Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Guest

Random Thought: What If Insane House Prices Are To Deliberately Prevent Economic Immigrants From Permanently Settling?

Recommended Posts

Guest

We opened the flood gates to counter an ageing population, stagnated economy and less than replacement birth rates. Great Britain is therefore open to everybody for business.

But the only way to protect the same ageing population is to make it unfair and impossible to buy a house. Including those who are native British.

If you're native Briton and have a long line of ancestors here, you have a far better chance than newcomers in buying property than anybody else in the world.

Outcome we see today: some areas are predominantly native British as only native British can afford to live there and face little inward immigration whereas other areas face incredibly concentrated newcomer immigration and cheaper housing.

If house prices plummet so that all locals can afford, immigration would be far more evenly distributed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We opened the flood gates to counter an ageing population, stagnated economy and less than replacement birth rates. Great Britain is therefore open to everybody for business.

But the only way to protect the same ageing population is to make it unfair and impossible to buy a house. Including those who are native British.

If you're native Briton and have a long line of ancestors here, you have a far better chance than newcomers in buying property than anybody else in the world.

Outcome we see today: some areas are predominantly native British as only native British can afford to live there and face little inward immigration whereas other areas face incredibly concentrated newcomer immigration and cheaper housing.

If house prices plummet so that all locals can afford, immigration would be far more evenly distributed.

Why do they need to buy when housing benefit and tax credits pay for the housing?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We opened the flood gates to counter an ageing population, stagnated economy and less than replacement birth rates. Great Britain is therefore open to everybody for business.

But the only way to protect the same ageing population is to make it unfair and impossible to buy a house. Including those who are native British.

If you're native Briton and have a long line of ancestors here, you have a far better chance than newcomers in buying property than anybody else in the world.

Outcome we see today: some areas are predominantly native British as only native British can afford to live there and face little inward immigration whereas other areas face incredibly concentrated newcomer immigration and cheaper housing.

If house prices plummet so that all locals can afford, immigration would be far more evenly distributed.

I don't understand your argument here. You say that native Britons with a long line of ancestry have a better chance of buying property. Yet, the number of OOs has reduced significantly in recent years and there are large numbers of overseas buyers who buy to leave vast swathes of London, Cambridge and other uk cities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Why do they need to buy when housing benefit and tax credits pay for the housing?.

If the goal is to prevent economic migrants from settling permanently by high prices, these benefits are not enough to secure permanent residence.

Someone who has not bought and receives housing benefit and/or tax credits is still vulnerable to political changes to benefits, immigration and visas etc.

Since buying a property in the UK does not give you automatic residency, a newcomer has to contend with not only high prices but the requirements to receive residency (living here for 5 years)

Edited by phantominvestor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
I don't understand your argument here. You say that native Britons with a long line of ancestry have a better chance of buying property.

A native Briton has a strong currency (well maybe not anymore) in his favour, probability of a higher income, a chain of potential inheritances and access to more benefits from the welfare state than newcomers.

Super high prices blocks all people from owning a home but it impacts poor incoming migrants far more.

The goal being: come here to work, pay your taxes but be priced out so you cannot settle. Stay on the tread mill.

Yet, the number of OOs has reduced significantly in recent years and there are large numbers of overseas buyers who buy to leave vast swathes of London, Cambridge and other uk cities

The fact that OO has reduced significantly in recent times is interesting and that foreign investors could also be behind it.

I believe the market is artificially inflated by government props but the question is: why? Is it really as mundane as money for developers and builders? Or printed money seeking a home?

Or is there a hidden undercurrent of ensuring that nobody in the UK acquires capital housing to keep it a rich mans paradise and to keep everybody working forever? Hence OO rates dropping, potentially for both OO and newcomers alike.

Given the immigration policy of today, what would realistically happen if house prices dropped to historical lows? I suspect immigration would sky rocket drastically. House prices act as a dampener on immigration as I am not sure if you would work long term in a country with no hope of ever settling permanently.

Edited by phantominvestor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A native Briton has a strong currency (well maybe not anymore) in his favour, probability of a higher income, a chain of potential inheritances and access to more benefits from the welfare state than newcomers.

Super high prices blocks people from settling permanently but most of all, it prevents poor incoming migrants.

