UK home repossessions up in Q3, arrears down-CML

ruggedtoast

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

How do you assume the government would pay for this?
Investing in social housing & raising the minimum wage.

I presume by borrowing billions of pounds, raising taxes and cutting public spending :rolleyes:

Which would produce a worthwhile lasting, sustainable social and economic benefit.

If you cant see the difference between investing in people, and infrastructure for people, and pi$$ing billions up the wall so that some bods in the City can do a few extra lines in the bathroom of Stringfellows then I dont know what.

Thrugelmir

Emy1501 wrote: »

But does GB though? Lets not forget he eradicated boom and bust:rolleyes: Gave us light touch regulation which meant that we had to invest more money into RBS than any other bank in the world has received. Forced a well run bank in Lloyds to buy a bankrupt bank in HBOS therefore forcing it into near bankrupcy.

The voters will decide next year.

Events are dictating policy. The Government is not setting policy. As there is no ammunition left in the locker that can impact the economy. That's why we are heading into unknown terroritory.

My immediate concern is the lack of policy now. Though thats probably due to the fact that the economy is very fragile and could easily spiral downwards again.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

How do you assume the government would pay for this?
Investing in social housing & raising the minimum wage.

Raising the minmum wage and freezing benefit levels.

No cost to the taxpayer.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Raising the minmum wage and freezing benefit levels.

No cost to the taxpayer.

Simply by freezing benefits they'll be able to increase minimum wage and readjust the social housing balance.

Fcuk me if it's that easy then it'll solve most of our discussions on here

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Discussing QE before the event, and factoring it into actual predictions are somewhat largely different circumstances.

What you can't plan the extent of future events and how they will effect things.

I am sure I said that earlier today and you were sure that meant not having a clue.
You never explained to me what a new government would do and what interest rates would do? but you were fairly certain they would lower house prices.

So how have you factored these in?

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Simply by freezing benefits they'll be able to increase minimum wage and readjust the social housing balance.

Fcuk me if it's that easy then it'll solve most of our discussions on here

No, fund the adjustment. :rolleyes:

Social housing has no connection to the minimum wage.

Affordable housing is a different issue. That can be tackled in many ways. Some of which wouldn't appease those looking to profit from the broader residential property market.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No, fund the adjustment. :rolleyes:

Social housing has no connection to the minimum wage.

Affordable housing is a different issue. That can be tackled in many ways. Some of which wouldn't appease those looking to profit from the broader residential property market.

I was being a little pedantic as you had chosen to ignore ruggedtoasts original statement to sort out minimum wage and social housing :rolleyes:

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Some good from government intervention would be the government investing in social housing and reversing the right to buy fiasco, building affordable housing, reforming tenancy laws and raising the minimum wage; to help the army of working poor Labour are meant to care about but do nothing for.

StevieJ

Emy1501 wrote: »

Isn't that what GB and AD are doing though? Many economists have laughed at AD's predictions for growth and his plans for paying off the debt we are incurring.

Lets not forget GB back in 2008 was pouring scorn on anyone who told us we were about to enter a recession even though it was pretty obvious even to me.

Then again I have laughed at many economists

lemonjelly

Just had an email from communities & local government.

Regarding the mortgage rescue scheme (which I mentioned earlier) there are some stas included on it.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/xls/1380438.xls

As you can see, out of 1111 applications to the scheme, only 74 progressed onto it for one reason or another.

I'd argue that this highlights the assertions I made earlier in this thread.

Thrugelmir

lemonjelly wrote: »

Just had an email from communities & local government.

Regarding the mortgage rescue scheme (which I mentioned earlier) there are some stas included on it.
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/xls/1380438.xls

As you can see, out of 1111 applications to the scheme, only 74 progressed onto it for one reason or another.

I'd argue that this highlights the assertions I made earlier in this thread.

A combination of low interest rates and interest only mortgages is supporting these mortgage holders. Longer term interest rates will rise and the mortgage debt either has to be repaid or refinanced by a new borrower. So the problem has gone away merely defered into the future.