neilj
Member
Posts: 6,459
Member is Online
|
Housing
Feb 21, 2022 11:45:19 GMT
via mobile
Post by neilj on Feb 21, 2022 11:45:19 GMT
No sign of the housing market cooling yet
'The average price tag for a home has shot up by almost £8,000 in the space of a month as the easing in the COVID crisis sparks renewed interest in city living, according to a report.
The Rightmove website said its measure of asking prices stood at a record level of £348,804 following the jump of £7,785 this month.
It said that February's figure marked the biggest month-on-month leap in its 20 years' reporting of asking prices'
|
|
|
|
Post by birdseye on Mar 2, 2022 21:34:27 GMT
Since council tax is there to pay for local services I do not see how anyone can describe a higher level of tax for second home owners as "fair". Do they use more local services than one home owners - no they use less and therefore should pay less.
The above approach is socialist discrimination.
And no, I do not own a second home
|
|
|
|
Post by pete on Mar 18, 2022 11:05:41 GMT
Since council tax is there to pay for local services I do not see how anyone can describe a higher level of tax for second home owners as "fair". Do they use more local services than one home owners - no they use less and therefore should pay less.
The above approach is socialist discrimination.
And no, I do not own a second home
Absolute nonsense. If second home owners can afford a second home they can afford to pay more in council tax.Tough if they don't use the home enough, that's their choice. If they'd pay less then that means the locals need to pay more to cover the cost of services. In that case youd have people wanting second homes banned and rightly so. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 28, 2022 12:09:14 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2022 13:14:01 GMT
Lloyds Bank forecasting 8% fall in house prices next year. I think the big difference between Truss and Sunak is she thought she could stop a recession next year whilst he will be responding to its effects. Which is why I think he has no time to get structural interventions to the economy up and running when 2023 is a firefighting operation. |
|
johntel
Member
Posts: 1,676
Member is Online
|
Post by johntel on Oct 28, 2022 14:43:12 GMT
Lloyds Bank forecasting 8% fall in house prices next year. I think the big difference between Truss and Sunak is she thought she could stop a recession next year whilst he will be responding to its effects. Which is why I think he has no time to get structural interventions to the economy up and running when 2023 is a firefighting operation. I suspect that actual house price drops will be limited to the north and other places that have overheated as happened after 2008. Prices round my way in Surrey never actually went down they just stagnated for a few years. And this time most people will still be getting decent pay rises. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 30, 2022 18:47:30 GMT
|
|
johntel
Member
Posts: 1,676
Member is Online
|
Post by johntel on Nov 27, 2022 15:53:52 GMT
@lexiteer continuing from your reply neilj's post I don't think getting a lot of new homes built will be 'easy peasy' by any means. The areas of the SE that are most in need of 'new towns' are Tory and Lib Dem controlled and there will inevitably be great resistance there - nimbyism on a political scale. Local councillors will have stood on a platform of 'protecting the green belt'. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 16:55:23 GMT
@lexiteer continuing from your reply neilj 's post I don't think getting a lot of new homes built will be 'easy peasy' by any means. The areas of the SE that are most in need of 'new towns' are Tory and Lib Dem controlled and there will inevitably be great resistance there - nimbyism on a political scale. Local councillors will have stood on a platform of 'protecting the green belt'. 'Easy peasy' NIMBYism squeezy is a 'relative term' for how it will be easier for a large LAB majority compared to CON. I also think Gove's plan is pretty weak and that perhaps for the next 2yrs 'no plan is better than a bad plan'. IMO the SE does not need a load of 'new towns' and most certainly does not the large low housing density, car dependent, green belt estates being added to various small towns within commuter distance of London (examples on request). Brownfield sites in the Midlands+North with high density housing, no need for a car and not on green belt is the 'right houses in the right places'. However, to give an example of how having a different party in 'Central' govt to the 'very local' party then you already see that chez nous in Hertfordshire (but don't tell the people who vote for LDEM councillors, then seem a bit shocked when the housing quota is built in their ward rather than the CON voting wards  ). LAB will need some England wide policies and I'm not sure how 'tiered' they intend to make to it but Westminster is sovereign for England (housing policy is already devolved at a nation level). A large LAB majority in Westminster can do whatever they want and folks in CON or LDEM areas will not be able to stop them. PS Some of the reform covered by Halligan would also be a fairly major money maker for local govts and potentially central govt. Rachel is needing to find a lot of different pockets of money and some land owners are going to be in for a shock (IMO). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 17:37:23 GMT
