Jump to content

Cost of Living Crisis


Paco

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Actually it does exist.

Millions of houses are in the hands of an army of Buy-to-Letters who own multiple houses via bank loans which renters are paying off for them.

The issue can be solved by prising it out of their hands.

The Buy-to-Letters have created a national housing shortage forcing house prices up as a direct result.

And there are more people needing to rent because of that, causing a bubble in rental prices too.

We should not be seeing house prices and rental prices BOTH go up across the country and BTL causes this.

Fix that and you'll see an easing of both house prices and rents.

How do you figure this out?  The national housing shortage is there because not enough homes are being built to cater for both a growing population and a changing demographic.  Whoever owns the existing homes doesn't create a shortage (although it does drive prices up).  If you nationalised all private rented homes (which we all know is fantasy land stuff) there would still be a housing shortage because people are already living in those houses.  Changing ownership does not magically create more homes for people that want them.

The shortage was created during Right to Buy back in the 80's and stopping councils building new houses.  Successive governments have done nothing to rectify that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Detournement said:

He's saying you get a bigger long term effect from the shorter more violent shock than the longer more moderate situation.

Basically if unemployment hits 10% it means 1 in 20 jobs are gone, no one can get a pay rise and people will work for buttons to have any money coming in. It also means more directly employed jobs becoming gig economy roles.

Plus more people die and end up in prison so that helps people like Larry Summers as well. 

He should have said "or" instead of "in other words" then, so this thick prole could understand it.

Also if unemployment hits 10% are not 2 in every 20 jobs gone, rather than 1?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

He should have said "or" instead of "in other words" then, so this thick prole could understand it.

Also if unemployment hits 10% are not 2 in every 20 jobs gone, rather than 1?

If it goes from 5% to 10% then 5% of jobs are gone ie 1 in 20.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

Image

There is about to be a years long completely contrived recession to protect the wealth of the super rich who have been making billions from QE for the past decade and don't want to give it up.

The 'We' Larry is using here does not include any of us.

 

This on top of the last 12 years of austerity 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Left Back said:

How do you figure this out?  The national housing shortage is there because not enough homes are being built to cater for both a growing population and a changing demographic.  Whoever owns the existing homes doesn't create a shortage (although it does drive prices up).  If you nationalised all private rented homes (which we all know is fantasy land stuff) there would still be a housing shortage because people are already living in those houses.  Changing ownership does not magically create more homes for people that want them.

The shortage was created during Right to Buy back in the 80's and stopping councils building new houses.  Successive governments have done nothing to rectify that.

If who owned the existing housing stock didn't create a shortage, there would be no increase in prices.

Your point underlined isn't the point. It's only true when BTL owners only have one or two properties but we see lots of them owning swathes of properties through Limited Companies. That's not so much a shortage of property but a shortage of people to negotiate with. The result is the same. Prices go up.

For example, if I own 40 houses, that's 39 houses that 39 other people can't own who now have to rent from me. They are not negotiating with 39 owners. They are negotiating with one - me.  I've just created a fictitious shortage and scarcity adds value. So if you want to rent you need to do so from a smaller and smaller group of owners who own more and more property and that drives rental prices up.

All this price growth is entirely artificial and is exactly what happens when you place control of a finite resource into a few hands.

I've rushed that explanation but hope it's clear enough.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

If who owned the existing housing stock didn't create a shortage, there would be no increase in prices.

Your point underlined above is only true when BTL owners only have one or two properties but we see lots of them owning swathes of properties through Limited Companies. That's not so much a shortage of property but a shortage of people to negotiate with. The result is the same. Prices go up.

For example, if I own 40 houses, that's 39 houses that 39 other people can't own who now have to rent from me and the number of people who own houses up which are subsequently put up for rent decreases. So if you want to rent you need to do so from a smaller and smaller group of owners who own more and more property and that drives rental prices up too.

All this price growth is entirely artificial and is exactly what happens when you place control of a finite resource into a few hands.

