Join the Labour Party and save your country!

134689334

Posts

  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    Stevo, you not addressing the points raised.
    The point raised was you think rent controls are a good idea. I am explaining why that may not be the case.

    Also, as is mentioned above, nobody has to live somewhere expensive. There is a magical thing called Commuting'. I do it and all but one of my team do it because we work in central London.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    Stevo, you not addressing the points raised.
    The point raised was you think rent controls are a good idea. I am explaining why that may not be the case.

    Also, as is mentioned above, nobody has to live somewhere expensive. There is a magical thing called Commuting'. I do it and all but one of my team do it because we work in central London.

    no you are not.
    Commuting? isnt that also very expensive? with comments like that, it really does go to show how out of touch the modern tory has become.
    Private land lords making money from the state via housing benefit, not very right of centre, free market and all that, is it?

    the choice these essential workers are making is to move out of the SE, many to Auss, Canada & NZ, soon to be followed by even more highly skilled Dr's as they become p1$$ed off by being forced to work 7 day weeks, in under staffed, under funded hospitals, address the real needs here Hunt, not the head line grabbing speeches.
    Corbyn is offering a real choice, not another "tory Lite" a real shame there are not more labour MP's that will represent the non Tory section of this country.
    there is 66% of the population that didnt vote Tory, Labour need to win them over.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    Yes thanks. It usefully highlight the two main issues with rent controls. One is that ifmappliedmtomthenprivate sector it causes disinvestmemt in rental housing stock which is needed. Two is that this only works where there is plenty of social housing stock available. Not always the case and probabl not in the UK.

    We don't need more private rental stock. We need those houses back on the market for people to buy to live in.
    However the underlying reason for wanting this appears to more the leftie aversion to anyone who has the temerity to try to make money from renting out property. How dare they... :roll: Ironically these landlords that mamba seems to think are simply profiteering actual, perform more of a useful function that someone who just sticks their money in the bank or similar. Limit the returns on property and they may just stick their money in the bank instead. The buyers are then more likely to be those who can afford their own homes, thereby reducing the housing stock available to renters. Not really what was the aim of rent controls...

    If that's the only thing that you can see, it says a lot more about you than it does about me, mamba or any of the other "lefties". People in my generation have to pay ridiculously expensive rents, our finances are taking an absolute hammering and all the time, buying a house seems to be a fading dream. If you really imagine that I am more interested in stopping landlords making money than I am in having a more financially secure future for myself and my family, putting some money aside for our children and saving for our retirement, then that's a really dismal worldview you've got.
    OK, so your plan to increase the supply of houses for sale is to screw over private landlords, many of whom are investing in property as a form of pension fund? Surely the best way is to encourage building more property - then let the laws of supply and demand take effect. Your plan doesnt even increase the housing stock, just shifts it from rental to owning.

    You are not the only one to have had a hard time on the property market, but it goes in cycles. When I first bought a flat in the late 80's the market was going mad and I had to club together with a mate to be able to afford to buy one. Ended up losing money on it in the early 90's when he got married and we had to sell up. That's life and it isnt always fair.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    Stevo, you not addressing the points raised.
    The point raised was you think rent controls are a good idea. I am explaining why that may not be the case.

    Also, as is mentioned above, nobody has to live somewhere expensive. There is a magical thing called Commuting'. I do it and all but one of my team do it because we work in central London.

    no you are not.
    Commuting? isnt that also very expensive? with comments like that, it really does go to show how out of touch the modern tory has become.
    Private land lords making money from the state via housing benefit, not very right of centre, free market and all that, is it?

    the choice these essential workers are making is to move out of the SE, many to Auss, Canada & NZ, soon to be followed by even more highly skilled Dr's as they become p1$$ed off by being forced to work 7 day weeks, in under staffed, under funded hospitals, address the real needs here Hunt, not the head line grabbing speeches.
    Corbyn is offering a real choice, not another "tory Lite" a real shame there are not more labour MP's that will represent the non Tory section of this country.
    there is 66% of the population that didnt vote Tory, Labour need to win them over.
    I think you find that where commuting is required to get to work, then pay and benefits tend to take this into account - as employers nèed staff the market prices this in. Laws of supply and demand again. Read a bit of economic theory and let it sink in. If prices are high, it is due to an imbalance of demand and supply. By all means try to limit demand though sensible management of the net population flows and stimulate house building by means such as streamlining plannig applications, cost of developing etc.