|
|
johntel
Member
Posts: 1,676
Member is Online
|
Post by johntel on Nov 27, 2022 19:44:09 GMT
@lexiteer continuing from your reply neilj 's post I don't think getting a lot of new homes built will be 'easy peasy' by any means. The areas of the SE that are most in need of 'new towns' are Tory and Lib Dem controlled and there will inevitably be great resistance there - nimbyism on a political scale. Local councillors will have stood on a platform of 'protecting the green belt'. IMO the SE does not need a load of 'new towns' and most certainly does not the large low housing density, car dependent, green belt estates being added to various small towns within commuter distance of London (examples on request). Brownfield sites in the Midlands+North with high density housing, no need for a car and not on green belt is the 'right houses in the right places'. PS Some of the reform covered by Halligan would also be a fairly major money maker for local govts and potentially central govt. Rachel is needing to find a lot of different pockets of money and some land owners are going to be in for a shock (IMO). I think there's a general view that the SE has the biggest problem - because that's where jobs are being created and people want to live right now. e.g.https://www.centreforcities.org/housing/ "Where has the worst housing shortages? Cities with the biggest housing shortages are primarily concentrated in the Greater South East of England such as London and Brighton". New Silicon valley - type plans are great but they will take more time and we need some quick results. I completely agree with you about Halligan's ideas- I don't know why he doesn't get taken more seriously - it's probably because he's perceived as a right-winger I guess. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 21:23:02 GMT
IMO the SE does not need a load of 'new towns' and most certainly does not the large low housing density, car dependent, green belt estates being added to various small towns within commuter distance of London (examples on request). Brownfield sites in the Midlands+North with high density housing, no need for a car and not on green belt is the 'right houses in the right places'. PS Some of the reform covered by Halligan would also be a fairly major money maker for local govts and potentially central govt. Rachel is needing to find a lot of different pockets of money and some land owners are going to be in for a shock (IMO). I think there's a general view that the SE has the biggest problem - because that's where jobs are being created and people want to live right now. e.g.https://www.centreforcities.org/housing/ "Where has the worst housing shortages? Cities with the biggest housing shortages are primarily concentrated in the Greater South East of England such as London and Brighton". New Silicon valley - type plans are great but they will take more time and we need some quick results. I completely agree with you about Halligan's ideas- I don't know why he doesn't get taken more seriously - it's probably because he's perceived as a right-winger I guess. Affordability is a related issue for issue. Prices are high when demand outstrips supply and as per regional affordability analysis I posted a while back then London and the South is the least affordable part of England (and UK). It's a complex issue but if a lot more skilled jobs are created in Midlands-North then demand will move to those areas (ie the need to level up). That regional shift in demand MIGHT mean house prices become more affordable in London/South (ideally not via a crash but by many years of decent wage growth and very little house price gains in London/South). We do need some additional housing in London/South but it shouldn't IMO be the expensive 3-4bed houses that the big builders love to build on the car dependent fringes of suburbia (google 'Garden Suburb' to see how many of those are being built as 'add-ons' to commuter-ville). A new build 3-4bed house on green belt, that is a car journey from a train station into London, is not affordable for a young person trying to get on the property ladder and is just 'bad' in so many other ways as well. Higher density housing in town/city centres (ie no need for a car) is IMO what is needed in London/South (and probably also in many towns/cities in other regions). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 12, 2023 19:33:34 GMT