You’re describing price growth.  Not the creation of a property shortage.  

I’ll say it again.  BTL is bad for other reasons but is not causing a shortage of houses.  That is caused by not enough houses being built over a period of decades.

If you owned 40 houses and rented 39 of them out if they were nationalised the council would still rent those 39 houses to the people that were already in them.  You haven’t changed a thing regarding number of available homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Detournement said:

Image

There is about to be a years long completely contrived recession to protect the wealth of the super rich who have been making billions from QE for the past decade and don't want to give it up.

The 'We' Larry is using here does not include any of us.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Left Back said:

You’re describing price growth.  Not the creation of a property shortage.  

I’ll say it again.  BTL is bad for other reasons but is not causing a shortage of houses.  That is caused by not enough houses being built over a period of decades.

If you owned 40 houses and rented 39 of them out if they were nationalised the council would still rent those 39 houses to the people that were already in them.  You haven’t changed a thing regarding number of available homes.

You are correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, yoda said:

 

 

Bill Gates Met With Jeffrey Epstein Many Times, Despite His Past - The New  York Times

I'd like to see 100% unemployment in this photo.

On the right we have James Staley who had to resign as head of Barclays Bank because of his close relationship with Jeff. It's on record that Staley was sending his own daughter to Epstein's parties.

Then Larry, Jeff and Bill need no introduction.

The guy on the left is Boris Nikolic a Serbian immunologist who was the head of science for the Gates Foundation and named by Epstein as the executor of his will. Quite the CV. 

Edited by Detournement
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Left Back said:

How do you figure this out?  The national housing shortage is there because not enough homes are being built to cater for both a growing population and a changing demographic.  Whoever owns the existing homes doesn't create a shortage (although it does drive prices up).  If you nationalised all private rented homes (which we all know is fantasy land stuff) there would still be a housing shortage because people are already living in those houses.  Changing ownership does not magically create more homes for people that want them.

The shortage was created during Right to Buy back in the 80's and stopping councils building new houses.  Successive governments have done nothing to rectify that.

Whilst I agree that right to buy was a huge contributor to the current crisis, the main problem is private landlords & inaction by government to build (in areas where homes are needed). 
I looked at the number of homes owned by private landlords in the UK & was absolutely shocked by the the amount. According to the source I saw, 1/3 of all homes are private rental - 8.7 million!  Also, the number of residents who own their house has gone DOWN since right to buy was introduced in 1981!! 
There are also huge numbers of houses ( in areas where they are needed, centres of employment like London & SE also Edinburgh) which are now Air BnB. It’s a shocking state of affairs & income from second home should be taxed at 75% in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Left Back said:

You’re describing price growth.  Not the creation of a property shortage.  

I’ll say it again.  BTL is bad for other reasons but is not causing a shortage of houses.  That is caused by not enough houses being built over a period of decades.

If you owned 40 houses and rented 39 of them out if they were nationalised the council would still rent those 39 houses to the people that were already in them.  You haven’t changed a thing regarding number of available homes.

They got them at a hefty discount, which would help with a mortgage 

You also had a number of kids buying the elderly parents discounted property, so when they shuffled off this moral coil they could make themselves a tidy profit selling it off or renting it out 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brother Blades said:

Whilst I agree that right to buy was a huge contributor to the current crisis, the main problem is private landlords & inaction by government to build (in areas where homes are needed). 
I looked at the number of homes owned by private landlords in the UK & was absolutely shocked by the the amount. According to the source I saw, 1/3 of all homes are private rental - 8.7 million!  Also, the number of residents who own their house has gone DOWN since right to buy was introduced in 1981!! 
There are also huge numbers of houses ( in areas where they are needed, centres of employment like London & SE also Edinburgh) which are now Air BnB. It’s a shocking state of affairs & income from second home should be taxed at 75% in my opinion. 

