Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Trixta

You Thoughts...

Recommended Posts

Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

Is this the main gripe of people who want house prices to crash?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

Is this the main gripe of people who want house prices to crash?

It is the normal aspiration of the British to buy a home and have children. That aspiration is now impossible for many hence the gripe.

I think the government's priority is to make sure that everyone has shelter because Britain isn't a third world country. It would also be prudent to make sure your citizens want to stay in the country and owning a house is part of that deal. The tax policy of Gordon Brown has made BTL a viable alternative to formal pension products. The low interest rates have prolonged the housing boom. Government policy seems to have ignored the young minority in favour of the easy votes from the home owning majority. Think how easy it would be to tax BTL hard, tax second home owners hard and stopped the demand for housing in its tracks (interest rates/immigration). The government are wretched.

Edited by Xurbia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Government have a responsibility to house those most in need, and on that score this Government have done very very well in housing very large numbers of needy people.

I dont think the Government could ever possibly house everyone, nor should they that would be plain daft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

We shouldn't have a government that deliberately allows/enables house prices to hyperinflate in order to temporarily prop up MEW & debt driven consumption. It's just a method of hiding the core problems in the economy in the short term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

Is this the main gripe of people who want house prices to crash?

I don't think anyone should have the right to buy a house, particularly as this itself in inflationary.

Giving handouts to people to buy assets simple adds fuel to the fire.

Housing is an entirely different issue, and the goverment should help those in genuine need to housing (but not houses!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon is saying all the right things in my opinion, and he is saying that he will make housing more affordable, which is the decent thing the government should do.

I thought Gordon would be the biggest flop as PM, but now due to his policies on housing, i will give him a score of 9 out of 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gordon is saying all the right things in my opinion, and he is saying that he will make housing more affordable, which is the decent thing the government should do.

I thought Gordon would be the biggest flop as PM, but now due to his policies on housing, i will give him a score of 9 out of 10.

Gordon Brown is my hero too. He's has contributed to the shortage of housing through stealth, short changed pensioners and ****ed business up with loads of rules. Now he's ready to solve the problems he helped create. What a sly little c**t he is, IMHO. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gordon is saying all the right things in my opinion, and he is saying that he will make housing more affordable, which is the decent thing the government should do.

I thought Gordon would be the biggest flop as PM, but now due to his policies on housing, i will give him a score of 9 out of 10.

I agree, Gordon is saying he is going to build 300,000 houses, he is going to axe the ridiculous plan to turn the UK into a land of Gamblers with Super Casinos.

1. These are only suggestions for housing, he has not commited to anything, and they are to be shared equity housing.

2. Super Casinos are not axed, they are just on hold

3. The money for the flood work announced, has since been axed.

Again, the man who promised no spin, who is currently eyeing up an election, is taking the p1ss, and its a shame to see Bearback falling for it.

How many of you would like to predict what Gordon is going to do, we can revisit it in 12months and have a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, Gordon is saying he is going to build 300,000 houses, he is going to axe the ridiculous plan to turn the UK into a land of Gamblers with Super Casinos.

1. These are only suggestions for housing, he has not commited to anything, and they are to be shared equity housing.

2. Super Casinos are not axed, they are just on hold

3. The money for the flood work announced, has since been axed.

Again, the man who promised no spin, who is currently eyeing up an election, is taking the p1ss, and its a shame to see Bearback falling for it.

How many of you would like to predict what Gordon is going to do, we can revisit it in 12months and have a laugh.

Labour pretended to be the friend of business and the entrepreneur when they came into office. How long did it last? It's a clever government, that's for sure. Somehow they've remained in power even though private pensions are worthless, an unsupported war has been waged and tax has been squandered. No other government has managed to come close to screwing the country up so much and still the British public vote for them! :huh::lol::blink:

If the house building numbers are anything like their immigration forecasts we are in trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gordon is saying all the right things in my opinion, and he is saying that he will make housing more affordable, which is the decent thing the government should do.

I thought Gordon would be the biggest flop as PM, but now due to his policies on housing, i will give him a score of 9 out of 10.

Try to put your brain into gear before spouting sh ite ;)

Brown says a lot and promises much but rarely delivers and often does the reverse of what he promises.

Judge him on what he does, not on the spin. He's an even bigger liar than Bliar.

Edited by Waiting Patiently

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have faith in Gordon. He took credit for the boom, and now will take credit for the crash - "I have now made housing more affordable".

If Gordon builds 3 million extra homes, even if shared equity, it doesn matter, because the supply increase will bring prices down.

3 million extra homes, a massive credit crunch, we've just had the biggest housing boom in history, my god, we are due a tsunami of a crash. :lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the government is currently actively preventing people from owning homes. For example:

- Allowing them to hyperinflate beyond FTB's reach, in order to keep debt flowing

- Using taxpayers' money in shared ownership scams that mean people only 'own' 1/2 a home, whilst making the other 1/2 more unaffordable as more public money is pumped into the bubble

- Many (most?) people who buy today at 6x salaries will never 'own' their own homes - If they don't get reposessed or bankrupted, they will be paying the bank for the rest of their lives, probably into retirement.

