Riots, Fire, Anger And House Prices

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE

A lot of bleeding heart liberal waffle. If these yoof got a second job they'd soon be able to afford a house. Better still look into shared ownership.

...Shiv Malik, co-author of the book Jilted Generation: How Britain Has Bankrupted Its Youth, says the under-thirties feel betrayed – sold out in favour of their parents and grandparents. Fees, he argue, are just one part of the jigsaw. The 29-year-old took to the streets himself on Thursday, and was injured after being hit by a police baton. He argues that most of the protesters were not anarchists or socialists but young people whose instinct to revolt had been awakened for the first time.

...Lucas watched angrily ...At 26, still paying off student debt, unable to get onto the housing ladder, she had thought the Lib Dems offered hope. "I saw them as the party for the young," she said. To her, the vote on fees was a broken promise.

..."There has been a build-up of issues – not just tuition fees but the EMA, youth unemployment, struggling to get onto the housing ladder and bleak prospects for the future – all coming together to spark a wave of protest," says Porter. "The NUS considers this level of youth activism to be unprecedented, perhaps since the 1960s."

...There was even some sympathy in the right-wing press. While condemning the violence, the Daily Mail also commented: "We… worry that graduates will have to start paying this money back at about the time they are buying their first house and starting a family, crippling them financially just as they try to become fully fledged members of society."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/12/riots-fire-anger-defining-political-moment?CMP=twt_gu

Kohoutek

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

A lot of bleeding heart liberal waffle. If these yoof got a second job they'd soon be able to afford a house. Better still look into shared ownership.

Shared ownership isn't really owning a house though, is it? It's a weird combination between being a tenant and an "owner" (of a fraction of a long lease). The existence of shared ownership is symptomatic that house prices are unaffordable for people who might reasonably be expected to be able to get on the property ladder.

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE

But shared ownership provides the guaranteed security of tenure the rentiers keep bemoaning. There has never been and never will be any valid reason or justification to rent, impoverishing yourself, and paying off your landlords mortgage.

Kohoutek

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

But shared ownership provides the guaranteed security of tenure the rentiers keep bemoaning. There has never been and never will be any valid reason or justification to rent, impoverishing yourself, and paying off your landlords mortgage.

Well if you get into shared ownership you're paying off the housing association's secured debts to financial institutions. Not much difference to paying off your landlord's mortgage. There's a reason why rents on shared ownership schemes are indexed to RPI....

M&G will launch its social housing investment fund by the end of the year, the asset manager says.

M&G said it is in the process of putting a fund together that will pool pension fund money and distribute loans to housing associations.

It said the fund will aim to raise a proportion of the current £20bn shortfall in social housing. It will provide investors with an inflation-linked cash flow for 20 to 40 years and give investors the security of owning the underlying properties.

http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/1894180/-launch-social-housing-fund

Graham_Devon

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

But shared ownership provides the guaranteed security of tenure the rentiers keep bemoaning.

No it does not. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No it does not. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes it does. A landlord can throw you and your family out on the street in under 4 weeks. A privilege no home owner would enjoy.

Graham_Devon

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

Yes it does. A landlord can throw you and your family out on the street in under 4 weeks. A privilege no home owner would enjoy.

So can shared ownership. Theres a massive tenancy agreement you have to sign and adhere too.

The only real difference is your tenancy in terms of the landlord deciding to sell up is much less likely, but still covered in the T&C's.

Just because a share of the house is owned, it does not mean you are secure. You still have to adhere to the agreements and if you don't pay your rent, you'll be evicted.

Kohoutek

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

Yes it does. A landlord can throw you and your family out on the street in under 4 weeks

No they can't.

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE

Harder to get evicted though. Which is the point, visa vie it's more secure than renting. If you and your ilk spent less time bemoaning your rental tenancy agreements and looking into owning your own home you'd realise this.

Kohoutek

THE_GHOULISH_CODPIECE wrote: »

Harder to get evicted though. Which is the point, visa vie it's more secure than renting. If you and your ilk spent less time bemoaning your rental tenancy agreements and looking into owning your own home you'd realise this.

Is that how you define "renting" and "owning", security from being evicted from your own property? I thought the difference between renting and owning is that when you own you don't pay rent – that rules out most people on shared ownership schemes as being "owners".

It's very hard to get evicted full stop for any reason except non-payment of rent if you're a responsible person. Your landlord has to take you to court after all. While we're on the subject, an owner and his home can be parted if you don't pay your mortgage too...

Snooze

*yawn* ...