Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Si1

What is the governmnent's housing strategy, the unwritten summary?

Recommended Posts

My view is that they want to increase building rates and quality of the letting market. But they do not want an identifiable nominal housing market crash in the short to medium term, even though they are happy to see real values fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares what a house is worth if not borrowing against it or have any plans to sell it?.......Thousands of homes will never be sold any time soon, know of many homes not sold for over 50 years or more, they stay in families or sometimes rented out 'in it for the long term'.......What happened when most of the decent housing stock becomes owned outright and stays that way?.......;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

More building, smaller house sizes, higher prices.

 

 

Two for the size of one and the price of four.....Pack 'em in pile 'em high.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, winkie said:

Two for the size of one and the price of four.....Pack 'em in pile 'em high.;)

And lots of immigrants to fill them.

People are deluded if they think the builders/bankers and Bozo's in Westminster will stop without a shock of some kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Si1 said:

Did they reverse anything ?


This is the sort of problem the british people face.  BTLers/Bankers/Builders....all with an ear to the Chancellor and PM.

 

Also known as FRAUD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

And lots of immigrants to fill them.

People are deluded if they think the builders/bankers and Bozo's in Westminster will stop without a shock of some kind.

I can't get on the blame the immigrant band waggon.......They have been actively encouraged to move here by all governments because they pay takes and spend money into the economy.....Why most people living in this country decend from another place, people have always moved and worked and lived all over the world, only one world......The point is it is not all take, take, and not everyone has directly benefited.....If policies are made, everyone should feel that they will benefit.....In other words, if you encourage it you must see it is provided for people are integrated, not see that things are getting worse for everyone because the infastructure and local resources have been neglected......Only natural that people will try to do the best for themselves and their families, if it means moving so be it....see what then left with.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, winkie said:

I can't get on the blame the immigrant band waggon.......

Oh dont get me wrong.

I dont blame the immigrants.  I blame the government/bankers/corporations.

EVERYONE would move country for a better life if they had to.

Exactly what you are saying.

The problem is TPTB wont stop, they're forcing more and more people into smaller and smaller spaces using less and less available money.

It's a powder keg and the BrExit vote is just the start of it.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

Oh dont get me wrong.

I dont blame the immigrants.  I blame the government/bankers/corporations.

EVERYONE would move country for a better life if they had to.

Exactly what you are saying.

The problem is TPTB wont stop, they're forcing more and more people into smaller and smaller spaces using less and less available money.

It's a powder keg and the BrExit vote is just the start of it.

I blame mass immigration, the Government and liberal media who allowed it/supported but not immigrants*.  Let me explain the difference, if you were on a ferry that was full and they let more passengers on, the problem would be the excess passengers but them individually would not be responsible as they were told it was safe to go on.  The distinction is subtle but should be obvious to anyone intelligent.

*Although I do blame the scum who lie about being in danger when they are not, which is quite a lot of people.  Of course we should be like the US not let Asylum seekers go on holiday to their native countries.  A friend of mine from South America has a friend who got Asylum in the US and is not allowed to visit any of Northern South America as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS I also blame pro single parents for being selfish and not moving to places of less demand to free up space in London.

I think the Government strategy is "Oh no we have a big problem, what can we do?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

 

Open borders and the welfare state are incompatible.

Anyone who argues for the former for lots of economic and socially responsible reasons is also by definition, arguing for the destruction of the latter.

That is the simplest fact of life that many well meaning people fail to see.

 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the unwritten plan has always been to inflate the debts away while avoiding any kind of crash, and obfuscate the issues in the hope that people won't wake up and vote them into oblivion. This is probably true of at least the three major can kicking parties.

 

Edited by Parkwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Parkwell said:

I think the unwritten plan has always been to inflate the debts away while avoiding any kind of crash, and obfuscate the issues in the hope that people won't wake up and vote them into oblivion. This is probably true of at least the three major can kicking parties.

 

And use help to buy as a kind of throttle to limit the rate of nominal house price falls

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

 

Open borders and the welfare state are incompatible.

Anyone who argues for the former for lots of economic and socially responsible reasons is also by definition, arguing for the destruction of the latter.

That is the simplest fact of life that many well meaning people fail to see.

 

 

Goes without saying.....Common sense. Likes of a shop handing out free gifts to all who have the will and ability to get there, those with the greatest need got given most help......I would also say there are thousands who came on holiday/ study and decided to stay, there are many unaccountable people living here and all over the world, many can't and do not claim benefits.......If the people do not come from one place they will most certainly come from another, often nobody really knows where some came from, has always been like that.....Just saying it is a good thing to help others for a set period of time, but they should also give something back to society, and become a friendly integrated part of society....the free lunch should not last forever, goes for everyone.;)

Share this post


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

I think the Government strategy is "Oh no we have a big problem, what can we do?"