    But rent controls as explained above will reduce the stock of property available for rent, pushingnip the market rate again. Not what we need as the likely impact is more homelessness. And probably less social mobility and longer commute times as people stay put in rent controlled properties to avoid. That's before you consider the law of unintended consequences as people find ways around it. State attempt to interfere in markets dk not have a history of ending well.

    Commuting can be cheap or expensive depending on the circumstances. The commuting forum on herenis full of people who will happily tell you that they commute for free. Your insinuation that there is some mass exodus abroad due to this issue sounds a bit like an unsubstantiated rant. Evidence please?

    But to claim that I am out of touch when commuting is and has been for ages the norm for millions of people in the UK, particularly in the South East? Get real.

    It is the toxic mix of economic illiteracy and illogical hatred of those you perceive to be making in a way that you disapprove of which means that people with views like yours should never be given the reins of power in this country. Hence the vote for Corbyn so we call all see what he is really like if he gets to lead labour (getting this back on topic :wink: )
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    OK, so your plan to increase the supply of houses for sale is to screw over private landlords, many of whom are investing in property as a form of pension fund? Surely the best way is to encourage building more property - then let the laws of supply and demand take effect. Your plan doesnt even increase the housing stock, just shifts it from rental to owning.

    So if there is no mechanism to stop every man and his dog jumping into the BTL game, what will stop middle-aged property owners snapping up all of the newly built houses just to rent them out? Down my road, 6 houses have gone up for sale since the start of the year, and every single one of them has been bought by a BTL landlord. And much of this will be funded by the taxes that you and I pay.
    You are not the only one to have had a hard time on the property market, but it goes in cycles. When I first bought a flat in the late 80's the market was going mad and I had to club together with a mate to be able to afford to buy one. Ended up losing money on it in the early 90's when he got married and we had to sell up. That's life and it isnt always fair.

    House prices in the 1980s were nowhere near as high as they are now (I'm talking inflation-adjusted prices).

    Besides, so what that times have been hard before? Just because we've had a mess before doesn't mean we should have one again. We should be avoiding past mistakes, not repeating them.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    Again finchy you are simply ignoring the laws of supply and demand. It's a nice thought to kid yourself that you can buck them with a bit of socialist intervention (remember Gordon Browns hubristic boast that he had eliminated boom and bust? :lol: Or the Tories attempt to keep Sterling in the ERM? :roll: although at least they learnt from it).

    What's to stop all new properties being bought by a certain demographic group that you are generalising about? (Prejudice again, like someone else on this thread has demonstrated) How about supply and demand? Demand for houses to rent goes up - this pushes the prices up and reduces rental returns/encourages owners to sell. Supply of rented accommodation goes up - rental prices will tend to fall. Unfortunately you fall into the same trap as mamba in letting your own personal experiences/situation colour your judgment. I am trying to look at this objectively.

    Not to mention the limitation on BTL interest deductions announced by Osbourne. Although why a particuar type of business should not get a deduction for interest costs at their marginal tax rate like any other business I do not understand.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    So when are the laws of supply and demand going to reduce rents and prices? Over the last 10 years we've been building 120,000-160,000 houses per year, more than enough to accommodate the rise in population. You don't need a shortage of supply to push up prices, this is just an irrational bubble just like past tulip bulbs, share prices or dot.com bubbles, based on the idea that investing in a certain market will make you rich.

    I believe that the housing market will collapse... eventually. But how much longer do we have to wait?
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    the election is for labour party supporters to elect THEIR leader, this country needs an effective opposition.

    an accountant is deemed a suitable person to sign a firearms certificate and such a person should not be trying to distort this election and get an unelectable Corbyn into the driving seat.
    I put it to you sir, that the accountant still has some way to go in order to do as much damage to the Labour Party that Harriet Harman is doing.
    Is she the ultimate undercover politician?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    edited July 2015
    My views huh! Ignoring your insults....... esp as you continue not to address the points raised :lol:

    However, as you rightly suggested we do...... Corbyn offers the labour party a choice and if someone of the left became leader of the opposition and i d have liked to have seen a more credible left of centre candidate, then the electorate has a choice, electing another right of centre labour leader will ensure even less people see labour as a credible party, instead, people like Liz Kendal etc are fighting to be more tory than the tories.

