Census 2011: UK at 63.1 million, up 4 million in 10 years

chewmylegoff

You seem to be trying to argue against the data ISTL - I don't understand what your point is.

If the number of households is increasing faster than the population is increasing, that indicates that enough houses are being built such that the average number of people living in each house is reducing, not increasing.

People can't just choose to live on their own if there isn't a house to do it in, therefore there must be enough new houses being built, such that people are not being compelled to live in increasingly crowded conditions.

chewmylegoff

Also, looks like 29% properties contain only one person. Makes you wonder how many people were'nt captured in the census.

I expect there is something in this, however there isn't really any reason to think that the % of people not declared on the census is any higher in 2011 than it was in 2001.

Supposedly the supermarkets estimate that there are really 75-80 million people living in this country on the basis of the amount of food they sell, but this could (i) be a myth as i've never seen the evidene (ii) be true, but be a result of the fact that we throw half our food away uneaten / feed our pets on 'human food' / are all very fat.

IveSeenTheLight

chewmylegoff wrote:

You seem to be trying to argue against the data ISTL - I don't understand what your point is.

If the number of households is increasing faster than the population is increasing, that indicates that enough houses are being built such that the average number of people living in each house is reducing, not increasing.

People can't just choose to live on their own if there isn't a house to do it in, therefore there must be enough new houses being built, such that people are not being compelled to live in increasingly crowded conditions.

I'm not arguing against the data at all.
Indeed, I've been doing my best to provide it.

The average household is 2.4 and the last decade indicates the average person per increased household was only 2.3, however we also see that single person households (in all properties, not just new properties in the last decade) increased by 12%.

Now certainly the last decade with HPI, increased divorces etc, would result that they had the opprtunity or luxury to afford a property on their own. The more recent statistics would indicate that it may be less of an opportunity moving forward if the trend continues.

The population is increasing whilst property is being built at it's lowest rate in over a decade.

kabayiri

I predict housing consumption will change in its nature over the next decade or 2, especially in those areas under stress.

If we allow conversions of sheds; more housing extensions for extended family living; tax breaks for multi-generational living in the same home; further incentives to turn properties into multiple dwellings; all these things could help counter the building shortfall.

GeorgeHowell

If the population continues to increase, with incentives and subsidies to have more children plus positive net immigration, then eventually the UK will resemble one solid Gotham City from Lands End to John O'Groats (or to Berwick-on-Tweed if Salmond gets his way), and still vast numbers of people will not be able to afford the home that they want.

chewmylegoff

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

If the population continues to increase, with incentives and subsidies to have more children plus positive net immigration, then eventually the UK will resemble one solid Gotham City from Lands End to John O'Groats (or to Berwick-on-Tweed if Salmond gets his way), and still vast numbers of people will not be able to afford the home that they want.

this is obviously true, but the missing information is how long it will take.

with urban sprawl currently taking up only ~7% of the country, our population would have to increase to ~ 1 billion before the UK was one solid connurbation reliant on superheroes to protect us all from comic book villains.

coastline

think Labours Prescott said the same a few years ago..

http://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/We-need-to-build-at-least-200-000-homes-a-year-says-Shapps

GeorgeHowell

chewmylegoff wrote: »

this is obviously true, but the missing information is how long it will take.

with urban sprawl currently taking up only ~7% of the country, our population would have to increase to ~ 1 billion before the UK was one solid connurbation reliant on superheroes to protect us all from comic book villains.

The other flaw in the argument is that long before it reached that point almost certainly all or most of the population would have perished through one or more of :- starvation/dehydration, untreatable disease epidemic, or civil strife. But it is true to say that unless galloping population growth is somehow checked that point will be approached sooner or later. If today's ruling class is anything to go by there are likely to be a lot more villains than superheroes around to grapple with it.

the_flying_pig

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9403215/Census-2011-population-surges-by-3.7-million-in-a-decade.html

And 2 million more than the latest estimates expected.

And that, boys and girls, above all else, is the reason for house prices being where they are.

Not once in 10 years did we build enough houses to keep up with new household formation.

Population soared at the highest rate in history, while house building has fallen to the lowest level in a century.

It really isn't any more complicated than that.

All those elaborate myths about credit, liar loans, BTL, etc etc etc are mostly just utter nonsense. Any part they played was vanishingly small at best.

You don't half talk some rot, m8.

chewmylegoff

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9403215/Census-2011-population-surges-by-3.7-million-in-a-decade.html

And 2 million more than the latest estimates expected.

And that, boys and girls, above all else, is the reason for house prices being where they are.

Not once in 10 years did we build enough houses to keep up with new household formation.

Population soared at the highest rate in history, while house building has fallen to the lowest level in a century.

It really isn't any more complicated than that.

All those elaborate myths about credit, liar loans, BTL, etc etc etc are mostly just utter nonsense. Any part they played was vanishingly small at best.

Hamish, just wondering, after your "elaborate myths" comment, if you have any comment on the ratio of house building to population increase set out above which seems to contradict your assertion that:

"Not once in 10 years did we build enough houses to keep up with new household formation".