See the Housing thread --->>> https://ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/thread/31/housing Sadly too many CON MPs (notably those down South) are too NIMBY so one for Starmer and LAB after GE'24 I expect... one that he/they might try to 'devolve' ALL responsibility for though (not necessarily a bad thing as I hope the 'right type of housing' ends up being built in the ' right left* places' * As in 'Left behind' which after GE'24 will be back to being very highly correlated to LAB seats (although some coastal places that are 'Left behind' but will likely still return a CON artist to HoC) Some argue that it’s easier to build new towns than try and extend existing towns, though others who know a lot more about planning than me might be able to say how good an idea that is. (From what I’ve read, part of the problem is that new developments don’t necessarily include all the necessary services and infrastructure, making existing residents rather less keen?) But as home ownership becomes more difficult there may be fewer NIMBY votes in future?The tide is turning.... The smart money started getting out of BTL a while ago so they'll be less landlords in the future (although that will increase rents £pcm for those renting in a market with less supply)
70,000 BTL landlords exited the PRS this yearwww.property118.com/70000-btl-landlords-exited-the-prs-this-year/Timing is everything and that might be a bit of problem for LAB to take us back to 'Churchill' land policies. It is better to fix the roof when the sun is shining (ie fix the housing market when prices are rising). Other data (eg recent GDP) suggests 'big builders' are already back to 'hoarding' mode with their land banks and with fixed rate mortgages starting to drop (and base rates have, or soon will have, peaked) I doubt the 'bubble' will burst with a huge pop but we can't undo how big HMGs from 1990s onwards (and the 'Magic Money Tree' era from 2008 onwards) allowed the bubble to get. A 'soft landing' (many years of wages growing faster than house prices) is not easy to achieve but too much fixing of the roof (reform of housing will mean increased supply) when it's hammering with rain isn't good timing. NIMBYs in the 'right places' (green belt) is not a bad thing IMO and they don't usually vote LAB (although ironically they do sometimes vote LDEM when/where LDEM try to 'out NIMBY' CON, and if the council is CON then one guess where the housing 'quota' ends up being built ) My 2c is we need to redevelop town centres and build 'up' rather than 'out' (with a lot of 'change of use' due to the trend for 'virtual' rather than 'physical' shops). Town/city centre wasn't popular during Covid when everyone wanted more space but looking at regional house price data then the tide is turning on buying (often 2nd) homes in the outer reaches of GB. NE.Eng is still being 'levelled up' but anyone who moved to Wales (especially N.Wales) to be more remote got their timing wrong - but don't mention that to one of my friends who bought the high in Denbighshire as he's a bit touchy about it  www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/welsh-homes/house-prices-wales-see-biggest-25696609 |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 12, 2023 20:00:30 GMT
This drags on growth. If households have to put a larger share of their income into their homes, they have less money to invest in the stock market, for example.”
Unlike the USA, very few people in the UK directly own shares. One feature that was very obvious during the 1980s privatisations was the number of people selling their shares for a quick profit rather than becoming buy and hold investors (the latter is what Maggie Thatcher expected to happen). Almost all stock market holdings are in pension funds. To an extent this also happened with Council tenants who bought their council houses at a discount. So I have serious doubts about this academic's assessment. One change that should have happened years ago was the enforcement of Section 106 agreements to fund improvements to water treatment works when new houses are built, rather than them being paid for from water rates. It is the builders not the house-owners that profit from new house building. Bringing in a land value tax just taxes the same people twice: first because they have to pay more for the house in the first place and then they have to pay more each year they live in it.Starmer isn't going near any 'wealth taxes' (unless he has us fooled). The tax we need is a 'Land Uplift Tax' where the tax is on the profit that the landowner makes when land receives planning permission*. That tax is then ideally spent locally on all the stuff that the house builders don't do (even if they say they will). I note Saj has read Halligan's book: Home Truths (see the very first post on this thread)
SAJID JAVID SUPPORTS “MORALLY JUSTIFIABLE” LAND UPLIFT TAX
nacsba.org.uk/news/sajid-javid-supports-morally-justifiable-land-uplift-tax/TANGENT: It's a shame Saj is quitting politics. He did drone about his childhood a bit too much but so do most politicians. Generally a decent chap IMO, shame he's going. * Reform is then also required to ensure land is not hoarded (and I'm not contradicting my view on 'green belt' but that would be a LLOOONNNG explanation). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Feb 13, 2023 13:21:35 GMT
In some places then the problem isn't lack of housing pushing up property and rent prices. There is a lot of unused or 'inappropriately' used housing around the country but with that potential supply removed from the market then locals are very often priced out.
