Help to "Buy" (Sell) to be pumped up

[TheCountOfNowhere]

7 minutes ago, Assume The Opposite said:

HTB gave the economy a sugar rush as you all know in 2013 but it's not strong and stable

The Guardian reported in 2015 the economy had come of its sugar rush high:

"Firstly, the economy has come off its sugar-rush high. Growth was boosted in 2013 and early 2014 by a booming housing market"

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/01/uk-factory-data-debunks-tory-claims-of-economic-recovery

HTB was half the equation....Funding for Lending and Term Funding the other half.  HTB is a marketing ploy to get peolpe to profit the bankers via FLS/TF

Will be interesting to see if Term Funding/FLS are pulled and IRs go up.

Everything else is noise.

[durhamborn]

4 hours ago, Bunfight said:

Exactly the same in Stockton down by the river.  260k for a new 4 bed or 200k for one sold last year and now back up for sale.  Eco homes apparently based on a Scandinavian model - the estate has no defined roads or paths... it looks an absolute mess with cars abandoned all over.

i walk past the development and most that were up for sale 2 years ago still haven't sold and they've just started building more.  HTB advertising everywhere, 'buy this home for £100 per week' etc...

Yep "eco" estates.Amazing really as the gardens are about 12 foot by 12 foot and mostly flagged or pebbled over.Zero wildlife,though i did see a crows nest build behind a Sky dish,no trees anywhere .Im my parents 1920s semi with front and back gardens with hedges loads of wildlife.They should build bigger homes with much bigger gardens and instead have rules,no fences only hedges,each garden must have one native tree etc.That way great for people and wildlife.They have just moved 12 immigrants into the one in Darlington,one was complaining his wife is on the way over wanted to be in the south.We dont need these houses in the north,they are just a scam for the builders.£260k for a house down by the Tees in Stockton 

[rantnrave]

1 minute ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

HTB was half the equation....Funding for Lending and Term Funding the other half.  HTB is a marketing ploy to get peolpe to profit the bankers via FLS/TF

Will be interesting to see if Term Funding/FLS are pulled and IRs go up.

Everything else is noise.

Given the brief time period between FLS and HTB beginning, it's hard to know which is to blame most for the boom. I'm actually thinking FLS has done far more damage, especially with the low savings rates it created encouraging BTL to take-off.

[GreenDevil]

6 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

and IRs go up.

As much chance of that as the current rate of interest rates 0.25%

[Bruce Banner]

3 minutes ago, rantnrave said:

Given the brief time period between FLS and HTB beginning, it's hard to know which is to blame most for the boom. I'm actually thinking FLS has done far more damage, especially with the low savings rates it created encouraging BTL to take-off.

I was about to post the same thoughts. 

[Sawitcoming]

Seeing that the Banks are putting up mortgage rates reported yesterday helped put perspective on this for me.

The Tories know that the whole game is up. The perfect storm is coming. Help to Buy is one of the simplest policies the Tories can implement to "communicate" their support for the market, while actually not really supporting the market beyond their house builder mates.

More and more I see the game is up and that the Help to Buy move is no indication of an intent let alone an ability to prop up the market.

[The Knimbies who say No]

9 hours ago, Dorkins said:

People under 35 are extremely fed up with the situation in the UK hence the rise of Corbyn, the collapse of the Lib Dems and the near extinction of the under 45 Tory voter. All 3 main parties are feeling that youth anger now.

Kinda interesting to look at what is known about party membership figures(caveat:data from parties themselves) Lib Dems have never been higher, possibly ahead of the Conservatives now.

From a few months ago, Lib Dems over 100k members:

https://www.libdems.org.uk/liberal-democrats-highest-membership-local-elections

 

Labour 570k:, Tories...? Tortes can have a minimum of 60k fully paid up members in 2016 going on £1.5M subs at £25 each, but not everyone pays the full amount. Estimates around 100k. can wait for the 2017 membership subs figures to be released

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/31/labour-generated-10-times-party-membership-fees-tories-2016/

 

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2017/09/conservative-party-membership-is-down-by-a-quarter-could-it-drop-below-100000-next-year.html

 

Conceivable that the Tories are the third party in terms of membership, average age of a member is 71. Have we passed 'peak Conservatism'? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Knimbies who say No]

Bit O/T but I Can't help but feel that the issue of FPTP and PR will raise its head again if/as/when the extent of the various parties membership/seat ratios is examined:

Cons 1 seat per 300 members approx

Labour 1:2,000

LD 1:8,000

 

 

Edited October 3, 2017 by The Knimbies who say No

[Si1]

2 hours ago, Sawitcoming said:

Seeing that the Banks are putting up mortgage rates reported yesterday helped put perspective on this for me.