The goal being: come here to work, pay your taxes but be priced out so you cannot settle.

As with most things, cause and effect are circular and social reflexivity.

Given the immigration policy of today, what would realistically happen if house prices dropped to historical lows? I suspect immigration would sky rocket drastically. House prices act as a dampener on immigration as I am not sure if you would work long term in a country with no hope of ever settling permanently.

It it TCs that are drawing immigrants here, nowt to do with the cost of buying property. Stop TCs and immigration would dry to a trickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most countries around the world have legal restrictions on foreigners buying land and property, in very many places it is totally impossible. Why not adopt this commonplace approach rather than a very destabilizing hpi project??? Sorry but your thesis is far fetched imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most countries around the world have legal restrictions on foreigners buying land and property, in very many places it is totally impossible. Why not adopt this commonplace approach rather than a very destabilizing hpi project??? Sorry but your thesis is far fetched imo.

Half of 'Londoners' now were born abroad - how do you decide who is a foreigner or a local?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I knew an immigrant who arrived with nothing yet built up quite a portfolio of London property.

That was a different world: that brief post-war era when property was cheap even in London. So a German Jew who had arrived on the Kindertransport as sole survivor from his family found himself in the right place at the right time. His generation of landlords were basically like the Russian Oligarchs: people who grabbed the opportunity when valuable assets were going legally but very cheap. The parents of today's 'boomers'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

phantominvestor, if the plan was to make it difficult for immigrants to settle in the UK, it's plainly not working. As others have said, immigrants are more than happy to receive free money from the tax payer (TC, HB, CB) and just by my kids last school experience, many Eastern European families do settle in the UK (about 30% of my kids school was EE).

In fact, the Tories including May have explicitly stated that even newly arrived immigrants will never ever be "kicked out" of the UK - I suspect when Article 50 is passed, they will hand out permanent residency cards to one and all who happen to be in the UK at that time. I also suspect that FOM will continue for at least another 5 years, if not 10. FOM is not going away anytime soon. A transient, fluid demographic is coming to a town centre near you if it hasn't already arrived.

High house prices have choked the wider economy for at least the last 15 years now. I don't have an answer as to WHY governments around the world have an infatuation for high house prices - but I DO know governments do NOT operate with the best interests of the public at heart, regardless of what they say.

Edited by canbuywontbuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We opened the flood gates to counter an ageing population, stagnated economy and less than replacement birth rates. Great Britain is therefore open to everybody for business.

But the only way to protect the same ageing population is to make it unfair and impossible to buy a house. Including those who are native British.

If you're native Briton and have a long line of ancestors here, you have a far better chance than newcomers in buying property than anybody else in the world.

Outcome we see today: some areas are predominantly native British as only native British can afford to live there and face little inward immigration whereas other areas face incredibly concentrated newcomer immigration and cheaper housing.

If house prices plummet so that all locals can afford, immigration would be far more evenly distributed.

Incorrect.

If house prices plummet the Uk economy goes into a severe recession, the pound drops sharply and people don't want to move to the UK.

(I'm not arguing for the current insane house prices to stay high, just calling it how i see it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the goal is to prevent economic migrants from settling permanently by high prices, these benefits are not enough to secure permanent residence.

Someone who has not bought and receives housing benefit and/or tax credits is still vulnerable to political changes to benefits, immigration and visas etc.

Since buying a property in the UK does not give you automatic residency, a newcomer has to contend with not only high prices but the requirements to receive residency (living here for 5 years)

In no other country of the world would five years give you permanent access to residency and social security benefits because the host country would quickly go bankrupt. The point is, virtually nobody pays their way in life...retirement and health benefits in the West are currently squared by adulterating the currency, selling houses that were built centuries ago to the Chinese etc and plundering natural resources. Current death bed bill is £250,000 per capita. But in the la la land of the UK we go down the route that immigrants are equal to the indigenous population. If five years gives you access to thirty years retirement, unlimited health benefits and by and large minimum income guarantees and housing benefit then we have really lost the plot. Do we seriously think any other country in the world would extend this sort of charity to a Brit that decides they want to live in another country for five years.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In no other country of the world would five years give you permanent access to residency and social security benefits because the host country would quickly go bankrupt. The point is, virtually nobody pays their way in life...retirement and health benefits in the West are currently squared by adulterating the currency, selling houses that were built centuries ago to the Chinese etc and plundering natural resources. But in the la la land of the UK we go down ther route that immigrnats are equal to the indigenous population. If five years gives you access to thirty years retirement, unlimited health benefits and by and large minimum income guarantees and housing benefit then we have really lost the plot. Do we seriously think any other country in the world would extend this sort of charity to a Brit that decides they want to live in another country for five years.