North Norfolk: The place where one in 10 homes is largely unusedwww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-64303486With a very useful 'click-thru' to: "Action on Empty Homes publishes the most authoritative guide to empty homes data" www.actiononemptyhomes.org/facts-and-figuresNB Due to the lag in data collection then I expect the 'trend' has stopped and probably reversed and as per previous posts then there could be 'unintended (but foreseeable) consequences' if the tide turns too fast in, what is already, a market with falling prices. The 'bubble' of unused/'inappropriately' used housing needs to have the air let out - but I'd be cautious about using a pin! PS Very happy to agree with anyone who says CON HMG (and HMG's pre 2015) have inflated the bubble. Covid added a bit of extra 'air' in 'nice places next the sea (or in the country)' but Rishi added extra air even then (and I did criticise the stamp tax holiday at the time*). Additional stamp tax on 2nd homes/BTLs and increased allowance for 1st time buyers are good ideas though. * as did plenty of others: www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/sunak-stamp-duty-economy-house-prices-b1892883.html(although the 'smart money' did realise that created a good time to BTL-Exit) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 2, 2023 11:38:40 GMT
Not many tourists in my LA polity (at the margin the pubs etc are quieter in the holiday seasons as some locals are on holiday elsewhere) but if anyone wants to add comments on ways to deal with the 'pricing out of locals' then please comment on the below: ---------------------------- More on my tangent into domestic holidays then I note the Welsh aren't yet at the point of burning down the English 2nd homes or BTLs but 'pricing out the locals' in housing is a serious problem in 'touristy' areas (such as Pembrokshire*, but not places like Neath which is 30min-1hr commute away)
How Wales' holiday let rules to crack down on second home ownership will be checked and enforcedwww.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/how-wales-holiday-rules-crack-26508922One for more specific discussion on the Housing thread but summary of options, some of which are being used: 1/ Ensure 'short-term' lets (Airbnb type) do bring in lots of tourists year round as that does support local businesses and those areas have always been 'touristy' 2/ Tax 2nd homers until the peeps squeak (and sell-up or at least are deterred from buying). a/ Council Tax at 2x (or more) what 'locals' pay b/ Capital Gains Tax on 'non-primary residence' needs to be jacked up (although Reeves doesn't seem to want to do that) 3/ New homes are 'locals only' and you have to prove 'local' status (eg a job or job offer) locally to buy a new build 4/ Apply #3 more forcibly to 'social housing' and ensure 'essential workers' (eg teachers, nurses, etc) get priority 5/ Could even apply a 'locals only' further (eg a covenant on a new build or social housing that has a 'right to buy' that it can only ever be sold to someone who is local/essential worker) * Doesn't state exactly where they work but I appreciate a commute from say Neath (where housing is cheap) is not ideal. Why it's 'impossible' for this young Pembrokeshire family to afford to buy first homenews.sky.com/story/why-its-impossible-for-this-young-pembrokeshire-family-to-afford-to-buy-first-home-12845687Wales is not my polity of course but the issue of there being somewhere cheap in a non-touristy area, maybe 30min-1hr commute, but housing 'unaffordable' for local/essential workers in a 'touristy' area is something that happens in the North of England as well (which is also not my polity at a LA level). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 5, 2023 11:16:49 GMT
