Rent controls - James O' Brien - LBC on now

[shavedchimp]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/national/radio/player/

Lot of sense being spoken. Have a listen

[Trump Invective]

Just now, shavedchimp said:

https://www.lbc.co.uk/national/radio/player/

Lot of sense being spoken. Have a listen

Yup. Wonder if the callers agree!?

[Trump Invective]

Oh dear. The first caller is insane.

[Trump Invective]

Digging a spectacular hole for herself 

[Trump Invective]

I think Obrien and the first caller just singlehandedly succeeded in destroying the stance of the rentier. This phone in needs maximum publicity.

[Locke]

https://www.businessinsider.com/does-rent-control-work-no-it-actually-increases-rent-prices-for-most-people-2015-9?r=US&IR=T

[crashbaby]

6 hours ago, Locke said:

https://www.businessinsider.com/does-rent-control-work-no-it-actually-increases-rent-prices-for-most-people-2015-9?r=US&IR=T

Have you taken a good look at the arguments there? They seem to revolve around the idea that only the more modest homes are rent-controlled, so landlords invest less in cheap homes and developers build more luxury homes. Strange how it never occurred to the author that maybe all rental stock could be rent-controlled.

Oh, and the second argument is that rent controls "ruin people's lives" because going from a rent-controlled flat to a market-rate flat sucks because the market rate is higher. Somehow that doesn't convince me to hate rent controls.

It's reasonable to be cautious and explore the consequences of rent-control, but that article is just crap. I don't think rent control is the best solution to the current housing problems, but it would still be an improvement over what we have now.

[Buzzardo2]

Please can someone indicate at which point in the podcast this part starts?

 

I regularly turn on O'Brien in the morning when I'm in the car, because I think it's important to know what people who I REALLY disagree with me are thinking. I'm open to being wrong, and to learning...

 

But he is such a sneering, condescending, intellectually dishonest and sometimes downright plain thick-as-pig-sh!t "presenter," that I often find myself turning right back off again in less than ten minutes - before I scream myself hoarse, at the constant parading of his banal and poorly-informed opinions as "fact."

 

With that in mind, I'd love to hear the right part of the podcast, but I'm not willing to pollute my ears with his utter bellendery to trawl through and find it!!!

 

Thanks.

 

B2

[mrtickle]

Thought you were describing Jon Gaunt there ^^

 

[macca13]

7 hours ago, Buzzardo2 said:

Please can someone indicate at which point in the podcast this part starts?

 

I regularly turn on O'Brien in the morning when I'm in the car, because I think it's important to know what people who I REALLY disagree with me are thinking. I'm open to being wrong, and to learning...

 

But he is such a sneering, condescending, intellectually dishonest and sometimes downright plain thick-as-pig-sh!t "presenter," that I often find myself turning right back off again in less than ten minutes - before I scream myself hoarse, at the constant parading of his banal and poorly-informed opinions as "fact."

 

With that in mind, I'd love to hear the right part of the podcast, but I'm not willing to pollute my ears with his utter bellendery to trawl through and find it!!!

 

Thanks.

 

B2

+1

[shavedchimp]

It's the second hour of the programme

[bear.getting.old]

James O Brien is simply the biggest ***** I have ever had the misfortune to ever hear on the radio. I am not a violent man but when I hear him I just want to punch his thick head

[BalancedBear]

We used to have rent controls in the UK. They ended up causing the supply of rental homes to dry up with the only ones left being complete crap holes. There is no need to try the same mistake again.

[Dorkins]

7 hours ago, BalancedBear said:

We used to have rent controls in the UK. They ended up causing the supply of rental homes to dry up with the only ones left being complete crap holes. There is no need to try the same mistake again.

It really depends how it's done I think. If you go for completely politician-controlled rents and no market forces then yes, the private rented sector will probably end up as you describe. There are other ways to do it though e.g. rents during a tenancy can only increase (or decrease!) according to a local rental index which is set using new market rents. The nice thing about that kind of system is you can then greatly improve tenant security of tenure without creating weird market distortions like tenants who hang on for decades and end up paying the equivalent of a fiver a month due to existing rents not keeping up with general inflation.

