A generation are being priced in order to keep the value up of their parents assets.

Graham_Devon

Posted this up as the end paragraph of the article is refreshing....

Politicians have to accept there is no quick fix for housing. More than that, there is no obvious, tried and tested route out of the current crisis. Getting it right will take an attitudinal shift. It is no longer possible to leave it to the market. Housing policy cannot be constrained by the desire to maintain and enhance voters' assets, nor the need to protect the construction industry's profits. Nor, important as it is, should it only be about providing jobs. Housing is a public good, and that is how public policy must treat it.

Don't expect any answers on this article, but do expect to see lots of home truths about the current problems of trying to bolster up existing owners assets and construction companies profits.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/02/housing-crisis-home-economics-editorial

CLAPTON

I see they don't mention that 'tax' on buyers of new build houses due to the 'affordable' homes requirement.

If that were abolished new builds would immediately become cheaper and more affordable for first time buyers (and others of course).

Housing for social tenants should be funded by tax payers in general rather than by this stealth tax on new build buyers.

ukcarper

I didn’t see any evidence only some to back up Hamish’s points i.e. builders not selling houses because of mortgage shortage and it also seems to say only about 200,000 properties have been empty for 6 months.

I don’t think it is all about protecting voter assets I can’t see that letting prices crash and putting most of the FTB who bought in the mid 2000s into negative equity would be a good thing. I think it is much better to let prices stagnate and let prices fall in real terms.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

i.e. builders not selling houses because of mortgage shortage

Says a bit more than that on that aspect!!

I really don't get the insistence on saying it's mortgages that are the problem, not prices.

It's like saying it's not the price of a holiday to Disney World that stops me going, it's my employer, as they won't give me more money.

ILW

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Says a bit more than that on that aspect!!

I really don't get the insistence on saying it's mortgages that are the problem, not prices.

It's like saying it's not the price of a holiday to Disney World that stops me going, it's my employer, as they won't give me more money.

Part of the reason the holiday is so expensive is to keep the riff raff out. Same with housing in a lot of areas.

Apparently you can buy a house in the Midlands for £10 or 20K.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Says a bit more than that on that aspect!!

I really don't get the insistence on saying it's mortgages that are the problem, not prices.

It's like saying it's not the price of a holiday to Disney World that stops me going, it's my employer, as they won't give me more money.

I’ll give you an example if you had to pay the full cost of a smart phone up front instead of signing up for a 2 year contract do you think so many people would have smart phones.

As for builder it doesn’t really say very much.

　

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I’ll give you an example if you had to pay the full cost of a smart phone up front instead of signing up for a 2 year contract do you think so many people would have smart phones.

As for builder it doesn’t really say very much.

　

The smartphone example doesn't work.

People have the choice based on a wide range of products at a wide range of prices. From basic at all levels of finance, to expensive for those who can afford it.

No ones priced out of owning a phone.

ILW

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The smartphone example doesn't work.

People have the choice based on a wide range of products at a wide range of prices. From basic at all levels of finance, to expensive for those who can afford it.

No ones priced out of owning a phone.

Virtualy nobody is priced out of owning a home, just might not be where or what you want. Just like the phone really.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The smartphone example doesn't work.

People have the choice based on a wide range of products at a wide range of prices. From basic at all levels of finance, to expensive for those who can afford it.

No ones priced out of owning a phone.

Of course it works in fact the points you made reinforce the fact(they choose the more expensive option because credit is available). People buy expensive phones on contract because of credit i.e. contract makes them affordable to people who would not be able to buy them outright.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Of course it works in fact the points you made reinforce the fact. People buy expensive phones on contract because credit i.e. contract makes them affordable to people who would not be able to buy them outright.

But almost EVERYONE needs the credit to get the home, posh or not.

Therefore it doesn't work.

You can pick up a handset for 5 quid and use PAYG for a mobile phone. You don't need credit for that. Theres choice right throughout the entire range, making it achievable for almost everyone.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

But almost EVERYONE needs the credit to get the home, posh or not.

Therefore it doesn't work.

You can pick up a handset for 5 quid and use PAYG for a mobile phone. You don't need credit for that. Theres choice right throughout the entire range, making it achievable for almost everyone.

Surely the fact that you need credit and it is not available proves the point that the lack of mortages has a large impact.