Since I brought it up on the main thread then there was a fairly pathetic attempt to 'convert' unused/surplus MoD sites announced back in 2016:
Defence secretary Michael Fallon has announced plans to release a further 13 Ministry of Defence (MoD) sites for house-building.www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/mod-names-sites-to-be-sold-for-housingI can't speak for every site but the NIMBY battle in a least one of those was a f*ing nightmare ending up with the 'wrong houses' again being built. Now the LA might have a vested (at best 'lazy pick of a big builder', but quite possibly somewhat 'corrupt') interest in who eventually gets to build on the site but fair to say they don't build many (if any) affordable houses that a local nurse/teacher/etc could afford to buy (without massive help from the bank of mum+dad). I'll also pick an 'anecdote' of how someone local to moi is taking advantage of the lack of affordable housing - not that I'm suggesting anyone else does this, just showing the hypocrisy of some 'RoCs' (the LOCs don't have a monopoly on hypocrisy). LDEM/CON councillor Dave (not his real name) doesn't want new houses built in his ward/borough/county and fights against them at council meetings. Meanwhile Dave puts 2 'shepherd's huts' in his back garden (separate entrance) as those don't need planning permission and cost <£20k each (1bed, ensuite, fully connected up, little patio, etc). He charged £600pcm in 2021 (probably gone up) which is £7.2k pa before tax - a yield of 36%. Not sure who the tenants are now but one was a nurses when he used to boast about it in 2021. OK, it is his land but if the council could get its hands on land at say £10k per plot then you'd be at £30k (and mercian provided examples of units in Berkshire that could be bought for <£50k). If you offered 'rent to buy' schemes limited to ONLY essential workers at say £300pcm that would generate a 12% yield for the LA and be a 50% cut in rent for local essential worker (who could then save the £300pcm towards putting down a deposit to buy the house in a few years - with no help from bank of mum+dad, as I appreciate not everyone has a 'bank of mum+dad' to help them get started). Given the NIMBY view of councillors and their desire to be elected rather than 'do the right thing' then the change has to, IMO, come mainly from central govt BUT quite clearly there is already a local ability to decide on 'what' type of houses are built and to some extent 'where' they are built. Braintree isn't my polity but I note LAB are campaigning on NIMBY as well although I do note they actually approve of CON's policy: "Clear the asylum backlog by approving settlements or returning to safe countries to end the hotel use" (although they obviously don't want those approved settlements in their local polity) www.labour4witham.org.uk/2023/04/03/ex-raf-wethersfield-not-suitable-for-dealing-with-government-asylum-chaos/Very simple policy they could have is: "Instead of housing asylum seekers, we would use the ex-RAF base to build affordable houses for local nurses and teachers"
LAB can by all means adopt that policy. I'm fairly sure CON won't state that and 99.9% sure local LDEMs wouldn't (based on them wanting to out-NIMBY CON elsewhere around the North side of the M25) |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Apr 6, 2023 0:05:39 GMT
Mr PoppyI'm here because you tagged me, but I struggle to see why a teacher or nurse would need an 'affordable' home. They're on much better money than most people and nowadays it's likely that their spouse would be working at least part-time. So perhaps minimum combined income of £40k? Possibly when they're starting out, but it wouldn't take long to trade up. Do people nowadays expect to move into their dream home straight away?