The Tories know that the whole game is up. The perfect storm is coming. Help to Buy is one of the simplest policies the Tories can implement to "communicate" their support for the market, while actually not really supporting the market beyond their house builder mates.

More and more I see the game is up and that the Help to Buy move is no indication of an intent let alone an ability to prop up the market.

It's still a transfer of money to benefit boomers over the rest of society, and a particular subset of amoral baby eating boomers at that. The gloss is wearing off htb rather quickly imho.

 

The Guardian: May's help-to-buy extension is another boon for housebuilders. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwj8aInDY

[spyguy]

1 hour ago, The Knimbies who say No said:

Bit O/T but I Can't help but feel that the issue of FPTP and PR will raise its head again if/as/when the extent of the various parties membership/seat ratios is examined:

Cons 1 seat per 300 members approx

Labour 1:2,000

LD 1:8,000

 

 

Members != voters.

There does need some tweaking to ensure that voting areas are roughly equal. At the mo, Labour do very well, having members of parliment for distrivtis which consist of a man + dog.

 

[moonriver]

18 hours ago, Loui said:

Here's an alternative view from the media

http://www.cityam.com/profile/christian-may

 

And to add to that link and the one from the Guardian, here are a couple more.... maybe more in the media are cynical of this than we originally thought....

http://neweconomics.org/2017/10/four-reasons-help-buy-scrapped-not-extended/

http://moneyweek.com/housing-crisis-politicians-stupid-ideas/

[btl_hater]

33 minutes ago, Si1 said:

It's still a transfer of money to benefit boomers over the rest of society, and a particular subset of amoral baby eating boomers at that. The gloss is wearing off htb rather quickly imho.

 

The Guardian: May's help-to-buy extension is another boon for housebuilders. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwj8aInDY

I have been slightly relieved to hear/read much of the public is negative about this HTB news. I rather misjudged them. I don't speak to many Boomers, mind.

[Mapatasy]

19 minutes ago, moonriver said:

 

And to add to that link and the one from the Guardian, here are a couple more.... maybe more in the media are cynical of this than we originally thought....

http://neweconomics.org/2017/10/four-reasons-help-buy-scrapped-not-extended/

http://moneyweek.com/housing-crisis-politicians-stupid-ideas/

Looks that way.

http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/money/mortgages-bills/why-this-move-wont-help-to-save-the-property-market-11364217797107

 

[Maynardgravy]

7 minutes ago, Mapatasy said:

Looks that way.

http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/money/mortgages-bills/why-this-move-wont-help-to-save-the-property-market-11364217797107

 

'...The current system is lining the homebuilder’s pockets, enriching existing homeowners by boosting their property values and doing nothing for the housing security of poorer households.

Extending it makes no sense and I can’t understand why the Tories can’t see that.'

I think the author answered his own question there.

[The Knimbies who say No]

54 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Members != voters.

There does need some tweaking to ensure that voting areas are roughly equal. At the mo, Labour do very well, having members of parliment for distrivtis which consist of a man + dog.

 

Sure, what I'm getting at is trying to get at is whether there exists the point at which the public pull back the curtain on the Cons and realise there is very little of substance there. An average of what, 200 members per constituency? And this is the Governing Party? Even the conference looks pretty desolate. Surely people are watching and wondering why on earth such a seemingly small group of people have control of the country?

Greens have 45k members.

[Clarky Cat]

4 hours ago, durhamborn said:

Yep "eco" estates.Amazing really as the gardens are about 12 foot by 12 foot and mostly flagged or pebbled over.Zero wildlife,though i did see a crows nest build behind a Sky dish,no trees anywhere .Im my parents 1920s semi with front and back gardens with hedges loads of wildlife.They should build bigger homes with much bigger gardens and instead have rules,no fences only hedges,each garden must have one native tree etc.That way great for people and wildlife.They have just moved 12 immigrants into the one in Darlington,one was complaining his wife is on the way over wanted to be in the south.We dont need these houses in the north,they are just a scam for the builders.£260k for a house down by the Tees in Stockton 

I'd prefer an "eco" house to the standard mass produced tiny boxes you see by the motorway everywhere. 

