Friday, May 11, 2012

The onward march downwards

Home Ownership Rates UK

In 1953, the proportion of owner-occupiers in England was 32 per cent. In 1961 this was 43% In 1918 the home ownership level was at 23%, In 1953 the rate of home ownership was 32% In 1961 rate of home ownership this was 43% In 1971 the rate of home ownership was 51%. In 1981 the rate of home ownership was 57.2% Home-ownership rates were to peak at 70% in 2003. In 2010, home ownership rates had fallen 67.4% *As of 2011 = 66% http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17026462

Posted by sibley's b'stard child @ 12:21 PM (1818 views)
Please complete the required fields.



8 thoughts on “The onward march downwards

  • mark wadsworth says:

    Despite their rhetoric, the foot soldiers of Home-Owner-Ism (actual voters) don’t want there to be universal home ownership, because where’s the fun in that?

    The whole point of HOism is to exploit people beneath you. Now, for HOism to be insititutionalised, you need at least 51% of the electorate to be owner-occupiers so 51% can exploit the other 49%, this guarantees the maximum transfer of wealth. So the people at teh top of the 49% desperately scramble onto the ladder, ably assisted by right to buy legislation which have o-o levels the final push to 70% or so. But there was no way that o-o rates were going to stick as high as 70% or 73%, because the transfers of wealth from 30% to 70% are a lot less than from 49% to 51%.

    i.e. if tenants all lose £1 and the pot is shared by o-o, with a 49/51 split, o-o’s get £0.96 each, but with a 30/70 split, o-o’s only get £0.43 each. And what the Homeys revile most is universal and inalienable rights of land ownership for every citizen (economic as well as legal) via the tax sustem.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • sibley's b'stard child says:

    Post-war construction boom; BofE deregulation of mortgage market; RTB; demutualisation of building societies; dual-income mortgages/affordability vs salary/liar loans.

    Yep, pretty much run out of bullets now.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @MW “The whole point of HOism is to exploit people beneath you.”

    Do you honestly believe that the average person buying a house thinks like that?

    I’m sure that the elite / well off work on that premise but most ordinary people don’t and therefore I have to take issue with your views.

    With respect, intentionally or not, you tar all homeowners with the same brush which is demonstrably wrong.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    Mr G, “Home-Owner-Ism” is exactly what I say it is, i.e. the rational belief among a small elite (bankers, pol’s, landowners) than they can squeeze the maximum amount of money and power for themselves out of the economy by instigating this mania that everybody can become rich if only they get on the ladder.

    Now, that’s just the eilte doing the propaganda, it trickles down to a lot of owner-occupiers, who are desperate to cement their position and advantage (railing against Domestic Rates or Council Tax, being NIMBYs and so on) at the expense of those beneath them. These people are in fact irrational, they are not actually acting in their own best interests (their paper gain is wiped out twice over by their children’s very real cash loss).

    There are, quite clearly, also a lot of owner-occupiers who simply want to buy a house to live in, pay off the mortgage and aren’t too involved in the whole politics and economics of it – you would probably consider yourself to be in this group. In fact, most of my LVT friends are also owner-occupiers, so being o-o does not rule out being economically liberal. But the acid test always is: would you rather pay tax on your earned income or the rental value of your land?

    And then there is a surprising number of o-o’s who only own a tiny bit of land and derive most of their income from actual hard work, who are so brainwashed that they prefer to have half their earned income taken in tax to LVT. From where I’m sitting, these are the duped foot soldiers of Home-Owner-Ism.

    So to say that I equate “owner-occupation” (which is a splendidly good thing) with “Home-Owner-Ism” is a downright lie (and I have explained all this dozens of times) and neither have I ever said that “owner occupiers are all Home-Owner-Ists” (again, this is untrue because a lot of my known LVT chums are owner-occupiers).

    So there, it does speed things up enormously if we stick to actual facts instead of accusing people oif having said things which they never said.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    PS, the linked article is about the decline of owner-occupation. Levels of this were rising until the early 1970s (hooray) but now that we have a full-on Home-Owner-ist system, levels are declining again. That is what I said and that is what I meant. I made it quite clear that Home-Owner-Ism aims to have a level of owner-occupation which is just enough to secure an electoral majority (so 51% would be ideal).

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • i remember the 90`s says:

    I call it buying a home to live in,nearly all on here want to buy a home at the right price which imo should be 3.5 times average wage those who do buy to let are HOME OWNERist .

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mark wadsworth says:

    IRT90s, yes of course. Once the Homey’s have flogged off the council housing and kept the level of owner-occupation down as far as electorally possible, the result is that many more people have to rent.

    And if you want to do side swipes, yes, I did buy to let for a few years. That still doesn’t make me a Home-Owner-Ist, as I never whined about council tax, never asked for a subsidy, never signed a petition against any other new developments in the area.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • i remember the 90`s says:

    No i was not swiping ,i did not know you did buy to let ,i really don`t think a fair amount of buy to lets people know the damage they are causing and of course a lot don`t give a stuff as well .

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>