Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Si1

MP argues hpi is damaging

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, voldemort said:

Houses in the desirable cities in China and India (where people are internally migrating) are incredibly expensive - Shanghai for example is almost as expensive as London: https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/compare_cities.jsp?country1=United+Kingdom&country2=China&city1=London&city2=Shanghai&tracking=getDispatchComparison

And Australia does have lots of immigration - more than we do, with a population less than half the size, according to: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australia-population-growth-immigration-dick-smith-2018-3

Shanghai 1 bed flat £755.66 per month, London £1,621.82.

Shanghai population 24.18 million, London 8.14 million.

That disproves my point how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real mystery is why anyone believes that net migration on the scale we've experienced in the last decade is actually good for the economy? The obvious beneficiaries were and are bankers, property developers and landlords. And presumably the migrants themselves who would otherwise be motivated to return home in greater numbers. The rest of us will have to put with the insults and injuries of this folly for the rest of our lives.

Quote

The only major inquiry ever conducted in the UK into the economic impact of immigration was carried out by the Select Committee on Economic Affairs of the House of Lords in 2007/08. In April 2008 they reported that “The overall fiscal impact of immigration is likely to be small, though this masks significant variations across different immigrant groups." (see here) These findings have been endorsed by the OECD which found in its annual report that "estimates of the fiscal impact of immigration vary, although in most countries it tends to be small in terms of GDP and is around zero on average across OECD countries."" (see here).

12. The UK economy is now in a period of economic growth that was forecast by the Office of Budget Responsibility in 2015 to continue over the next few years. Mass immigration contributes to this growth, simply because more people make for a larger economy. This is why it is common to hear the argument that immigration is good for the economy because it increases GDP. However, it does not significantly increase GDP per head so does not necessarily make for a better economy. The most recent OBR report assumed that current high levels of net migration would continue and that this additional inflow would add no more than a tenth of one per cent to GDP per head of the population. The House of Lords report previously referred to stated that "We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration - immigration minus emigration - generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population." (see here).

13. The growing economy is creating more employment opportunities and the numbers of both UK born and migrants in employment are growing but the large pool of labour from abroad has been associated with continued low growth in earnings as employers have not had to offer higher wages (see here). Mass immigration is likely to be holding back wages for those in direct competition for work, which is often those who are already low paid – both British born and previous migrants alike. A study conducted by the Bank of England recently concluded that ‘the immigrant-native ratio has a significant small impact on the average occupational wage rates of that region’ and that the biggest impacts were observed in the semi and unskilled services sector (see here)

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/what-is-the-problem

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, zugzwang said:

The real mystery is why anyone believes that net migration on the scale we've experienced in the last decade is actually good for the economy? The obvious beneficiaries were and are bankers, property developers and landlords. And presumably the migrants themselves who would otherwise be motivated to return home in greater numbers. The rest of us will have to put with the insults and injuries of this folly for the rest of our lives.

More people == more GDP unless they really drag things down heavily. That's "good for the economy." That that doesn't translate into better lives in the country they're coming to is entirely beside the point. The downsides to it aren't material, measurable overall wealth and are therefore meaningless sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Captain Kirk said:

Your source says what I stated.

OK, so you can apply for permanent residency after 5 years of living in the UK. That's a long time to wait for handouts.

According to these stats, 57,111 people were granted permission to stay permanently in the year ending March 2017. Not sure if there is a later figure.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-january-to-march-2017/how-many-people-continue-their-stay-in-the-uk

We would need to know how many are claiming benefits but if it was as high as 50% then that is only 30K people, so a fraction of the 5 million that claim.

125K British people emigrated in 2017.

It is not 5 years for Asylum seekers they get it from one day.

 

Also you still have not proved that EU nationals don't get housing benefit.

Edited by iamnumerate

Share this post


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

It is not 5 years for Asylum seekers they get it from one day.

 

Also you still have not proved that EU nationals don't get housing benefit.