You make a valid point about short-term lets.  I have no idea how many of them there are in the UK but every  single one of them is a home that someone could be living in.  A far bigger issue than private landlords and up there with second homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Left Back said:

You make a valid point about short-term lets.  I have no idea how many of them there are in the UK but every  single one of them is a home that someone could be living in.  A far bigger issue than private landlords and up there with second homes.

Why don’t you think private landlords is a problem?

Rents in the public sector are way below what private landlords are charging, yes,  the lack of public housing is a problem, but blatant profiteering by private landlords is an absolute travesty & tragedy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Brother Blades said:

Why don’t you think private landlords is a problem?

Rents in the public sector are way below what private landlords are charging, yes,  the lack of public housing is a problem, but blatant profiteering by private landlords is an absolute travesty & tragedy. 

I never said it wasn’t a problem.  If you look back I’ve said it is, and it drives up rents.

I’ve also said that private landlords aren’t causing a shortage of houses as was claimed.  They’re nothing like as bad as second home owners or short term let owners who are removing homes from stock, hence are “a far bigger issue”.

Removing second homes and short-term lets would put a far bigger dent in resolving the housing crisis than nationalising all private landlords.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Left Back said:

You’re describing price growth.  Not the creation of a property shortage.  

I’ll say it again.  BTL is bad for other reasons but is not causing a shortage of houses.  That is caused by not enough houses being built over a period of decades.

If you owned 40 houses and rented 39 of them out if they were nationalised the council would still rent those 39 houses to the people that were already in them.  You haven’t changed a thing regarding number of available homes.

I agree mostly with this with one exception.  BTL creates issues around occupancy.  Most people that own thier homes tend to stay in them longer than renters.  When a renter moves, the time take to re-let a property is a property that is empty.

Holiday home owners and AirBnB have a far greater impact than BtL on property availability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Clown Job said:

Don’t be greedy and ask for a wage rise to help with the cost of living 

 

30757076-E9CB-42E2-9FD4-E1E5FB765C4C.jpeg
 

Edit: Don’t forget the subsidised bar also 

08855CA3-C5BD-450C-8D05-9A669A778EE4.jpeg

Been a while since we've had anyone vehemently insisting that we need to pay MPs more in order to attract quality, to stop them feeling the need to take on other "jobs", and to curb corruption.

Anyone still believe that, even if we paid them all £10m per annum, they wouldn't still use their position to grasp for every last bawbee possible and set themselves up in cushy advisory roles thereafter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, strichener said:

I agree mostly with this with one exception.  BTL creates issues around occupancy.  Most people that own thier homes tend to stay in them longer than renters.  When a renter moves, the time take to re-let a property is a property that is empty.

Holiday home owners and AirBnB have a far greater impact than BtL on property availability.

This is another perfectly reasonable point but I would counter it slightly.  

I think it’s only this week the law changed in England to stop landlords booting you out of your rented house.  Think that’s been the case in Scotland for a while.  If the tenant decides to move on then of course that isn’t the landlords “fault”

Assured tenancy might reduce the churn on people moving between rented properties and bring private landlords more in line with social housing in that regard (i.e. thinking of somewhere as home rather than a temporary rental).  Far too early to tell in England.  No idea if it’s made any difference up here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Been a while since we've had anyone vehemently insisting that we need to pay MPs more in order to attract quality, to stop them feeling the need to take on other "jobs", and to curb corruption.

Anyone still believe that, even if we paid them all £10m per annum, they wouldn't still use their position to grasp for every last bawbee possible and set themselves up in cushy advisory roles thereafter?

That’s working out well eh? 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Left Back said:

That’s working out well eh? 😂

I've never understood what people mean by "quality" when that argument is made.

I think it's supposed to refer to top people in industry...who would then concentrate on loosening regulations and siphoning money off to their colleagues, like what we've already got but likely even more effective at doing so. So I'm not sure if they realise what the job of an MP is actually supposed to be.

Link to comment
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...