I'd say it's closer to "Oh no we have a big problem, but there will still be enough comfortably housed oldies about in 2020 that we can win that election without doing anything, so let's leave this one for a future government."

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


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

 Of course we should be like the US not let Asylum seekers go on holiday to their native countries.  A friend of mine from South America has a friend who got Asylum in the US and is not allowed to visit any of Northern South America as a result.

That's a very good point...if an asylum seeker returns to their native country on holiday it follows that that country is no longer dangerous.  Why should asylum be permanent?  I would argue that giving asylum does not need to mean giving citizenship with all that follows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Wayward said:

That's a very good point...if an asylum seeker returns to their native country on holiday it follows that that country is no longer dangerous.  Why should asylum be permanent?  I would argue that giving asylum does not need to mean giving citizenship with all that follows.

If we followed that idea than Yasmin Alibhai Brown would no longer be here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Si1 said:

And use help to buy as a kind of throttle to limit the rate of nominal house price falls

 

Since the introduction of Abenomics in Japan in 2013 there's been a veritable construction boom in Tokyo and Osaka, much of it on plots barely big enough to park a car (so-called jutaku houses).

Direct comparisons with Japan can often be unreliable but I see no reason in principle to believe that the introduction of micro-houses over here will lead automatically to house price falls, especially when these developments are being underwritten by central govt.

House price change (Tokyo), year on year.

97_graph1.jpg

 

Source: Land Institute of Japan.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

 

Since the introduction of Abenomics in Japan in 2013 there's been a veritable construction boom in Tokyo and Osaka, much of it on plots barely big enough to park a car (so-called jutaku houses).

Direct comparisons with Japan can often be unreliable but I see no reason in principle to believe that the introduction of micro-houses over here will lead automatically to house price falls, especially when these developments are being underwritten by central govt.

House price change (Tokyo), year on year.

97_graph1.jpg

 

Source: Land Institute of Japan.

 

Surely microhouses will just lead to shrinkflation.  A bit like with renting where more people share than have their own flat etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The overall housing strategy if you consider Britain as a business in competition with other countries seems to be similar to any business employing people.

Typically if it's an open plan office sub-divide the floor space into the smallest units possible and cram workers into ever smaller spaces to keep down the company overheads and the costs of servicing the units.  No doubt some company manager would describe the units in the office getting ever smaller as an "innovative" idea rather than a bit more accurately as penny pinching.

The company is broke now but crazy lenders (the owner's pals and bailout chums) still lend it money as with so many (tiny) units the company must be doing well even though it's stopped producing.  Now and then they've used the photocopiers to print up some extra money to pay some of the outgoings.

The current government's housing strategy is to keep up the pretence up for as long as possible with as little overt change in policy as possible.

The company owners and managers spotted the opportunities early and are trousering as much of the borrowed money for themselves as possible.  Some of the office unit dwellers saw what they were doing/which way the wind was blowing and decided to do likewise.

Buyer beware.

 

 

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Parkwell said:

I think the unwritten plan has always been to inflate the debts away while avoiding any kind of crash, and obfuscate the issues in the hope that people won't wake up and vote them into oblivion. This is probably true of at least the three major can kicking parties.

 

Sadly I think this is true, Its been done many times before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Parkwell said:

I think the unwritten plan has always been to inflate the debts away while avoiding any kind of crash, and obfuscate the issues in the hope that people won't wake up and vote them into oblivion. This is probably true of at least the three major can kicking parties.

 

"Inflating the debts away" means inflating the thing that is used to pay off mortgages i.e. wage inflation. There is no significant wage inflation around. If TPTB want to "inflate the debts away" they aren't doing a very good job of it.

Share this post


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

"Inflating the debts away" means inflating the thing that is used to pay off mortgages i.e. wage inflation. There is no significant wage inflation around. If TPTB want to "inflate the debts away" they aren't doing a very good job of it.

I think they are doing a bad job of it, as with so many things. One problem is the major parties are so focus group and knee jerk orientated they no longer have much in the way of joined up ideological strategy. Not that I can understand at least. There seems to be a vague hope inflation will deal with it as they have manipulated the stats and ignored inflation at over 5% for substantial periods, while flooding the markets with funny money. They have been increasing the minimum wage and personal allowance but achieving larger wage inflation will require tackling benefit reforms, out sourcing, zero hours, and immigration to varying degrees. Much of this is either against their current agendas or too unpalatable for career politicians. I doubt half of them have the nous for it.

For the record I really don’t want a plan like this to succeed. It’s a terrible idea. I’d rather see it all crash and burn. I’ll take my chances. The medicine should have been taken in 2008 but few have the bottle for it.

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.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    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.