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

Home Ownership much lower

Recommended Posts

BBC saying home ownership rates much lower than reported. 

Could be good if they do change the way it's measured as would really be a heads up to policy makers in government 

Share this post


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

Thanks for that. Looks like statistics were interpreted to suit their agenda as usual. I can't find the BBC link but did find the below. If you've got the BBC link that would be handy to edit into your post.

BBC just reporting a bit of work from the Resolution Foundation (link).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go

Quote

The think tank, which lobbies for low-income families, calculated that 51% of families or individuals own a home.

It is calling for more attention to be paid to the millions of others who rent.

"Our new analysis shows that we should perhaps obsess a little less about homeowners, and think more about how the other half live," it said.

Even stevens - tipping point just about reached if their methodology has merit. Thing might be about to start getting interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fully Detached said:

Here you go

Even stevens - tipping point just about reached if their methodology has merit. Thing might be about to start getting interesting.

Very significant electorally if true. It may explain the Tory party's sudden loss of enthusiasm for BTL. Rule number one in politics is to get elected. Those LL relying on debt to fund their property empires should be worried because the government is probably not going to be making life any easier for them in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, stormymonday_2011 said:

Very significant electorally if true. It may explain the Tory party's sudden loss of enthusiasm for BTL. Rule number one in politics is to get elected. Those LL relying on debt to fund their property empires should be worried because the government is probably not going to be making life any easier for them in the future.

Exactly - bring it on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think tipping point has been reached. Hence all the various actions which show a clear change in tune from the government.
2020 will be the fight for the renters votes unless the conservatives can turn things around very very quickly indeed.

They are making a good start but its too little, and not drastic enough. BTL should be banned, HTB ISA should be ramped up with Gov contribution.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

Very significant electorally if true. It may explain the Tory party's sudden loss of enthusiasm for BTL. Rule number one in politics is to get elected. Those LL relying on debt to fund their property empires should be worried because the government is probably not going to be making life any easier for them in the future.

Exactly you can give the electorate bull but you need to make sure you have the correct information.

When you are in a democracy start worrying when you are in the minority and the majority want what you have.

I bet the trajectory is pretty worrying also and not getting people in houses is suicide for the conservative party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fully Detached said:

Here you go

Even stevens - tipping point just about reached if their methodology has merit. Thing might be about to start getting interesting.

IIRC ONS had it well in favour of the havenot`s by 2021-2  this was not long after George introduced C24 tax changes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do we mean anyway.

Is it the percentage of properties owned or on a mortgage occupied by the people who own them.

Or is it the percentage of the population who live in a home they own individually or jointly?

i expect the latter is much lower. Adult kids living at their parents homes don't own but aren't renting either - so how are they treated - but their parents are living in a home they own?

Given how many people live in HMOs and shared flats I expect the proportion of people who own at least one home is much less than the official stats suggest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, long time lurking said:

IIRC ONS had it well in favour of the havenot`s by 2021-2  this was not long after George introduced C24 tax changes 

What interests me most is how slowly this changes - if the housing market turns like an oil tanker, the ownership levels move at almost glacial speeds. Which means that once the political weight gets chucked behind our side of the scrum, I think it's likely to stay that way for quite a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

Very significant electorally if true. It may explain the Tory party's sudden loss of enthusiasm for BTL. Rule number one in politics is to get elected. Those LL relying on debt to fund their property empires should be worried because the government is probably not going to be making life any easier for them in the future.

True, so why aren't Labour or Lib Dems proposing anything? I suppose they have to tread a fine line between fixing the BTL disaster and upsetting legitimate home owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

which is always a risk. As when you do come to buy in the next few years, houses will no longer being going up in value, but decreasing even if it takes time.

But having waited so long, the money doesnt really matter. Its about securing a place with low risks on a small mortgage. Not about winning the lottery, which we all know is a fallacy anyway if you ever wanted to trade up again.

We are going to see some harsh crackdowns on BTL'ers, and more building and more taxes on multi owners. I wonder if house builders are work a punt, although im always uneasy with them, as i see them as part of the problem. 

Edited by jiltedjen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jiltedjen said:

BBC saying home ownership rates much lower than reported. 

Could be good if they do change the way it's measured as would really be a heads up to policy makers in government 

Do they really care if they are on the right side of prosperity?......is it not the poor that keep the rich and make them richer?.....as a proportion of income those with the least pay the most for almost everything.;)

Share this post


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

Exactly you can give the electorate bull but you need to make sure you have the correct information.

When you are in a democracy start worrying when you are in the minority and the majority want what you have.

I bet the trajectory is pretty worrying also and not getting people in houses is suicide for the conservative party.

The irony is that the Labour party which laid the egg of this disaster will be the beneficiaries when it hatches. The Tories should have made reducing housing costs their number one priority when they got into office with the Liberal Democrats in 2010 and dumped the blame in Labour but they were so petrified of what happened to them under John Major when prices crashed in the early 1990s that they tried to fiddle their way round the issue and just made things worse. In particular they failed to realise that the electoral fallout from an HPC this time would not necessarily be a rerun of the 1990s as it was highly levered BTL landlords who were likely to be the biggest losers and they are of almost no significance electorally. They should have been thrown to the wolves immediately not encouraged to expand their property holdings. Just another example of Cameron's complete craveness and uselessness as PM

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ThePiltdownMan said:

True, so why aren't Labour or Lib Dems proposing anything? I suppose they have to tread a fine line between fixing the BTL disaster and upsetting legitimate home owners.