Link here about EU nationals -

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-to-stop-migrants-claiming-housing-benefit

Also, I wasn't including asylum seekers because I can''t believe anyone seriously thinks asylum seekers are responsible for HPI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if immigration was the cause of HPI, why are house prices in the North of the UK, where we've had a lot of immigration since the 50s, cheaper than in the South where we've had less? If anything immigration of people from poorer countries makes housing cheaper.

I could entertain that the immigration of 200,000 millionaires every year to the UK could push up prices but not 200,000 broke people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Riedquat said:

More people == more GDP unless they really drag things down heavily. That's "good for the economy." That that doesn't translate into better lives in the country they're coming to is entirely beside the point. The downsides to it aren't material, measurable overall wealth and are therefore meaningless sentiment.

Let me suggest that GDP per capita is the superior statistic, and point out that the growth rate of this metric has dwindled to zero over the last decade, despite the UK govt delivering an unprecedented £1.5 trillion of sovereign debt into the economy over the same period. Material, measurable and meaningful. The clearest lesson to be drawn from this is that net migration >200,000/yr is hopelessly, pathologically unsupportable.

 

ercchart3016.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Captain Kirk said:

Link here about EU nationals -

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-to-stop-migrants-claiming-housing-benefit

Also, I wasn't including asylum seekers because I can''t believe anyone seriously thinks asylum seekers are responsible for HPI.

From the link.

From the start of April, new EEA jobseekers will no longer be able to access Housing Benefit if they are claiming income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA).

So a self employed Big Issue seller can still claim Housing Benefit? Even if they can't, an immigrant on minimum wage in London (or anywhere for that matter)  can still claim it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Captain Kirk said:

Also, if immigration was the cause of HPI, why are house prices in the North of the UK, where we've had a lot of immigration since the 50s, cheaper than in the South where we've had less? If anything immigration of people from poorer countries makes housing cheaper.

I could entertain that the immigration of 200,000 millionaires every year to the UK could push up prices but not 200,000 broke people.

Facts don't support your assertion. Net migration into the UK since 1997 is entirely without precedent. London and the South East attract by far the greatest number of new arrivals.

latest-im-stats.png

Edited by zugzwang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Captain Kirk said:

Link here about EU nationals -

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-rules-to-stop-migrants-claiming-housing-benefit

Also, I wasn't including asylum seekers because I can''t believe anyone seriously thinks asylum seekers are responsible for HPI.

Did you read your link

Quote

The Housing Benefit changes do not affect UK and Irish Republic nationals, or EEA migrants genuinely self-employed or in a job. EEA nationals who have been working in the UK, and are subsequently made redundant and claim JSA, will not be affected by this measure.

So a EU migrant working 16 hours a week can still get housing benefit!

Share this post


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

Facts don't support your assertion. Net migration into the UK since 1997 is entirely without precedent. London and the South East attract by far the greatest number of new arrivals.

latest-im-stats.png

+1

Share this post


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

Facts don't support your assertion. Net migration into the UK since 1997 is entirely without precedent. London and the South East attract by far the greatest number of new arrivals.

latest-im-stats.png

I never said there wasn't any immigration! Also, London has had a population of around 8m for decades. It goes up and down.

 

Share this post


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

I never said there wasn't any immigration! Also, London has had a population of around 8m for decades. It goes up and down.

 

If you google population of London 2018 you get "8,787,892"

 

For 1997 I found this

Quote

Greater London's population grew by 542,000 to 7.56 million between 1997 and 2007 - an increase of 8%, according to the figures.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7639338.stm

 

It has been going up since 97, it has not being going up and down.  (BTW prices were reasonable in 97).

Share this post


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

Did you read your link

So a EU migrant working 16 hours a week can still get housing benefit!

OK, so an EU national can get housing benefits. I did say I believed it was stopped in 2014. I never stated it as fact. However, I was right that non-EU immigrants can't.

Share this post


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

OK, so an EU national can get housing benefits. I did say I believed it was stopped in 2014. I never stated it as fact.

Was that saying thank you for correcting my incorrect belief that EU nationals cannot get housing benefit? Sorry it was not that clear.

Share this post


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

If you google population of London 2018 you get "8,787,892"

 

For 1997 I found this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7639338.stm

 

It has been going up since 97, it has not being going up and down.  (BTW prices were reasonable in 97).