IMO, It's not the case that the government should be working towards making home ownership possible; they should just stop working towards making it impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have faith in Gordon. He took credit for the boom, and now will take credit for the crash - "I have now made housing more affordable".

If Gordon builds 3 million extra homes, even if shared equity, it doesn matter, because the supply increase will bring prices down.

3 million extra homes, a massive credit crunch, we've just had the biggest housing boom in history, my god, we are due a tsunami of a crash. :lol::lol::lol:

How so?

Are you very young?

If he builds 300,000 houses and offers them on shared ownership whereby a 2 bed flat made of cardboard on a floodplain and no local infrastructure is sold for 250k, you own 50% so you have a 125k mortgage, the Government or HA own the other half on which you pay rent. How on earth do you project that house prices will crash.

It will be the complete opposite, the current housing stock would look cheap, and people would have a preference for the older non housing association/Government shared equity housing.

This plan is designed to appease the morons, who are upset at labours handling of the housing market, but too fking stupid to realise they are being shafted up the bside by paying the full price for a cardboard box located in a condemmed area, with the Government holding onto the other 50% on which you would pay rent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid I was a complete anarchist.

As I matured I thought a nice warm fuzzy democracy is about the best we can hope for.

Having entered the real world under New Labour I'm now more of an anarchist than as a 14 year old bopping around my bedroom to the Subhumans..

Give governments any power at all and they'll want more and more and more until we're left with the authoritarian crony-capitalist hell we have today. Hoping/asking for government to do something is a slooooow way to get anything done. Government itself is a large part of the problem.

What are the government proposing for the housing crisis? Using tax payers money to prop up a market with shared ownership scams. 25 year mortgages, which are not popular with the banks so will probably require more tax-payer funded 'incentives' to get off the ground.

If Government wanted to help more people buy homes all they needed to do was place limits on mortgage lending multiples, tax buy-to-let and second home ownership until it represented such a poor investment that no one would be interested in speculation. If they wanted more homes built they could make it expensive to hoard landbanks.

They know this but don't care. They know huge mortgages increase the money supply at pace and give an impression of economic prosperity while fobbed people off with the Chinese Price Index as purchasing power declines rapidly.

Democracy only works on a small human scale. Local communities should be allowed to build the cheap homes they need rather than be buffeted about by the whim of big builders and the local councils in their pockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many people will be suprised to know that around their cities their own councils own huge and vast tracts of land.

They buy these up using compulsory purchase, and hang onto them for decades. I have many friends who are farmers, and in the City I live our Council own many thousands of acres of land, the council lease back the land to the farmer they bought it from at a peppercorn rent so as to keep it maintained. Each year they sell of a couple of acres to the large housing developers, yet nothing is built. With HPI and Land inflation, you would be a fool to build a new house, money is made on the inflation of land without lifting a trowel

That is your problem, your so called elected representative are actually working against you. We all now this, but do nothing about it. If this was France,and we were real Europeans, our Town Halls, and our Councils would all be burnt to the ground, the Councillors would be hanging from trees, minus their testicles, and we would all be working a 20hr week and living in decent housing.

Edited by laurejon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Government under Thatcher realised that they couldn't afford to maintain their extensive housing stock known as council housing so they decided to sell it off under the right to buy scheme. The 'hook' as it were was to give everyone the chance to own their own home but the reality was the government couldn't afford to keep all of the property. So, tes, the government will encourage people on to the housing market regardless of house price inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How so?

Are you very young?

If he builds 300,000 houses and offers them on shared ownership whereby a 2 bed flat made of cardboard on a floodplain and no local infrastructure is sold for 250k, you own 50% so you have a 125k mortgage, the Government or HA own the other half on which you pay rent. How on earth do you project that house prices will crash.

It will be the complete opposite, the current housing stock would look cheap, and people would have a preference for the older non housing association/Government shared equity housing.

This plan is designed to appease the morons, who are upset at labours handling of the housing market, but too fking stupid to realise they are being shafted up the bside by paying the full price for a cardboard box located in a condemmed area, with the Government holding onto the other 50% on which you would pay rent.

So, after 3 million extra homes are built, we have over supply, and then as you put it "current housing stock will look cheap". So nobody buys these new house on shared equity schemes, so the prices are reduced, then the prices of old stock is reduced to compete etc etc etc. Over supply will crash the market, simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How so?

Are you very young?

If he builds 300,000 houses and offers them on shared ownership whereby a 2 bed flat made of cardboard on a floodplain and no local infrastructure is sold for 250k, you own 50% so you have a 125k mortgage, the Government or HA own the other half on which you pay rent. How on earth do you project that house prices will crash.

It will be the complete opposite, the current housing stock would look cheap, and people would have a preference for the older non housing association/Government shared equity housing.

This plan is designed to appease the morons, who are upset at labours handling of the housing market, but too fking stupid to realise they are being shafted up the bside by paying the full price for a cardboard box located in a condemmed area, with the Government holding onto the other 50% on which you would pay rent.

