House Waiting Lists between 10 and 33 YEARS

the_ash_and_the_oak

yes I mean i know the differential exists but think we should try and compare like with like a little bit if poss

imo whats being said here is "credit expansion based on wages" = the credit expansion is the multiplier but it still has to multiply *something*. ie lets just accept 60k and 600k - any changes in credit would be a product not a sum = eg it wouldnt change to 90k and 630k imo

IveSeenTheLight

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

tbf when I've rented somewhere new i've hardly ever had to wait 33 years imo

Do you rent social housing?

the_ash_and_the_oak

nope - social housings role has been increasingly taken over by private rental and btl imo

ruggedtoast

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No... everyone has access to the same credit as someone else in their circumstances. A person on 20K in Preston can get as much credit as a person on 20K in Finchley.

There is not a credit ban in Lancashire.... But there are lots of 60K houses.

So again, why does a victorian 3 bed terrace up north cost 60K, and an almost identical one in the south east can cost 600K.

I'm sorry Hamish but this is absolute bol1ocks. Credit is determined by all kinds of different factors, only one of which is salary. Salary doesnt even figure on equifax anyway.

I think this statement just shows how out of step you are with the reality that most unretired people live with in the UK.

Going back to the OP - I think this refers to council stock which is dwindling rapidly thanks to the Right to Buy fiasco. Other council tenants have to make do with private rental and then claim it back via housing benefit.

Many, if not most, of the people on the waiting list for a council house know they have no chance of getting one in the next 10 years. Thanks to a variety of Labour's social policies which have already been discussed to death here.

System

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I'm sorry Hamish but this is absolute bol1ocks. Credit is determined by all kinds of different factors, only one of which is salary. Salary doesnt even figure on equifax anyway.

I think this statement just shows how out of step you are with the reality that most unretired people live with in the UK.

Going back to the OP - I think this refers to council stock which is dwindling rapidly thanks to the Right to Buy fiasco. Other council tenants have to make do with private rental and then claim it back via housing benefit.

Many, if not most, of the people on the waiting list for a council house know they have no chance of getting one in the next 10 years. Thanks to a variety of Labour's social policies which have already been discussed to death here.

Like JB, this made me think:

why does a victorian 3 bed terrace up north cost 60K, and an almost identical one in the south east can cost 600K.

What's your take on it?

Yakubu22

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

:rotfl:

Oh, good heavens no.... Just pointing out a few facts that seem to have escaped the price controls crowd.

As I posted in another thread.......

In some parts of the UK, you can buy a 3 bed terrace for 60K. In other parts of the UK a similar 3 bed terrace costs 600K.

Credit is available equally everywhere in the UK.

Therefore the cost differential between areas is driven by supply and demand.

There are not enough houses of the types people want, in the places they want them, and where the employment exists to support them.

In a free market, anything in short supply is rationed by price. The differential between prices in different areas is nothing more than a reflection of the different levels of supply and demand between areas.

There are really only 3 ways to lower prices.....

People can move from expensive areas to cheaper areas, equalising demand across the housing supply. This will reduce prices in the more expensive areas, but raise them in the cheaper areas.

You can introduce artificial price caps on housing, such as via mortgage lending restrictions or tax rises. This seems to be the preferred solution of the keyboard warriors here and on hpc. This will lower house prices, (at least temporarily) but what many don't seem to realise is that because more people can afford them it will result in rationing being imposed through other means. Waiting lists for example, which have now reached 33 years for some housing in the social sector.

Or you can build more houses..... Which would be the most effective solution by far. And yet it's the one thing we never hear the resident house price critics campaigning for.:rolleyes:

What do you in your spare time?

chucky

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Like JB, this made me think:

why does a victorian 3 bed terrace up north cost 60K, and an almost identical one in the south east can cost 600K.

What's your take on it?

demand and supply basically - there are individual drivers that impact the demand and supply in themselves that could be reasons. i'd even take it down to local factors to.

pretty obvious but it all boils down to market forces and individual requirements and decisions.

the_ash_and_the_oak

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Like JB, this made me think:

why does a victorian 3 bed terrace up north cost 60K, and an almost identical one in the south east can cost 600K.

What's your take on it?

It made me think too! One of the things it made me think was "I'd sure like to see two almost identical 3bed terraces one costing 60k and one costing 600k"

ses6jwg

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

tbf when I've rented somewhere new i've hardly ever had to wait 33 years imo

wasted money though

ruggedtoast

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Like JB, this made me think:

why does a victorian 3 bed terrace up north cost 60K, and an almost identical one in the south east can cost 600K.

What's your take on it?

Because someone who can afford to pay / borrow £600k to live in a 3 bed terrace in the SE wants to pay that much.

There are plenty of 3 bed terraces in the SE that are much cheaper.

Why are seats at the back of the theatre cheaper than the ones at the front?