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 6, 2023 7:55:14 GMT
Mr Poppy I'm here because you tagged me, but I struggle to see why a teacher or nurse would need an 'affordable' home. They're on much better money than most people and nowadays it's likely that their spouse would be working at least part-time. So perhaps minimum combined income of £40k? Possibly when they're starting out, but it wouldn't take long to trade up. Do people nowadays expect to move into their dream home straight away? Yes, when they are starting out. It is IMO about: 1/ Adding some more rungs to the bottom of the ladder in some places (ie the 'right homes in the right places') AND
2/ Being able to afford a deposit (as not everyone has the 'bank of mum+dad' for that)A single nurse might be paying £700pcm+ rent and with other costs genuinely struggle to save any money. Hence they can never get on the ladder. EG After upcoming pay rise then (rounded) a newly qualified single nurse would be on £30k so could get a mortgage for >£120k but they'd need at least £12k deposit + legal fees. So, provide housing that ONLY essential workers can 'rent to buy' that also provides an income for the LA allowing the nurse to be able to save £300pcm towards a deposit. After 2yrs they could afford to buy a modular home unit (<£60k) and still keep saving. They could then start moving up the ladder and free up the bottom rung for the next person. One problem with the simplistic 'average house price to earnings' ratio is the 'average house price'. As you pointed out there are affordable houses in many areas but not all areas. In many areas the only 'new houses' being built are higher up the 'ladder' (which pushes the average price up but doesn't help those struggling to get on the first rung). There is the criticism of 'rabbit hutches' but the example of the nurse above would probably be paying for a room in a shared house and obviously wouldn't be forced* into the LA's 'rent to buy' modular units. However, for less than 1/2 the rent and a chance to get on the housing ladder - many might. Currently some areas with high average house prices struggle to recruit nurses, teachers, etc as the cost of renting is so high and they'd never be able to save a deposit to ever start on the housing ladder. Wouldn't necessary apply to everywhere in the country. However down South then when new housing does get built it is typically 3-4bed brick houses >£300k with maybe a few flats (>£230k) but very little on the lowest rungs of the ladder. EG Bedfordshire is a bit cheaper but even then the cheapest home they have is £235k for a one-bed. www.bellway.co.uk/new-homes/results?keyword=HertfordshireOr this one that is 'From £735k': www.regenta.co.uk/bridge-house-mews/?There are some 25% shared ownerships that sound affordable (£70k) until you check the monthly maths and look at the full price (£277k). 1 bed 'rabbit hutch': www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/85970253#/?channel=RES_NEW* Renting is a good option for some as it is more mobile. The 'rent to buy' scheme doesn't force the renter to buy. They can move elsewhere at any time (1-2mths notice) and obviously their savings move with them. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 11, 2023 16:39:06 GMT
I read most comments on the Issue Specific threads and hence wonder if anyone from LAB can add any details on how they intend to do 'pledge' in the lower tweet: GENUINELY Affordable
Noting once again that Liam Halligan literally wrote the book on how to do so and that it would be extremely unlikely that CON would 'pinch' LAB's plan if LAB adopted Halligan's policies
NB However, interest rates are set by BoE - or is Reeves intending to change that?
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 19, 2023 18:48:25 GMT
OK. I think we can largely agree on that. In the past there has generally broad agreement that successive CON HMGs have made the problem worse (even my BFF Dishy Rishi 'encouraged' the property bubble via stamp tax holiday). Bursting the bubble would be 'bad' (IMO) but we'll be heading off on a tangent if we get into that. Yes, what to do about it is up for debate. I think guymonde suggested an approach for correcting house prices a while back, though I forget the details. I suppose my main point really, is that this sort of thing has a degree of inevitability: parties gaming things to try and lock in their policies regardless of who is in power. Even if Labour were to manage to correct house prices, there’s an incentive to try and game them again. (Major saw a correction after Thatch, then they got boosted again with Blair…) WRT to the 'bubble' aspect then I'll repeat my view on how to handle ("correct") that - deflate, don't burst. If house prices come down 10% this year that is simply reversing the gain from last year* so very few people will be in '-ve equity' - so ignore that. What we then ideally need is prolonged period of wages growing much faster than house prices (eg 5% wage growth and 'unchanged' for house prices). Can run some maths with examples and looking at 'earnings multiples' etc but if you compound 5% for several years then 'average' property prices would be a lower multiple of earnings. Interest rates are very unlikely to return to the days of 10%+ so mortgage companies can+should lend at 5x (up from the more typical 2.5-3x when I was starting out on the ladder). Still