Mate of mine offspring did a uni placement year in California. On finishing uni, was offered a job by same firm. The hoops that had to be jumped through for a one year visa were a wonder to watch. After year, USA would not extend the visa, even though the firm was sponsoring. So back to Blighty. Yes, no other country will extend the welcome we do, even when a person can pay their way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In no other country of the world would five years give you permanent access to residency.

You mean, in every EU country.

That five-year rule is one of the main planks of free movement. The idea is that after five years (during which you contribute - just coming on a long holiday doesn't count, and you don't qualify for the dole or pension), you've earned your right to be treated on the same terms as a native.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mate of mine offspring did a uni placement year in California. On finishing uni, was offered a job by same firm. The hoops that had to be jumped through for a one year visa were a wonder to watch. After year, USA would not extend the visa, even though the firm was sponsoring. So back to Blighty. Yes, no other country will extend the welcome we do, even when a person can pay their way

So the US use our skills for may be a decade or so then that's it...see you thanks for your valuable contribution to our Exchequer but don't expect anything in return. Here, migrant can arrive at 62, do 5 years as a car washer and presumably be set up in retirement for the next thirty years. Am I wrong with this assumption?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean, in every EU country.

That five-year rule is one of the main planks of free movement. The idea is that after five years (during which you contribute - just coming on a long holiday doesn't count, and you don't qualify for the dole or pension), you've earned your right to be treated on the same terms as a native.

As I have pointed out very few people pay their way in life, we are all liabilities eventually because of our super generous retirement and health insurance. To allow people to access these after just five years of access level jobs is a nonsense. It also means we are going for short term Exchequer gains for long term liabilities.

The fact we have to square these liabilites by plundering natural resourses, selling the family silver...land and houses etc to the exporting countries, adding to debt, means migration is a bad way to fund deficits in the long run.

And surely it is the function of government to protect the population here, not extend those unfunded benefits to the whole world. Have a sensible qualification like 20 years because at the end of the day there will always be a minimum income guarantee (and full housing benefit) at retirement whatever the Universal pension rules might imply.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Half of 'Londoners' now were born abroad - how do you decide who is a foreigner or a local?

Ask them what Trigger calls Rodney.

I say that in jest - but I reckon it would actually be a pretty good test. I guess 90% of 'locals' would know it without even thinking about it. And 99% of 'foreigners' would not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask them what Trigger calls Rodney.

I say that in jest - but I reckon it would actually be a pretty good test. I guess 90% of 'locals' would know it without even thinking about it. And 99% of 'foreigners' would not.

Born and bred but no idea what you're talking about! I could cheat with google obviously. Wild guess: it was an old TV show where the guy had a Reliant Robin, I am fairly sure he was Rodney and it is not a very common name. You might as well say which slag on eastenders is shaging which chav!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Born and bred but no idea what you're talking about! I could cheat with google obviously. Wild guess: it was an old TV show where the guy had a Reliant Robin, I am fairly sure he was Rodney and it is not a very common name. You might as well say which slag on eastenders is shaging which chav!

That can be the back up question !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"how do you decide who is a foreigner...?" Iots of rational ways to define this in law...take your pick and then deny rights of property ownership to those outside scope...easy. This is an approach TPTB would take if they had the best interests of wider existing population at heart....but they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Housing benefits encourage immigrants to stay so I doubt that is the reason (also EU immigrants get HTB).

[i know a Latin American immigrant who is a single parent and would like to go home but doesn't want to have to pay rent again].

Edited by iamnumerate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the OP, I don't think high house prices are a deterrent. I moved to France as an immigrant in 1990. House prices in Paris were peak bubble territory at that time. I just rented. 8 years, then bought a house on the Riviera when no-one else was buying due to the crash. And IR's were at a reasonable 6% at the time ;)

I wouldn't expect it to be very different this time around.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   101 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.