Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Arpeggio

No Place to call home - BBC2 (on now)

Recommended Posts

About shortage of council houses.

Quote councillor Darren Rodwell Leader of Barking & Dagenham Council:

"As the leader of this Council, I cannot, on the allowance I get.....I cannot buy a house in this borough now....that is ridiculous".

Edited by Arpeggio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Maggie and all the I'm alright jack crew.

It's one thing to sell off public assets;

It's another thing to then not replace that lost stock.. but wait it's monstrous to then even stop local councils from borrowing to build council homes. 

 

Edited by Tapori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

About shortage of council houses.

Quote councillor Darren Rodwell Leader of Barking & Dagenham Council:

"As the leader of this Council, I cannot, on the allowance I get.....I cannot buy a house in this borough now....that is ridiculous".

Just up the parking fees and extend the chargeable areas along with double yellows everywhere and then award yourself a pay rise.  That's the way they do it everywhere else.  Invest in it - be a council entrepreneur.

They must have got to the tolerable end of the parking fee ruse and now they're on about being able to afford a house and about a shortage of council houses for them - paid by everyone else of course.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stupidity of the lady working in the council office not accepting that migrants - amongst other things -create a housing shortage had me reaching for the remote. No wonder everything is so messed up. Where do they find these idiots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, spunko2010 said:

The stupidity of the lady working in the council office not accepting that migrants - amongst other things -create a housing shortage had me reaching for the remote. No wonder everything is so messed up. Where do they find these idiots?

There are two possible valid responses to migrants

1) We need more homes for them so lets build more homes

2) We need more homes for them so lets stop them from coming.

 

To say more people has nothing to do with the lack of homes is just crazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tapori said:

Thanks Maggie and all the I'm alright jack crew.

It's one thing to sell off public assets;

It's another thing to then not replace that lost stock.. but wait it's monstrous to then even stop local councils from borrowing to build council homes. 

 

I can assure you that in 97 the problems were not that bad by a long way.    New and blue Labour are far more to blame than Thatcher.  (BTW I thought that she was awful but now things look quite good under her).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I can assure you that in 97 the problems were not that bad by a long way.    New and blue Labour are far more to blame than Thatcher.  (BTW I thought that she was awful but now things look quite good under her).

The twin post war troughs for house prices came under Maggie in 1985 and 1996. So affordability certainly wasn't an issue in 1997. 

Whether the Tories would have presided over a tripling of house prices over the next decade is unknowable. However, putting a BTL enthusiast in charge after Major probably had some bearing.

Blair always got what he wanted; fantasy house prices and education, education, education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, crashmonitor said:

The twin post war troughs for house prices came under Maggie in 1985 and 1996. So affordability certainly wasn't an issue in 1997. 

Whether the Tories would have presided over a tripling of house prices over the next decade is unknowable. However, putting a BTL enthusiast in charge after Major probably had some bearing.

Blair always got what he wanted; fantasy house prices and education, education, education.

Let me make clear that I don't think the Tories would necessarily have been better*.  However blaming them for the tripling in house prices, is like blaming Glen Hoddle for England doing badly at the last world cup - he was not manager then.

*Actually I think the majority of the British people are to blame because they think it is inevitable or even desirable that prices must rise when in other countries it has not done so and don't support policies that would make it cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Let me make clear that I don't think the Tories would necessarily have been better*.  However blaming them for the tripling in house prices, is like blaming Glen Hoddle for England doing badly at the last world cup - he was not manager then.

*Actually I think the majority of the British people are to blame because they think it is inevitable or even desirable that prices must rise when in other countries it has not done so and don't support policies that would make it cheaper.

I like to think of it this way.

pre labour 1997  a decent smallish family house in NR2 was 70-80,000

when they left it was 300k

The funny thing is I graduated in 2000 and got a job 20k and i think its about the same now after all those years for new grads if not worse.

In essence that house in 1997 would have earned 20k+ a year for ten years of labour government.

All I see the tories doing is try to sort it out = down 20% and then chickened out of a full correction and become just as bad = +40% to the new highs.

I don't blame Maggie I was a kid at the time the labour government had plenty of time to reduce prices via tax/policy etc etc

80k / 20 = 4 times earnings so affordable for a couple on the average.

300/20 = 15 times earnings and former buyers priced out .

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fromage Frais said:

I like to think of it this way.

pre labour 1997  a decent smallish family house in NR2 was 70-80,000

when they left it was 300k

The funny thing is I graduated in 2000 and got a job 20k and i think its about the same now after all those years for new grads if not worse.

In essence that house in 1997 would have earned 20k+ a year for ten years of labour government.

All I see the tories doing is try to sort it out = down 20% and then chickened out of a full correction and become just as bad = +40% to the new highs.

I don't blame Maggie I was a kid at the time the labour government had plenty of time to reduce prices via tax/policy etc etc

80k / 20 = 4 times earnings so affordable for a couple on the average.

300/20 = 15 times earnings and former buyers priced out .

 

 

 

 

 

Good point, sadly some places are even worse than Norwich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

When you need to be earning nearly £100k to afford to buy a house in Dagenham you know the country has lost the plot.

You mean they don't pay you to live in Dagenham, or as the locals call it Nam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

I like to think of it this way.

pre labour 1997  a decent smallish family house in NR2 was 70-80,000

when they left it was 300k

The funny thing is I graduated in 2000 and got a job 20k and i think its about the same now after all those years for new grads if not worse.