an issue with deposits though. Also, the issue of 'average' house price and the concerns some people have about putting in more 'lower rungs' (aka 'rabbit hutches'**) as entry points onto the ladder by building the 'right homes in the right places'. * www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/january2023 ** Having lived in student halls (which were far less fancy than the ones kids have today) and lived/visited plenty of places around the World then people don't need a lot of m2 (ft2) to live in, can share some communal spaces, etc. It is IMO about being able to get on the ladder. Then with lower monthly outgoings, hard work, some promotions, etc there becomes "equal opportunity" to move up the ladder - although I appreciate those who had the help of 'bank of mum+dad' can make a start on the ladder a bit higher up and/or in the more expensive parts of UK/rWorld. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Apr 23, 2023 18:24:19 GMT
Yes, what to do about it is up for debate. I think guymonde suggested an approach for correcting house prices a while back, though I forget the details. I suppose my main point really, is that this sort of thing has a degree of inevitability: parties gaming things to try and lock in their policies regardless of who is in power. Even if Labour were to manage to correct house prices, there’s an incentive to try and game them again. (Major saw a correction after Thatch, then they got boosted again with Blair…) … What we then ideally need is prolonged period of wages growing much faster than house prices (eg 5% wage growth and 'unchanged' for house prices). … ** Having lived in student halls (which were far less fancy than the ones kids have today) and lived/visited plenty of places around the World then people don't need a lot of m2 (ft2) to live in, can share some communal spaces, etc. It is IMO about being able to get on the ladder. Then with lower monthly outgoings, hard work, some promotions, etc there becomes "equal opportunity" to move up the ladder - although I appreciate those who had the help of 'bank of mum+dad' can make a start on the ladder a bit higher up and/or in the more expensive parts of UK/rWorld. Not sure about that Trev - even if wages rise faster, costs are still rising for business, which becomes more uncompetitive internationally, housing benefit costs go up… And in order to make it so that wages rise faster, it helps to sort the scarcity problem that pushes up house prices, which tends to involve building more homes unless we keep shrinking the population substantially |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 23, 2023 19:05:34 GMT
… What we then ideally need is prolonged period of wages growing much faster than house prices (eg A: 5% wage growth and
B: 'unchanged' for house prices
… ** Having lived in student halls (which were far less fancy than the ones kids have today) and lived/visited plenty of places around the World then people don't need a lot of m2 (ft2) to live in, can share some communal spaces, etc. It is IMO about being able to get on the ladder. Then with lower monthly outgoings, hard work, some promotions, etc there becomes "equal opportunity" to move up the ladder - although I appreciate those who had the help of 'bank of mum+dad' can make a start on the ladder a bit higher up and/or in the more expensive parts of UK/rWorld. Not sure about that Trev - even if wages rise faster, costs are still rising for business, which becomes more uncompetitive internationally, housing benefit costs go up… And in order to make it so that wages rise faster, it helps to sort the scarcity problem that pushes up house prices, which tends to involve building more homes unless we keep shrinking the population substantially I'm not sure which bit you are unsure about but I've broken the only way to make house prices more affordable into two parts A/ For high wage growth to be sustainable then it needs to come from higher productivity growth (otherwise as you rightly point out, it would make UK businesses less competitive) B/ Without going back into 'the right homes in the right places' then obviously the 'supply-demand' balance for housing would need to change to prevent the issue of 'excess demand' pushing prices up. That would obviously mean building more houses, although some stuff should be done the supply side as well (eg BTL, 2nd/foreign home owners, higher density house building, etc.) Both of those components won't be easy and would be lengthy discussions in their own right. My numbers were purely 'for illustrative purposes'. In the past the numbers have been the other way round (ie house prices have risen much faster than wages) and that is why houses become less affordable. So to make house prices more affordable we need to reverse the situation - although ideally without causing a 'crash' in prices. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Apr 23, 2023 19:16:34 GMT
