Tories - the NIMBY party of narrow self interest

[Dorkins]

16 hours ago, Riedquat said:

There are plenty of thoroughly British people I'd happily kick out and replace them with significantly more useful people from elsewhere (although out and none in would be better still) but I doubt anyone else would want them, and other countries need their useful people rather more badly than us - the parasitic nature of immigration of trained people is often glossed over.

Countries don't own people. It's a good thing that trained people are free to leave and seek better opportunities elsewhere, it gives the originating country an incentive to at least try to offer them a better life by staying put. In the middle ages the serfs were tied to the land and it didn't exactly encourage their landlords to look after them.

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Countries don't own people. It's a good thing that trained people are free to leave and seek better opportunities elsewhere, it gives the originating country an incentive to at least try to offer them a better life by staying put. In the middle ages the serfs were tied to the land and it didn't exactly encourage their landlords to look after them.

Which just goes to illustrate the problem of actively attempting to poach people those countries desperately need in order to make that better life there possible.

[iamnumerate]

3 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Countries don't own people. It's a good thing that trained people are free to leave and seek better opportunities elsewhere, it gives the originating country an incentive to at least try to offer them a better life by staying put. In the middle ages the serfs were tied to the land and it didn't exactly encourage their landlords to look after them.

Now I know why British Governments don't try harder to teach us foreign languages. If they did we could leave easier.  (I know there are English speaking countries but apart from Ireland, they are long way from here).

[Dorkins]

3 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Which just goes to illustrate the problem of actively attempting to poach people those countries desperately need in order to make that better life there possible.

I disagree. Quality of life for workers who might be considering leaving is not about having access to other workers, it's about whether they feel they get a fair return on their own labour. Principally that means taxes on wages not being extortionate and the cost of living (especially the cost of housing) being tolerable.

As I said, it's good for governments to be scared of their best and brightest going somewhere else because their policy environment makes workers want to leave. I think we could do with some more of that fear in Britain, it would be good if the UK government was more worried about workers leaving for Europe/Oz/NZ/Can/USA, maybe they would stop spamming the 'increase house prices and taxes on wages' button like a heroin-addicted lab rat.

[Riedquat]

If a country is already behind then it cannot provide that desired return on labour. It needs time and effort to build up to that standard, which is why having access to those other workers is necessary. You just won't get enough done to improve if your best and brightest march off en masse. It's not necessarily their policies making people want to leave (unless you're dealing with repressive regimes), it's simply that the pull is greater, especially with other countries dangling sacks of money the home nation simply cannot afford to match.

The cost of housing certainly isn't a barrier - most of these places have rather cheaper housing than the UK! Not sure what the differences in tax rates are.

[Dorkins]

4 hours ago, Riedquat said:

If a country is already behind then it cannot provide that desired return on labour. It needs time and effort to build up to that standard, which is why having access to those other workers is necessary. You just won't get enough done to improve if your best and brightest march off en masse. It's not necessarily their policies making people want to leave (unless you're dealing with repressive regimes), it's simply that the pull is greater, especially with other countries dangling sacks of money the home nation simply cannot afford to match.

The cost of housing certainly isn't a barrier - most of these places have rather cheaper housing than the UK! Not sure what the differences in tax rates are.

I don't think this is true, particularly for middle income countries where households are getting their first taste of mod cons e.g. internet connection and white goods. You don't need very high wages to have that, and people in middle income countries still expect to be able to own a home. They can also reasonably expect that their children will have a better standard of living than they did/do. This is why the vast majority of people in middle income countries stay put rather than trying to emigrate to a high income country. I think sometimes the immigration obsessives don't realise this - the vast majority of humanity doesn't want to migrate to a high income country, it wants to build a life at home where things are generally getting better.

Everything is backwards now. Workers in high income countries have the mod cons but no homeownership thanks to extortionate house prices. They are materially poorer than their parents were at the same age despite productivity increases since then.

