Tuesday, May 6, 2014

With 37 of Liebour’s target seats in areas where most people rent are rent controls comming?

Majority support for rent controls

56% say the government should introduce rent controls – and the majority say governments should be more willing to intervene in markets generally

Posted by landofconfusion @ 12:55 PM (2068 views)
Please complete the required fields.

6 thoughts on “With 37 of Liebour’s target seats in areas where most people rent are rent controls comming?

  • The endgame of rent controls is, less properties available for rent. The market, in allowing higher prices has driven the new development we see. Reduced affordability, on the other hand, is a result of lax lending requirements and also fraudulent mortgage backed derivatives treated as assets rather than the liabilities that they properly are, allowing lenders to over-leverage mortgages and re-sell them multiple times.

    Mortgage backed derivatives, treated as liabilities, are in contrast a proper element of market functionality by allowing futures buying and selling, because they let lenders hedge their bets and there is a limit to how many liabilities a firm can have on its balance sheet.

    So, if you want increased affordability, outlaw the labelling of derivatives as assets, destroying the fraudulent market in exotic mortgage backed derivative products. Once you do that, government will not need MERS to regulate mortgage multiples because they market will be circumspect when their profit is primarily from mortgage re-payments. That change would force moderation on house prices ensuring competition and lower rentals. Prices where there is high demand must rise to allow for new development. For example, the Borough with the greatest amount of housebuilding right now is the most contained City of Westminster. That new development is a function of price.

    If you do not allow prices to allocate capital, you get economy destruction and that is the main failure of Socialism according to Ludwig Von Mises who stated that Socialism and communism did not work, not because of morality, but because it lacked pricing mechanisms to spontaneously allocate capital where it is best employed. Remember, that higher prices in Westminster not only cause more house building, but also support transport links and also the re-location of businesses to other parts of the country.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • Unfortunately, years and years of Socialist education has left the general public illiterate, innumerate and incapable of understanding more than the operant conditioning of Socialist bribes. Salivate on cue when offered a free ride that you pay with in blood and by the loss of the prosperity of the nation so that a ruling elite can divide and rule the nation and retain power at the expense of the total destruction of your way of life.

    To re-iterate, if we did not have Socialism right now, bearing down on us, consuming over 80% of GDP, we would all be working three day weeks or less, earning quadruple or more our present wages, with so much wealth we would be living like Kings and Queens given the amount of technology at our fingertips.

    Don’t believe me? Well, it is harder now to own a house than in the 1970’s, when we still had typing pools, no internet, type writers were the norm. International collaboration on work was almost impossible and it took up to six months to get a BT telephone line.

    Its an absolute joke and we are all living in abject poverty relative to where we should be. All for the purpose of maintaining a hierarchical society. Read 1984 and it explains that process.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • I would imagine that rent controls would reduce the demand from BTL, whilst the remainder of the fixed number of properties end up for sale and massively increase the supply of lower cost housing to first time buyers. I cannot see vast numbers of properties lying empty because rentiers could not get ‘what it’s worth’.

    They have rent controls ion Germany, how does that work out?

    I’m afraid the price control theory does not work in the land market. I can see your point if they fixed the price of ‘tomatoes’ and people decided to grow less of them.

    If rent controls lead to lower land values (which they would, because less rent can be extracted), then the house part (bricks, cement, windows) becomes a larger part of the cost make up of property and they become much cheaper to build. therefore I can see rent controls leading to more building and not less. In fact I think the current unrestrained system speaks for it’s self on the building front.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • Price controls, always and everywhere, result in shortages and mis-allocation of capital. Whereas Pete Green laments limitations of the free market, forgetting that we have a mixed socialist / market economy, he forgets that government is yet worse at allocating capital than free markets. He forgets that whilst land value taxes, etc. solve some problems, that these interventions cause more problems than they solve, leading to further interventions, and on, and on, and on, until the economy collapses and the carrying capacity of the economy disapears with the ruling elite resorting to war and or genocide to maintain control. Oh, you think that is unrealistic? Well, tell that to the Soviets, Maoists, and on and on, right the way through history.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • This is just political posturing Harold Wilson used the same trick back in 1960s , The landlords, we were told were ripping every one off etc etc all good political noises . All that happened was the rented section good and bad collapsed in the space of two /three years ,It did weed out a few well publishised appalling landlords who would not survive for long nowdays because of modern ledgislation .But every landlord was cast in a bad light , could earn more money in the post office and sold up , You could not find a flat to rent for years , Dont vote it only encourages them

    Please complete the required fields.

  • Libertas,

    What you are forgetting is that you are the only libertarian on the site, so no one actually agrees with you about any of that. I doubt many sensible people would too, since libertarianism, as far as I can tell, is the preserve of TEA party members, Ron Paul and anti-establishment tech-rebels like the inventor bitcoin and the guy who ran the Silk Road.

    Libertarianism is not even particularly popular on the internet, even though Libertarians are clearly obsessed with the internet.

    If you have a reasonable counter to PG’s rather sensible assertion that an increase in net wages would, in large part, simply accrue to landlords, then perhaps it would be better to mention that, rather than just announcing that he has forgotten something that has apparently happened right the way through history (I thought Marxism was only 150 years old…). Personally, I think it was rather obliging of him to even consider the implications of the world you were envisaging, since it’s such a ludicrously implausible outopia (as opposed to an eutopia).

    Incidentally, there are a number of societies that have attempted to abolish taxation and government, with limited success at replicating the level of community-generated social provision that libertarians believe such reforms would give way to. If you don’t believe me, you should check out the anarchic idyll that is Somalia.

    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>