Meanwhile, in Swansea they're building decent looking council houses to Passivhaus standards, adequate parking etc

Here

[Patient London FTB]

On 01/10/2017 at 6:35 PM, fru-gal said:

 

In Berkeley Homes' defence Help to Buy accounts for a much smaller percentage of their sales than it does for the other major house builders. 

Not because they're somehow more moral, but because they were clever enough and lucky enough to buy central London land in the downturn and bet big on interest from global investors in the rebound. They just don't play in the HTB league. But maybe they will change that stance in future given the decline of the London and SE market. 

[ThePrufeshanul]

25 minutes ago, The Knimbies who say No said:

Sure, what I'm getting at is trying to get at is whether there exists the point at which the public pull back the curtain on the Cons and realise there is very little of substance there. An average of what, 200 members per constituency? And this is the Governing Party? Even the conference looks pretty desolate. Surely people are watching and wondering why on earth such a seemingly small group of people have control of the country?

Greens have 45k members.

there is a big difference between party members and the populace who voted for them.

You have to be a bit of a political wingnut to be a member of a party but theroetically the membership could contain a single, crazy, subscriber but be voted in with all of teh seats on parliament. 

As such the size of the party membership is irrelevant to their legitimacy in governing the country. All that matters is votes.

[Democorruptcy]

If anyone wants to explain what a free market is to Theresa May or express displeasure at builder's overcharging because banks are willing to lend= when they have 20% covered by our taxes, for houses later sold at a loss https://email.number10.gov.uk/

[durhamborn]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Members != voters.

There does need some tweaking to ensure that voting areas are roughly equal. At the mo, Labour do very well, having members of parliment for distrivtis which consist of a man + dog.

 

Its like the reform act of 1832 never happened.

 

 

[rantnrave]

11 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

If anyone wants to explain what a free market is to Theresa May or express displeasure at builder's overcharging because banks are willing to lend= when they have 20% covered by our taxes, for houses later sold at a loss https://email.number10.gov.uk/

Great - many thanks. Always appreciate your input on threads!

[Sawitcoming]

2 hours ago, Si1 said:

It's still a transfer of money to benefit boomers over the rest of society, and a particular subset of amoral baby eating boomers at that. The gloss is wearing off htb rather quickly imho.

 

The Guardian: May's help-to-buy extension is another boon for housebuilders. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwj8aInDY

I totally agree. Its another £10bn mis spent. Does it mean they are really going to prop up house prices? I think they must recognise what is coming and know that they can not.  I think they are virtue signalling and providing a clear story that when TSHTF and house prices crumble that they were doing all they can to support the market. It also helps to sell a few of their mate's slave boxes.

[LTL FTP]

38 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

Its like the reform act of 1832 never happened.

 

 

Theresa May is as effective as a cat flap in an elephant house.

[Patient London FTB]

On 02/10/2017 at 11:41 AM, Sawitcoming said:

So yesterday on Facebook the Shadow Chancellor came out against HTB.  

Labour pretty much have the Tories where they want them.

I suspect they put HTB in their manifesto to outflank the Tories and trick them into extending HTB, making them look to younger people like they're working in the housebuilders' interests. 

Labour also know they just need to wait and sooner or later the London housing market will go off the edge, losing the Tories a lot of votes. They can blame a crash on seven years of Tory decisions. And if the Tories try to bail out the market Labour can scream that it's another bail out for bankers. 

This is of course rather cynical, which is why the biggest chance of Labour missing the open goal in front of them is that they push to hard and voters start to believe the party would be happy to see the economy crash to get into power. That's why the Tories are jumping up and down about the danger of Corbyn and stuff like Labour wargaming a run on the pound. 

 

[Si1]

20 minutes ago, Sawitcoming said:

I totally agree. Its another £10bn mis spent. Does it mean they are really going to prop up house prices? I think they must recognise what is coming and know that they can not.  I think they are virtue signalling and providing a clear story that when TSHTF and house prices crumble that they were doing all they can to support the market. It also helps to sell a few of their mate's slave boxes.

I think this has some substance.