    But my contention is that people like you (and me, i m not a labour party member) should have zero part in the leadership election and leave that to 2020....
    .
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.
  • LookyhereLookyhere Posts: 987
    Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.

    Unless additional housing is ring fenced, then it either becomes a let or is no longer affordable, the biggest prob i see is that the 1st time buyer cannot compete with the BTL sector.
    Most of the private sector "affordable housing" down here, where housing costs are amongst the most expensive in england and where commuting isnt an option, gets sold on and i believe a recent survey shows that within 6 years, the majority goes back into lets.
    Proposed changes to right buy effecting HA's and even charitable HA's will lead to even less affordable housing.
    Its funny but a lot of the lefts policies, when given to the electorate as an idea or an aim (with no left/right bias) get a lot of support (rent control, public ownership of railways, curbs on financial sector, better education and nhs spending) but once a left wing tag is added, usually by the media, people seem to oppose them - that is Labours biggest problem, who ever they end up electing.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    Sure, but basically if there is enough supply rents & prices will drop.

    At the moment, rising house prices (and in a few places it's rising super fast) means that there is, ironically, little incentive to build houses.

    Instead, the incentive is to buy the land which could build housing, and then not build anything. The price of that land is continuing to rise without any development, and the lack of development keeps pushing up the price of existing houses.

    The landowners in that instance are looking to sell right at the top.

    This is all fine, you can't blame the land owners for wanting to make a profit, but you could limit how long land set aside for housing can be left undeveloped.

    You could also give tax breaks to those who build high quality homes that are better suited to low income earners and tax penalties for those who don't.
  • verylonglegsverylonglegs Posts: 3,400
    And if you reduce the cost of housing for low earners then cutting tax credits doesn't become such a politically charged move and is much more acceptable. It's almost like some sort of joined up thinking....
  • mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,616
    I work in the construction industry for a manufacturer who supply to contractors. My customer base is architectural practices and consulting engineers. With very few exceptions most are involved in residential development projects. Therefore to say that house building needs to pick up is way off the mark. There is hardly any capacity in the UK construction industry to increase the current house build programme, and quite frankly there hasn't been since the post war build boom. It isn't all about recruiting more brickies and plasterers, it is the whole life cycle of the build that has a short fall in personnel. From architects/technicians, engineers, QSs, planning officers etc etc. In the last boom before the recession there was such a shortage of architects and engineers in the UK. Many larger practices travelled the world with jobs fairs recruiting professionals from all over and employed them on a contract basis. When the recession hit, the contracts were terminated, so many of them returned home. Not to mention the laying off of full time personnel across the board. So many professional experienced people thrown on the scrap heap, never to return to the industry. There in lies a massive problem.

    As for land banks held by the big national house builders, I am not an accountant, but heard that it is in their interest to not build on land for a few years as they can write down the value of the land. Therefore when it is developed these PLCs can realise a good profit. Perhaps Stevo can shed some light on this?

    In my part of the world and across the South/South West rental is getting stupid expensive and this is down to restricted development opportunities, the student accom business and 2nd home purchases. This does two things to small communities. 2nd home ownership inflates housing costs beyond the reach of the younger generation and kills off any local small businesses ie; general stores, pubs etc as these traders need 6/7 day trading not Friday to Sunday.

    Message ends.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.

    Is there not another way of increasing supply, by taxing rental income or by increasing council tax on empty properties almost punitively and therefore dissuading the BTL market that pumps up the rental market and increases the purchase market? It won't be popular with those in the construction industry (or those with multiple properties for that matter...)
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.

    Is there not another way of increasing supply, by taxing rental income or by increasing council tax on empty properties almost punitively and therefore dissuading the BTL market that pumps up the rental market and increases the purchase market? It won't be popular with those in the construction industry (or those with multiple properties for that matter...)
    So the solution to the lack of rental properties is to destroy the BTL market and return the houses to private ownership?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.