Edited January 27, 2019 by Dorkins

[hurlerontheditch]

I think they tried something similar in Ireland, where the landlord could only jack up the rent by a certain amount each year, however it ended up with tenants being given notice with the excuse that the landlord needed the house for a family member, only then to re-advertise and get some other mug in at 15% more rent

 

 

[Dorkins]

5 hours ago, hurlerontheditch said:

I think they tried something similar in Ireland, where the landlord could only jack up the rent by a certain amount each year, however it ended up with tenants being given notice with the excuse that the landlord needed the house for a family member, only then to re-advertise and get some other mug in at 15% more rent

That's why section 21 also needs abolishing.

[BalancedBear]

On 27/01/2019 at 07:23, Dorkins said:

It really depends how it's done I think. If you go for completely politician-controlled rents and no market forces then yes, the private rented sector will probably end up as you describe. There are other ways to do it though e.g. rents during a tenancy can only increase (or decrease!) according to a local rental index which is set using new market rents. The nice thing about that kind of system is you can then greatly improve tenant security of tenure without creating weird market distortions like tenants who hang on for decades and end up paying the equivalent of a fiver a month due to existing rents not keeping up with general inflation.

I do have some sympathy for that kind of control, but there are always unintended consequences, and once you have one form of control, politicians will always think that the next solution to whatever problem the first set of controls have created can be fixed by further controls. The best way of providing a large supply of good rental properties is to allow as many people to enter the landlord market as possible. This has been stamped on because it was seen to be taking houses away from FTBs. However the underlying problem is no landlords, but huge population increases due to immigrants, many of whom will rent their homes when they first reach the UK. The only solution is to rebalance immigration with extra homes. Also the recognition of longer term tenancies of 3 and 5 years could be fine too, as many landlords do want long term tenants.

[Dorkins]

7 hours ago, BalancedBear said:

the underlying problem is no landlords, but huge population increases due to immigrants

Immigrants didn't write the 1988 Housing Act that gave private tenants almost no security of tenure. You can play around with supply and demand all you like but that won't change whether the landlord has the legal right to chuck you out. It's that legal right to secure tenure that many private renters want.

[byron78]

On 27/01/2019 at 00:14, BalancedBear said:

We used to have rent controls in the UK. They ended up causing the supply of rental homes to dry up with the only ones left being complete crap holes. There is no need to try the same mistake again.

And how much were houses to buy when rent controls were about? 

You're right. They can reduce the rental stock. Which in turn reduces the number of landlords/BTLs. Which in turn.... 

[TopBanana101]

On 24/01/2019 at 11:31, Trump Invective said:

I think Obrien and the first caller just singlehandedly succeeded in destroying the stance of the rentier. This phone in needs maximum publicity.

Just had a listen (1:21:00 Thurs 24th).  She is crazy!  I also found 1:54:00 interesting, Swindon Council 67% of Housing Benefit payments went to  Private Landlords, one example given was next door neigbours, one social one private and the difference in payments: Social=£75/week, Private=£300/week.

I think that Rent Controls will have a much bigger impact than PRA, it's whipping up to be the perfect storm IMHO.

[shavedchimp]

+1

As I said, lot of sense spoken on that programme. 

Strange there's quite a lot of hate here for Mr Jo'B....I'm not that clever but he clearly is, mentally very sharp. Even if you dislike his condescension and opinions you should salute the precision of his methodical dissections. This one about being a rentier is a perfect example of that

[bear.getting.old]

Its not strange - O Brien is precise yes -  precisely a first class *****-stick. If any solution to the problem comes from his tiny mind then no wonder it will be a socialist loony idea that won't work rent controls being it. The guy is a total utter piece of excrement.

[Buzzardo2]

On 29/01/2019 at 23:02, shavedchimp said:

Strange there's quite a lot of hate here for Mr Jo'B....I'm not that clever but he clearly is, mentally very sharp. Even if you dislike his condescension and opinions you should salute the precision of his methodical dissections.

ROFLMAO...

 

3-4 weeks back, a caller came on and had the temerity to suggest he thought Brexit would be good, and was already benefitting him and his wife on the following basis...

He was in the building trade (IIRC - or something closely related) and his wages had actually gone up noticeably, as a lot of EE's in his local area had gone home since the referendum...

• O'HalfBrain is in there like a rat up a drainpipe to ridicule him, citing some report that said it wasn't happening. "Err, it's actually happening here...." saith the caller, and gave numbers.
• Again, "NO NO NO NO NO...." from O'HalfBrain... "it's JUST NOT...." (starts talking over the guy as usual...)
• "S***..." you can hear him thinking... "I'm in trouble here...one of my darned  "Researchers" has let through a Brexiteer who doesn't sound like gravel-voiced-Granny-Ethel-from-Dartford, or some other token "Brexit Thicky" that I can openly patronise..."