Because they were late to the party ,they all now know (since brexit vote) they will need to propose something original to define them  from team blue, going along with the status quo is not going to work .....hence team yellow are now promising a second referendum 

Overall they will all know what the demographics mean 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have been upset as a labour voter that they are banging on about nukes etc, when they should be screaming at the top of their voices WE WILL CRASH HOUSE PRICES.

I think they would do very well. But i have hardly seen anything. this is very upsetting.

I think come 2019 labour will be promising massive BTL bans etc, and will strive to out-do the conservatives. But at the moment the Conservatives are surprising even labour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ThePiltdownMan said:

True, so why aren't Labour or Lib Dems proposing anything? I suppose they have to tread a fine line between fixing the BTL disaster and upsetting legitimate home owners.

It is in the Parliamentary Labour Party's electoral  interests for the poor to remain poor and for renters to outnumber home owners. They have nothing to gain from increasing home ownership or people accumulating capital assets in any other form. The lesson they drew from the 1980s is that increasing property ownership means more Tory voters. I thought after decades of evidence everyone knew this by now. Why are people so naive.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

The irony is that the Labour party which laid the egg of this disaster will be the beneficiaries when it hatches. The Tories should have made reducing housing costs their number one priority when they got into office with the Liberal Democrats in 2010 and dumped the blame in Labour but they were so petrified of what happened to them under John Major when prices crashed in the early 1990s that they tried to fiddle their way round the issue and just made things worse. In particular they failed to realise that the electoral fallout from an HPC this time would not necessarily be a rerun of the 1990s as it was highly levered BTL landlords who were likely to be the biggest losers and they are of almost no significance electorally. They should have been thrown to the wolves immediately not encouraged to expand their property holdings. Just another example of Cameron's complete craveness and uselessness as PM

I think they knew the problem existed but never envisaged the unintended consequences of Zirp ,MMR and banning I.O for OO   i think it was to late by the time they did 

From where i was sitting it was obvious in 2010 what was going on everyone  i knew that had paid "silly" money for two /three bed terraces that i thought would go through the floor (they did fall 15-20%) were bailed out by BTL ,BTL has set and raised the floor back up to the peak since then, as they have been the only people in the game at that end of the market for the last 5 years .....i`m glad to say though the tide has definitely changed ....and i think the supply of greater fools is rapidly running out 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

It is in the Parliamentary Labour Party's electoral  interests for the poor to remain poor and for renters to outnumber home owners. They have nothing to gain from increasing home ownership or people accumulating capital assets in any other form. The lesson they drew from the 1980s is that increasing property ownership means more Tory voters. I thought after decades of evidence everyone knew this by now. Why are people so naive.

Eh labour had there greatest victories whilst stood on team blues coat tails and this was after the 80`s, they stopped fighting for the working class in the 70`s ....the target  over the last twenty years have been the middle class 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stormymonday_2011 said:

The irony is that the Labour party which laid the egg of this disaster will be the beneficiaries when it hatches. The Tories should have made reducing housing costs their number one priority when they got into office with the Liberal Democrats in 2010 and dumped the blame in Labour but they were so petrified of what happened to them under John Major when prices crashed in the early 1990s

Major won the 1992 general election, 3 years into a proper HPC. The lesson of 1992 is that having a HPC on your watch does not equal losing the next election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, long time lurking said:

Eh labour had there greatest victories whilst stood on team blues coat tails and this was after the 80`s, they stopped fighting for the working class in the 70`s ....the target  over the last twenty years have been the middle class 

While Blair may have pitched at middle class voters Labour has always relied on its core vote which most definitely is not the property owning classes

I suggest you recheck the results and the electoral maps form 1966 and 1997

Labours win in 1966 took 48% of the popular vote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1966

Blair took 43.8% in his 'landslide' victory in 1997

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1997

Those maps of core labour voting areas look almost identical to me.

The run of Labour victories were as much down to the rise of the Liberal Democrat vote scooping up Tory voters in marginals as anything else. Not a small element of that was  that was disgruntled middle class voters who lost out in HPC1. There were 1.6 million homes in negative equity in the mid 1990s and many were concentrated in Conservative consttuencies.This is why Tories are reticent about crashing the Housing Market. Labour were the winners from the last HPC and theTories fear that might happen again.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

Major won the 1992 general election, 3 years into a proper HPC. The lesson of 1992 is that having a HPC on your watch does not equal losing the next election.

 

That is true but Labour pretty much blew the 1992 election with their appalling campaign when it was assumed by many, including Neil Kinnock, that they were a shoe in

Moreover the impact of HPC 1 went on a lot longer than April 1992 which is when.the election was held.

The housing market did not bottom until mid decade and its effects continued to be felt even after property prices started to rise again.

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/indices-nationwide-national-inflation.php

Moreover, it needs to be remembered that an HPC may appear in prices much earlier than it impacts individuals personally and financially.

It takes time for family break ups, job losses, forced employment moves etc to apply the effect directly to a big chunk of the population. As a consequence the full cost of negative equity may not have been apparent to everyone in April 1992.

This time there are probably far fewer exposed OO compared to BTL investors so the electoral consequences of crashing the property market may be far less. You can be sure that the political parties are crunching the numbers on this point. I suspect each HPC has its own distinct features which will only be fully understood once it rolls out to its conclusion. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by stormymonday_2011

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:   28 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.