    Is there not another way of increasing supply, by taxing rental income or by increasing council tax on empty properties almost punitively and therefore dissuading the BTL market that pumps up the rental market and increases the purchase market? It won't be popular with those in the construction industry (or those with multiple properties for that matter...)
    So the solution to the lack of rental properties is to destroy the BTL market and return the houses to private ownership?

    If people could afford to buy houses, there wouldn't be such high demand for rental properties.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    Tories would most people a favour if they put in some proper policy that led to building of lots of houses, particularly housing aimed at lower-end income, and particularly in London.

    If they're the party of the workers now, they should work on the supply side & help them out.

    They tinker with the demand side (which usually ends up pumping it up) and totally ignore the supply side.

    Property is usually unproductive, so rent spending isn't all that economically beneficial.

    Better off having lower rents so that capital can be spent in more productive ways.

    Is there not another way of increasing supply, by taxing rental income or by increasing council tax on empty properties almost punitively and therefore dissuading the BTL market that pumps up the rental market and increases the purchase market? It won't be popular with those in the construction industry (or those with multiple properties for that matter...)


    I guess you could, but wouldn't making building housing easier and more attracting be better?

    Why always negative?

    Improves expenditure, thus GDP, improves the construction industry, etc etc.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814

    If people could afford to buy houses, there wouldn't be such high demand for rental properties.
    People can afford to buy the houses.
    Just not the "right" ones.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Frank the tankFrank the tank Posts: 6,806
    If the cost of a house/home was PLOT + MATERIALS + LABOUR + 10%-15% PROFIT I can't help but think they would be a whole lot cheaper.
    Tail end Charlie

    The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    Why doesn't the Government build some affordable houses to rent out?
    They could even delegate it to local councils.
    Maybe they could call then Council Houses?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889

    If people could afford to buy houses, there wouldn't be such high demand for rental properties.
    People can afford to buy the houses.
    Just not the "right" ones.

    I don't know what's it like where you are, but down here there's a definite lack of affordable housing - "right" or not. Lots of houses being snapped up by BTL landlords on the other hand...
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    Why doesn't the Government build some affordable houses to rent out?
    They could even delegate it to local councils.
    Maybe they could call then Council Houses?

    Don't be a silly communist. The state is BAD and EVIL and everything it does is WRONG.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    Sometimes you just can't win! :lol:

    Seems like a cracking way to reduce unemployment and the deficit, if BTL makes as much money as portrayed.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    I guess i'm less concerned about buy-to-let because, in my view, if there is enough supply the power the buy-to-let owner has is reduced somewhat.

    Germany is an example where home ownership is lower and renting is higher - and most of those homes are owned by big pension funds etc. Bit of regulation there too, but i'm quite relaxed about who owns it. That only becomes an issue when there is scarcity.
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    Sometimes you just can't win! :lol:

    Seems like a cracking way to reduce unemployment and the deficit, if BTL makes as much money as portrayed.

    As I've said above, I think that it's just a massive bubble and it will have to burst some day. When it does, I imagine a lot of people will get not just their fingers burnt, but their entire arms. And possibly torso and head. And legs.
  • pinnopinno Posts: 37,181
    I think that if they build huge concrete towers made up of hundreds of flats, it would be the answer to the housing problem.
    S - The Brazilian beach volleyball team
    W - Wiggle Honda
    "This year will be harder than last year. But that is good news; this year will be easier than next year."
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,889
    ^^^ They could if they were built properly. We lived in flats like that in Slovakia and Slovenia and they were really well built and so spacious we needed travel insurance to go to the toilet.
  • pinnopinno Posts: 37,181
    ^^^ They could if they were built properly. We lived in flats like that in Slovakia and Slovenia and they were really well built and so spacious we needed travel insurance to go to the toilet.

    You see! These ^ bloody immigrants taking up all the spare houses and squeezing us out and then they have the cheek to build more houses. :roll:
    S - The Brazilian beach volleyball team
    W - Wiggle Honda
    "This year will be harder than last year. But that is good news; this year will be easier than next year."
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    Anyway, getting back on topic - looks like Jezza could soon be leading Labour to the 'promised land' (the one that the Tories promised them at least :wink: )
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-beat-andy-burnham-6111518

    It also made me smile to hear that Cameron offered Corbyn advice on how to win the Labour leadership. Another #toriesforcorbyn convert?
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
Sign In or Register to comment.