[Si1]

Well well well. Following the Tories' lurch to the right, to patronage of privilege, with HTB, and the party's unholy alliance with the DUP, some of its parliamentary MPs are having a crisis of concience and leaving the party. It's not only brexit, but sheer elitist buffoonery, A jack-boot on common people's faces. 

[iamnumerate]

11 hours ago, Si1 said:

Well well well. Following the Tories' lurch to the right, to patronage of privilege, with HTB, and the party's unholy alliance with the DUP, some of its parliamentary MPs are having a crisis of concience and leaving the party. It's not only brexit, but sheer elitist buffoonery, A jack-boot on common people's faces. 

Sadly none of the MPs leaving Labour nor the Tories have any problems with HTB AFAIK.

[Si1]

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

Sadly none of the MPs leaving Labour nor the Tories have any problems with HTB AFAIK.

But it's a sign there are cracks.

[iamnumerate]

Just now, Si1 said:

But it's a sign there are cracks.

But not on housing all parties seem to think HPI is a good thing.

[Si1]

5 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

But not on housing all parties seem to think HPI is a good thing.

They're recognising eye watering inequality now. At least they'll query more money pumping schemes into boomers wealth whether by pumping house prices or state pensions. Politicians are starting to have to work for their place.

[iamnumerate]

38 minutes ago, Si1 said:

They're recognising eye watering inequality now. At least they'll query more money pumping schemes into boomers wealth whether by pumping house prices or state pensions. Politicians are starting to have to work for their place.

I admire your optimism but fear that their solution will be helping young people buy via HTB.

[Si1]

3 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I admire your optimism but fear that their solution will be helping young people buy via HTB.

Possibly. We'll see heh mate.

[zugzwang]

3 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

I admire your optimism but fear that their solution will be helping young people buy via HTB.

'HtB: Equity Loan' has dispensed less than £10bn since it began in 2013.

The UK govt's maximum total contingent liability with 'HtB: New Buy/Mortgage Guarantee' is capped at £1bn.

Trivial sums.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/help-to-buy-equity-loan-scheme-statistics-april-2013-to-30-june-2018

Quote

Over the period since the launch of the Help to Buy: Equity Loan scheme (1 April 2013 to 30 June 2018), 183,947 properties were bought with an equity loan.

• The total value of these equity loans was £9.90 billion, with the value of the properties sold under the scheme totalling £46.52 billion.

• Most of the home purchases in the Help to Buy: Equity Loan scheme were made by First Time Buyers, accounting for 148,863 (81 per cent) of total purchases.

• The mean purchase price of a property bought under the scheme was £252,888, with buyers using a mean equity loan of £53,793.

• In London, the maximum equity loan was increased from 20% to 40% from February 2016, and since then to 30 June 2018, there were 9,470 completions in London, of which 7,885 were made with an equity loan higher than 20%.

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by zugzwang

[iamnumerate]

1 minute ago, zugzwang said:

'HtB: Equity Loan' has dispensed less than £10bn since it began in 2013.

The UK govt's maximum total contingent liability with 'HtB: New Buy/Mortgage Guarantee' is capped at £1bn.

Trivial sums.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/help-to-buy-equity-loan-scheme-statistics-april-2013-to-30-june-2018

 

Thanks for that, are you saying that HTB didn't cause prices to rise higher?

[zugzwang]

1 minute ago, iamnumerate said:

Thanks for that, are you saying that HTB didn't cause prices to rise higher?

Of course it has, and I'd be the first to cheer were it to be scrapped. But set in the context of FLS 1 & 2, the TFS and the sundry other subsidies the house builders have received the contribution HtB's made to hpi is modest.

[iamnumerate]

2 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Of course it has, and I'd be the first to cheer were it to be scrapped. But set in the context of FLS 1 & 2, the TFS and the sundry other subsidies the house builders have received the contribution HtB's made to hpi is modest.

I see now.  I still fear that any new parties would continue FLS etc but thanks for the clarification.

[longgone]

4 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

I admire your optimism but fear that their solution will be helping young people buy via HTB.

More money is always the answer. HTB will be discontinued and replaced with something else more palatable to swallow. 

[Arpeggio]