It was 8.7m in 1939 also -

https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/londons-population-over-time/

I said it goes up and down, which it does.

Share this post


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

Was that saying thank you for correcting my incorrect belief that EU nationals cannot get housing benefit? Sorry it was not that clear.

Yes, thank you for correcting me. However, it doesn't change my belief that immigration is not responsible for the HPI we've seen 2000.

Share this post


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

Yes, thank you for correcting me. However, it doesn't change my belief that immigration is not responsible for the HPI we've seen 2000.

I don't think anything could do that. Demand has no effect on supply in your mind.

Ironically the first person I ever met who thought that immigration had caused HPI was a recent immigrant, he had not been living here long enough to become PC.

 

Edited by iamnumerate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, zugzwang said:

Facts don't support your assertion. Net migration into the UK since 1997 is entirely without precedent. London and the South East attract by far the greatest number of new arrivals.

latest-im-stats.png

 

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

If you google population of London 2018 you get "8,787,892"

 

For 1997 I found this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7639338.stm

 

It has been going up since 97, it has not being going up and down.  (BTW prices were reasonable in 97). 

 

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

For 1997 I found this

Quote

Greater London's population grew by 542,000 to 7.56 million between 1997 and 2007 - an increase of 8%, according to the figures.

  

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7639338.stm

 

It has been going up since 97, it has not being going up and down.  (BTW prices were reasonable in 97). 

A 542,000 increase represents a population increase of 27,100 a year. According to the chart above, we've had over 150,000 immigrants per year over the same period. Hence the first statement claiming facts don't support my assertion is wrong. Facts do support my assertion, and this is clearly wrong -

Quote

London and the South East attract by far the greatest number of new arrivals.

They attract about 18% at most which means 82% go elsewhere.

Share this post


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

I don't think anything could do that. Demand has no effect on supply in your mind.

Ironically the first person I ever met who thought that immigration had caused HPI was a recent immigrant, he had not been living here long enough to become PC.

 

Demand does affect supply in my mind. It is just that broke people don't increase demand and don't cause inflation. Demand is not the same as desire. Demand requires the funds to buy as well as the 'want' to buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I don't think I can edit posts, but another factor debunking the 'immigration is the cause of xxx'  is household size which I believe has been going down over the decades and is roughly the same all over the country at 2.5, a bit higher in cities as you'd expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I'm not pro immigration in case that is how I come across. This is roughly my take -

Things that don't cause HPI

Immigrants
Asylum seekers
A land shortage
A water shortage
People having babies
People on benefits
Homeless people

Things that do cause HPI

Wage inflation
Higher quality housing that people believe is worth paying more for
Housing bubbles caused by -
    Subprime lending
    Fraudulent lending (liar loans, CDOs and other products designed to hide subprime)
    Artificially low interest rates
    Money printing (Q.E etc.l)
    Government schemes that fund subprime lending (e.g. Help to Buy)
    Housing benefits and other taxpayer subsidies that i) stoke demand and ii) put a floor under rental prices.
    Financial and economic ignorance of the public leading to mania and people paying silly prices for houses
    Speculation resulting from all the mania

 

Neither lists are extensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Captain Kirk said:

Demand does affect supply in my mind. It is just that broke people don't increase demand and don't cause inflation. Demand is not the same as desire. Demand requires the funds to buy as well as the 'want' to buy.

I know people (immigrants) with no money who add to demand because the tax payer pays their rent.

And so a BTL can afford the mortgage and not a FTB!

If immigrants have no money and therefore do not add to the demand for rent or buying a house, they would all be homeless, does that seem reasonable to you?

Share this post


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

Also, I'm not pro immigration in case that is how I come across. This is roughly my take -

Things that don't cause HPI

Immigrants

 

Lets do a thought experiment.  Imagine a town where 10% of the town were pensioners and owned their own home.  Suppose they all decided to sell and move to Spain, would that have no effect on house prices?

(After all if immigration has no effect therefore emigration can't either).

Edited by iamnumerate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

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

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

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.