In essence that house in 1997 would have earned 20k+ a year for ten years of labour government.

All I see the tories doing is try to sort it out = down 20% and then chickened out of a full correction and become just as bad = +40% to the new highs.

I don't blame Maggie I was a kid at the time the labour government had plenty of time to reduce prices via tax/policy etc etc

80k / 20 = 4 times earnings so affordable for a couple on the average.

300/20 = 15 times earnings and former buyers priced out .

 

 

 

 

 

Well Jimmy Carter went on the TV in 1977 to warn against the dangers of greed - and that was him gone at the next election, the people preferred the 'grab everything for yourself' message of the cowboy actor.

The Democrats learned from this that they needed to embrace 'aspiration' (ie greed) or they would become unelectable. The same people that advised Clinton then came over here and advised the people who created 'New Labour'.

So in the end analysis if people only vote for who they think will put the most money in their own particular pockets, and cast aside the social contract in the clamour for [fast, easy] money and material possessions - then they get the leaders and ultimately the country they deserve.

And haven't you just.

Quote

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, interestrateripoff said:

Private rent consumes all the wage of the low paid was that for an ex council house? The country is screwed.

Quite right. Today I phoned up about 3 ex-LA flats for private rent. All 2 bedroomed - coincidentally in the same postcode area quoted by Fromage Frais a few posts above. They have been let already (but are still on Rightmove). The rent was between £550 and £595 a month. Council rents are around £328-350 a month (I'm on the housing register at present).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brown speaks and Blair smirks and then Cameron, Osborne, Clegg and Cable got in and pretty much promised the same.  Then HtB and FFL etc etc and they were no different.  Crooked policies from crooked people in parliament.

For sure the Conservatives would have overseen the multiplying of house prices after 1997 - it's what the LibLabCon does, it's in their DNA

 

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking primarily about Social housing; For that, Thatcher is undeniably responsible for a large part of the problems, from discount selling, demolishing and preventing LA's from borrowing to build social housing.

For house price rises she is also at fault; She backed the monetarists; Read about the ideology behind destroying social housing and triggering the first wave of property mortgage bubbles - Done for the bankers but also to hobble workers, because workers who have a fat mortgage, are less likely to campaign for better politics/wages/conditions/life  - This was very much in mind from the economic architects of that era. They needed obedience from the workers and she sowed the seeds to achieve this.

So she gets the blame for starting it with policy, and continuing it with her favoured ideology, and indoctrinating a populace with pure individualism which manifested itself in the attitude of the 118-BTL crew.

And as for Blair and New Labour? Well, that's a given that I think they are pricks as Thatcher said they were her greatest achievement; She forced them to adopt her politics as she had changed the political and social landscape so brutally.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dare say she went along with it all, even extremely enthusiastically and intelligently, but I think the actual policies and the actual ideas came from further up the chain of command - similar policies were being enacted elsewhere in the western world/developed world pretty much simultaneously.  They didn't get the same publicity as in Britain - no internet for instance.  She was also extremely happy and content to lend her name to the policies and that suited the people really behind the policies.  Nothing like encapsulating something in a single word such as "Thatcherism" if you want to summarize, push and propagate an agenda. 

She was sort of in the right place at the right time for those who wanted to implement those types of policies.

Then similarly, with the propaganda deeply embedded, Blair and Brown were opportunistic chancers who jumped on the bandwagon.  Major and his chums hadn't really helped much with his policies pretty much leaving an open door for NuLabour - although he, mainly by happenchance, did preside over a period of relatively low house prices which was great if you had the inclination and means to buy then - not that easy considering the high levels of insecurity for most people in the mid 90s.  

Britain and the people's well being were last on all of their priorities.  Then the opportunistic chancers Cameron, Osborne, Clegg and Cable et al jumped on board as well.  

People came last.  It's what the LibLabCon does best.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2016 at 9:19 PM, Arpeggio said:

 

"As the leader of this Council, I cannot, on the allowance I get.....I cannot buy a house in this borough now....that is ridiculous".

...but it used to be a volantary role...?...where did that go...?.......sense of entitlement here....time to provide for the people ...but it has to come from the current Government ....Churchill did it right...different time.. different place.....:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/10/2016 at 0:02 AM, MARTINX9 said:

When you need to be earning nearly £100k to afford to buy a house in Dagenham you know the country has lost the plot.

Should it be, I want to buy a house in Dagenham, have I lost the plot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2016 at 9:19 PM, Arpeggio said:

About shortage of council houses.

Quote councillor Darren Rodwell Leader of Barking & Dagenham Council:

"As the leader of this Council, I cannot, on the allowance I get.....I cannot buy a house in this borough now....that is ridiculous".

My bold.

Perhaps it's justice.

Maybe part justice.  Some still to come?

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, crashmonitor said:

The twin post war troughs for house prices came under Maggie in 1985 and 1996. So affordability certainly wasn't an issue in 1997. 

Whether the Tories would have presided over a tripling of house prices over the next decade is unknowable. However, putting a BTL enthusiast in charge after Major probably had some bearing.

Blair always got what he wanted; fantasy house prices and education, education, education.

Major...  if 1996 was the low point from that correction.    Prime Minister: 28 November 1990 – 2 May 1997

Unless you mean continuation from 'what she set in action'.  Anyway, that included house price crashes and allowing market participants to take their losses, rather than others to carry them.  So that's always a win for me.  

They didn't - Labour did.

Edited by Venger

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.