Not sure about that Trev - even if wages rise faster, costs are still rising for business, which becomes more uncompetitive internationally, housing benefit costs go up… And in order to make it so that wages rise faster, it helps to sort the scarcity problem that pushes up house prices, which tends to involve building more homes unless we keep shrinking the population substantially I'm not sure which bit you are unsure about but I've broken the only way to make house prices more affordable into two parts A/ For high wage growth to be sustainable then it needs to come from higher productivity growth (otherwise as you rightly point out, it would make UK businesses less competitive) B/ Without going back into 'the right homes in the right places' then obviously the 'supply-demand' balance for housing would need to change to prevent the issue of 'excess demand' pushing prices up. That would obviously mean building more houses, although some stuff should be done the supply side as well (eg BTL, 2nd/foreign home owners, higher density house building, etc.) Both of those components won't be easy and would be lengthy discussions in their own right. My numbers were purely 'for illustrative purposes'. In the past the numbers have been the other way round (ie house prices have risen much faster than wages) and that is why houses become less affordable. So to make house prices more affordable we need to reverse the situation - although ideally without causing a 'crash' in prices. Ah well, the thing about higher wages is that it tends to create more demand for goods pushing prices up. However, then business produces more to meet the demand, pulling prices down again. Until, you have full employment and bus8ness can’t meet excess demand, so you get inflation. Whereupon you need leftie measures to contain prices! If you up housebuilding, that can be counter-inflationary though. p.s. on space requirements for homes, I always need space, and more lots of it! That’s why I got a storage unit. Then a bigger unit. And an even bigger unit. Then a second unit… |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 30, 2023 7:31:44 GMT
As/when more details are released then I/someone can post but LAB finally grabbing the low hanging fruit on housing policy:
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jun 16, 2023 10:40:51 GMT
Pretty sure these will be found to have accelerated even quicker when the 'data reporting lag' catches up but this is IMO an obvious consequence of interest rates being raised so fast and so high (as well as lack of new housing stock, quite a lot of BTL landlords exiting the market, etc) - hence rate rises help create the 'price-wage' spiral as a lot of folks have higher rents (or mortgage payments) and hence demand higher wages/higher rents.
Index of Private Housing Rental Prices, UK: April 2023
- Annual private rental prices increased by 4.7% in England, 4.8% in Wales, and 5.2% in Scotland* in the 12 months to April 2023www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/indexofprivatehousingrentalprices/april2023* Worth reading the full piece to see why Scotland is going up so much (and IMO will create a less flexible labour market as people 'in tenancy' will be less willing to move to a new tenancy contract - the 'known' problem of using price caps to 'solve' inflation). They also cover NI in the write-up and NI's 'Special Status' has been noticed by landlords it seems (although from a lower base). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jun 23, 2023 9:36:57 GMT
As/when more details are released then I/someone can post but LAB finally grabbing the low hanging fruit on housing policy: /others - any more info on the above policy? As an inspired guess then big builders will start sitting on their land banks to try to protect their profit margins. So it would be a good timing opportunity to allow LAs to buy up land, already approved for development, that is not being developed (ie a 'use it or lose it' approach). The policy could be extended much further and needs a lot more detail WRT to areas like where is the money coming from; what can be built on the land (eg social housing that can only ever be owned by essential/local workers and certainly never be sub-let by a BTL landlord); etc. Quite a few LAs have gone bust due to 'property speculation' but they've been buying the wrong projects in the wrong places at top ££ prices. The private sector is very good at ripping off the public sector and leaving taxpayers with the bill when the budget spirals - see HS2 and pretty much every HMG 'project'. Getting the land cheaper is a key part of what needs to be a much more detailed 'new'* approach. I very much doubt CON will 'copy' any LAB policies on housing or planning as it's a huge can of worms within CON MPs (which has the Brucie Bonus benefit for LAB in that it will kick a hornet's nest within CON). My concern about lack of further details is that Starmer seems to be turning into the 'bad' side of Tory and possibly being 'bought off' by big builders and the vested interests who like the current system as it delivers big profits for them in the good times and they can ride out the bad times. * Not 'new' as it could be very similar to post WW2 approach, although with more focus on 'brownfield' sites. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Aug 23, 2023 11:03:14 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Oct 12, 2023 8:36:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Dec 29, 2023 12:55:45 GMT
We often worry, quite reasonably IMO, about the price of housing in the UK. Here is a report from Australia showing that they have the same problem: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-67723760As they don't have any shortage of land to build on, it is difficult to understand why house prices have got out of control. |
|
).