The only way in which I would 'buy' into Shared Ownership, is if the split was 99.99% renting and 0.01% ownership. That way I would have all the benefits of renting and the security of tenure in owning your own home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think many people will be suprised to know that around their cities their own councils own huge and vast tracts of land.

They buy these up using compulsory purchase, and hang onto them for decades. I have many friends who are farmers, and in the City I live our Council own many thousands of acres of land, the council lease back the land to the farmer they bought it from at a peppercorn rent so as to keep it maintained. Each year they sell of a couple of acres to the large housing developers, yet nothing is built. With HPI and Land inflation, you would be a fool to build a new house, money is made on the inflation of land without lifting a trowel

That is your problem, your so called elected representative are actually working against you. We all now this, but do nothing about it. If this was France,and we were real Europeans, our Town Halls, and our Councils would all be burnt to the ground, the Councillors would be hanging from trees, minus their testicles, and we would all be working a 20hr week and living in decent housing.

Funnily enough, while at Uni I went to a protests where some ecohippies were protesting against the loss of a piece of council-owned greenbelt which was used as very much a community space - dog walkers, kids. It was about the only public-access open space in the area. Private heavies moved in to take the eco warriors, who had become popular with the local grannies and residents, and people were shouting all sorts of abuse at the cops who were removing the protestors.

They didn't stop the barrage of abuse but I heard a photographer from the local rag casually stroll up to the cop in charge and quipped 'Helping out a Brother again, are we?' He was swiftly bundled away and slammed hard up against a portacabin and asked to expand on what he meant.

Local planning is riddled with corruption and unfairness. It should be far more open. In my area if you want to build flimsy travelodge-style flats for 300k each no problem. Many local authorities now set up special 'partnerships', which seem to consist of an alliance of 'local business' (which is dominated by representative of national or international business rather than the local greengrocer) and the Authority. It's a kind of EU-in-mini form where the democratic inputs are so miniscule as to be meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

No

Is this the main gripe of people who want house prices to crash?

Not mine. I think the government should be building more homes for affordable rent, not shared ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, after 3 million extra homes are built, we have over supply, and then as you put it "current housing stock will look cheap". So nobody buys these new house on shared equity schemes, so the prices are reduced, then the prices of old stock is reduced to compete etc etc etc. Over supply will crash the market, simple.

Example.

If you have a product that is quality and in short supply, and you flood the market with a more expensive, inferior immitation, that breaks after 2 days use. What happens to the market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason that housing is unaffordable is that there is a lack of competition and supply, cars are reletivly cheap cause theres lots of competition and they make more as required (if they created cars in the same proportions as houses we would be paying £20k for a 25year old Morris marina). The government should be concerned about the overpriced housing market because although it makes half the population believe thay are now the landed gentery it creates the massivly unballanced society we have today, real capitalists revel in this situation as part of their makeup is to lord it over others. This process started back in the 80's in a big way when maggie T sold off all the council stock. Labours is at fault on account of not reversing tory ideals, they sould have forced mass council building on the huge amount of council/govt owned land avaliable in every city and town (without charge for the land) which would have done 2 things, firstly it would have created supply and secondly it would have created competition to the private sector, an added bounus would have been that private rent would also be lower thus reducing the appeal of BTL, however where they went wrong was by pandering to the population who were at the time p*ssed off with their low house prices after the recent crash. (so to answer the question, it wouldnt then be the governments responsibility to ensure that everyone could buy a house but those that wanted to could easily do so)

Edited by steve99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This plan is designed to appease the morons, who are upset at labours handling of the housing market, but too fking stupid to realise they are being shafted up the bside by paying the full price for a cardboard box located in a condemmed area, with the Government holding onto the other 50% on which you would pay rent.

It's a great way for the landowners to make billions from the taxpayer by selling (the tiny proportion of) their land that is at risk of flooding to GordEnron.

Convince the government to sell you gold at the bottom, you sell the government flood plains at the top. TPTB must love Mew Labour!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Example.

If you have a product that is quality and in short supply, and you flood the market with a more expensive, inferior immitation, that breaks after 2 days use. What happens to the market?

You have moved the goal posts. Basically you are saying we have an increase in supply of 3 million, then 2 days later a reduction in supply of 3 million, which in effect is no increase whatsoever.

I have assumed that the new housing built by Brown will be of fair quality, not the cheap crap sold to amateur BTL brigade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im just wondering, how many people think that we should all the have the right to buy a home, and that the government should do something to ensure this is possible?

Is this the main gripe of people who want house prices to crash?

I don't think for one minute it would be in the government's interest to allow a house price crash. They'd be out of office in no time. More voters have an interest in keeping house prices high than not. I'm not sure they can control this beast they've created for much longer.

Just think of all those disgruntled owners with mega debts seeing their paper gains evaporate. I think that people are realising that Labour created this mess with their cheap money. I wouldn't want to be in GB's shoes.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 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.