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

Nikkster

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

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

After the Census was conducted, 1% of postcodes were assessed in something called the 'Census Coverage Survey', where every household in selected postcodes was first mapped (ie didn't just go off a printed list from Royal Mail etc) and then asked to fill in a mini-census. The info from this was used to validate the info in obtained in the main Census (number of households, people per household, ages etc). So the data should take people who weren't captured for whatever reason into account.

Turnbull2000

And in 10 years time, I expect another 4 million at least. Despite Tory rhetoric, they're quite content for half a million immigrants to arrive each year.

GeorgeHowell

Turnbull2000 wrote: »

And in 10 years time, I expect another 4 million at least. Despite Tory rhetoric, they're quite content for half a million immigrants to arrive each year.

It's the same as the 1950s, employers say they are short of manpower and the government allows immigration as a result. The difference is that then there was a genuine shortage, now there isn't but millions of them are workshy/unemployable and allowed to remain so on vastly over-generous benefits.

ecoguy

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

It's the same as the 1950s, employers say they are short of manpower and the government allows immigration as a result. The difference is that then there was a genuine shortage, now there isn't but millions of them are workshy/unemployable and allowed to remain so on vastly over-generous benefits.

I can tell you that the company I work for has tried to find British born workers to no end. There just aren't enough people with the computer skills we are looking for.

Also, as an immigrant myself (albeit one with A British parent) I really resent the implication that all immigrants are workshy. I pay my ridiculously high taxes/national insurance premiums so people can live on benefits. If I could opt out of the system and no pay in/but receive no benefits I would.

The problem in my mind is not one of immigrants/native born, but those who work and those who live in a culture of dependency.

John_Pierpoint

I read the quote above as suggesting that there is a cohort of works shy native NEETs, probably being dragged up in households without a nice fascist father to get them out of bed.

Just for the record the fastest house building in the 1930's was about 300,000 per year, when the UK population was less than 50 million. The time when electric trains/trams created suburbs.

kabayiri wrote: »

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.

That was the solution Chairman Mao used in the Chinese hutongs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutong
Back in the days when the Chinese did not have the organisation to throw up 30 stories of 30 sq Mt flats.
Probably instrumental in the formulation of the one child policy.

One of the richest fastest growing Chinese cities:


This is what you can buy in the Chinese city with the best wage rates.

Losing_the_way

With the accepted statistically increase in population outstripping the supply of new homes why is the housing market so slow. If there was a genuine tightening of supply we'd see any properties that come on to the market snapped up. The old excuse of lack funds for new buyers to the market has already been explained away. Funds aren't an issue either any longer or is it that they are now precieved as a problem thus holding back purchasers.

Something in the market is still not right.

John_Pierpoint

Meanwhile here is the fastest growing local authority in the UK proposing to demolish some of the 500,000 units per year built in the 1960s.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The reason why I don't see it is because credit is not so easily available.

Much of the credit no longer exists as such.

Something which has yet to impact the property market.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

chewmylegoff wrote: »

the ratio of house building to population increase set out above

Does not accurately track new household formation, as a blunt average cannot account for the increase in single person households.

The household formation estimates for the last decade were 235,000 per year.

For the next decade they estimate 270,000 per year.

Not once in the last decade, nor likely in the next, have/will we build enough houses to keep up.

kabayiri

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

Meanwhile here is the fastest growing local authority in the UK proposing to demolish some of the 500,000 units per year built in the 1960s.

Could we see the return of high rise mark 2?
Obviously they will rebrand it to make it seem more acceptable.

Something will have to be done in London/SE and places like Peterborough which have seen large immigration rises. Even a major house building program will take time to catch up, and all the NIMBYs will be out in force.

Interestingly, the situation in NW is a lot more patchy. No one is looking at concreting over the peak district yet!

I doubt they will do a Census2021 in the same format. There are people inside the ONS who think it's just too expensive now.