Then the caller starts talking about his wife's sitiuation. She's a pharmacist, and has found exactly the same thing - lots of job competition in her field seems to have left the UK as well, and therefore her wages have gone up...

• "NOOO NOOO NOOO..." O'HalfBrain wails. AKA "That doesn't fit my simplistic Sixth Form debating society narrative, so it must be wrong..."
• Followed by (out loud now)  "Obviously you're a typical Brexit racist, and so is your wife...." and the usual talking-over-someone-who-disagrees-with-me BS.
• "Err, actually she's Indian mate - not sure where you get the idea of racism from..." saith the caller.

This is all going in the wrong direction for the intellectually lazy ex-Minor Public Schoolboy Leftie, so obviously the guy is silenced, O'HalfBrain prattles on a bit more about how he's right, and presumably the guy was part of the plot to murder Jo Cox or some boll***s, and then we go to the news..

 

Anyway, back after the news and the adverts, and O'HalfBrain has clearly got someone to do some Googling. What are we treated to, as his laser-like "dissection" of the previous caller's "obvious lies?"

 

"See, I knew he was lying, and here's why. I've just source TWO reports (ooh, clever you - you got TWO Researchers on it, did you?") and here they are, proving that things aren't as good in the Pharma sector as he said...

The first was someone from the head of some Pharmaceutical industry body, (therefore nothing to do with "being a Pharmacist!!") who had trotted out something about some of their members moving manufacturing abroad after Brexit.

• A decent soundbite I guess - although GSK (one of the biggest Big Pharma companies in the world) have announced they've already re-registered their entire product range to be compliant and exportable post-Brexit, so it's no big deal.
• But worse for O'HalfBrain, it was completely irrelevant to the argument in play, however he seemed to completely miss that in his smug rush "to be right" as he always has to be.

The second was even more laughable...

• A report from a big operator of pharmacies (I forget which) saying they were having to reduce staffing in some of their branches, and close a few, "because there was such massive competition for staff, and they were struggling to recruit..."
• OK, so at least he got the correct sector, but apparently O'DerrBrain (despite having studied Economics and Politics at the LSE!!) didn't seem to understand the bit where they did Supply and Demand
• If there are more jobs chasing fewer people, guess what happens to wages dude?! Maybe you're caller might have been right - but obviously that couldn't be allowed to happen, could it?!

But no....all of this "evidence" was trotted smugly and condescendingly out to prove he was right, and the caller was of course a thick, lied-to, didn't know what they were voting for Brexit Racist.

 

"Methodical Dissection" my ar$e!!! The guy is so full of hubris that he's incapable of listening to anyone else who disagrees with him... and so intellectually feeble and slow-witted that he's incapable of debating an issue properly with an opponent.

• Any faintly articulate caller who doesn't come on and start with "Ooooh James, I love your show...I agree with everything you say....ooh and your book is the best thing since the Bible" gets ridiculed, talked-over and then ultimately faded out.
• And his Researchers usually seem to do a great job, ensuring that the only pro-Brexit callers who get through are either moronic Northern UKIP activists, or Cockney Grannies who come on and say stuff like "it woz better in the old days, you know before all them immigrants" so that O'Thickster has someone marginally below his own IQ level to bully.

 

I'm honesty astonished that Global keep him on the books. I can only imagine that his listener figures are dwindling by the month - the handful of echo-chamber acolytes, who want to rub themselves off while talking to him like it's some sort of 0898 line, can't be a bottomless pit - surely soon the owners will realise he's not bringing in the advertising revenue any more and fire him.

Can't wait for that day, when he's finally off air.

KK. Rant over!! But I just can't stand people who claim to be right all the time, when they're clearly as thick as mince despite a really expensive (Ampleforth and the LSE) education.

[BalancedBear]

On 29/01/2019 at 07:21, Dorkins said:

Immigrants didn't write the 1988 Housing Act that gave private tenants almost no security of tenure. You can play around with supply and demand all you like but that won't change whether the landlord has the legal right to chuck you out. It's that legal right to secure tenure that many private renters want.

No, you are right, but that is a slightly different issue to the rents actually charged. The lack of security of tenure is not a massive driver to rent increases.

[shavedchimp]

Struth Buzzardo, I regret mentioning it now. I'll go back to bed...