformist, they’d stop these tinkering but destructive interventions.
Edited by Eddie_George

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bigger the deposit they can put down, the more they can borrow

Wtf?!

(agree with the stamp duty stuff)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The less people earn, the less they can afford to pay back.

Let's face it. Until prices collapse and buy to let is banned then there is no housing market, just the biggest scan in history

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps its time to give up and buy a house in cheapest Yorkshire and let it out. If you can't beat them....

Maybe it's time sad lowly paid hair gelled 2nd hand house sales men with too much time on their hands fecked off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could easily pay £10 for a packet of crisps..... Doesn't necessarily equate that that is a right move.

A packet of crisps is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'debt' that people can service has reached saturation point. The end is nigh.

Well someone will probably invent (au-delà de la mort)gage, or in other words a mortgage that your children can inherit along with the house (and then use the money owed to reduce an inheritance tax liability).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The less people earn, the less they can afford to pay back.

Let's face it. Until prices collapse and buy to let is banned then there is no housing market, just the biggest scan in history

Ban BTL????? FFS!!!

Ban all businesses at the same time. Yes that's the answer.

No. The answer is NOT more Socialism. The answer is less.

#banHTB #letmktsetrates #bringbackcapitalism #banbankbailouts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban BTL????? FFS!!!

Ban all businesses at the same time. Yes that's the answer.

No. The answer is NOT more Socialism. The answer is less.

#banHTB #letmktsetrates #bringbackcapitalism #banbankbailouts

This biggest robbery since the humans left the caves has nothing to do with Socialism.

There is a widespread misunderstanding that Socialism = widespread subsidy, which is totally wrong.

In Socialism you get free education and a good career (well paid also) only if you study hard. It has nothing to do whether your parents had funds to send you into the private School where you can get "connected". Also, the banks and so called "financial services" were free of corruption and were not endlessly subsidised by taxpayers. Also, there was no "Help to buy",etc.

I know all this because I lived in Socialism, and in many respects it is much more superior to this "new world order" (cannot call it Capitalism)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban BTL????? FFS!!!

Ban all businesses at the same time. Yes that's the answer.

No. The answer is NOT more Socialism. The answer is less.

#banHTB #letmktsetrates #bringbackcapitalism #banbankbailouts

If you control land, decide who lives on it, make up rules for them and charge them tax, then you are a government.

Landlords are the narrowest most outstretched tendril of the state.

If you want a smaller state, get rid of all the landlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ban BTL????? FFS!!!

Ban all businesses at the same time. Yes that's the answer.

No. The answer is NOT more Socialism. The answer is less.

#banHTB #letmktsetrates #bringbackcapitalism #banbankbailouts

Wouldn't the socialist answer be state ownership of all BTLs as opposed to banning them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This biggest robbery since the humans left the caves has nothing to do with Socialism.

There is a widespread misunderstanding that Socialism = widespread subsidy, which is totally wrong.

In Socialism you get free education and a good career (well paid also) only if you study hard. It has nothing to do whether your parents had funds to send you into the private School where you can get "connected". Also, the banks and so called "financial services" were free of corruption and were not endlessly subsidised by taxpayers. Also, there was no "Help to buy",etc.

I know all this because I lived in Socialism, and in many respects it is much more superior to this "new world order" (cannot call it Capitalism)

Where did you live? Was it in this country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do have socialism. For the 1%. Bailouts, FLS, QE, HTB etc have inflated the assets of the people closest to the ponzi HQ and printing presses.

For the 99% it's free market capitalism. People who throw around socialism like it's some big boogeyman need to go to specsavers. This NWO/crony capitalism wet dream is already here.

While we are internally fighting over whether policies are marxist/statist/socialist, the bankers are still laughing at the peasants.

For anyone who wants a free market, take a look at Chile's history. After Thatcher's wet dream of neoliberalism was enforced by dictatorship, inflation was up to 300% in just weeks. The only reason it lasted so long was because of state sanctioned murder. Still want a free market? £300+ for a loaf of bread? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All interventions must cease. End of story.

Not until the inherent distortions of the existing interventions have been removed, and there are roughly ten centuries of those to get through. Anything else simply allows the existing beneficiaries of government and crown interventions to entrench their advantage of the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do have socialism. For the 1%. Bailouts, FLS, QE, HTB etc have inflated the assets of the people closest to the ponzi HQ and printing presses.

For the 99% it's free market capitalism. People who throw around socialism like it's some big boogeyman need to go to specsavers. This NWO/crony capitalism wet dream is already here.

While we are internally fighting over whether policies are marxist/statist/socialist, the bankers are still laughing at the peasants.

For anyone who wants a free market, take a look at Chile's history. After Thatcher's wet dream of neoliberalism was enforced by dictatorship, inflation was up to 300% in just weeks. The only reason it lasted so long was because of state sanctioned murder. Still want a free market? £300+ for a loaf of bread? ;)

+1

Spot on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wtf. So Pinochet was fatcher's fault now?

No chile was what thatcher was aiming for.

Basically if you can't accept that she was wrong now, after all the evidence is in, then basically you have a mental illness.

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:   26 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.