We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

More Breaking news Help2Buy II starting now...

1568101116

Comments

  • wotsthat wrote: »
    No idea. Why?


    I just wondered what proportion of people living in council housing actually are subsidised.

    If they are there and total benefits are contained or reduced by the use of such housing then there is no subsidy as it is all a cost to the exchequer ultimately.

    There are no doubt limited numbers who are in receipt of nothing or who are deliberately playing the system in places like London and the SE.
    "If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....

    "big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham
  • wotsthat
    wotsthat Posts: 11,325 Forumite
    I just wondered what proportion of people living in council housing actually are subsidised.

    100%
    If they are there and total benefits are contained or reduced by the use of such housing then there is no subsidy as it is all a cost to the exchequer ultimately.

    That's another way of saying yes it's a subsidy but it could be worse.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    So build some houses then.

    Both HPI and RI are nothing more than the result of a massive shortage of housing.

    Build more houses, they're badly needed.
    Or control the level of population.
  • Graham_Devon
    Graham_Devon Posts: 58,560 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    A "loss of profit" is a subsidy.

    Good lord. What on earth is this!?!?

    Tesco's are bloody nice chaps subsidising us all, as they could indeed make more profit on their goods.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Good lord. What on earth is this!?!?

    Tesco's are bloody nice chaps subsidising us all, as they could indeed make more profit on their goods.
    Social housing is not a competitive market, so the comparison is not valid.
  • Thrugelmir
    Thrugelmir Posts: 89,546 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    michaels wrote: »
    How many of the people knocking the scheme bought their first house with a deposit of less than 20% - only asking?

    Bought my first property with a 95% mortgage in 1983.

    The only reason I ended up with a 95% mortgage was that the bank manager (those were the days!) at Lloyds bank, said why we didn't we buy a 3 bed rather than 2 bed new property. As our budget suggested that it was affordable. Our mortgage was still less than 3 times joint income.

    So not knocking the scheme. As lenders themselves will be vetting applicants very closely.
  • wotsthat wrote: »
    100%



    That's another way of saying yes it's a subsidy but it could be worse.


    On the basis that we are never going to have 100% employment at a liveable wage, that we are always going to have a proportion of elderly and infirm who will require housing there will always be a cost to society as a whole if we wish to live as we do in a civilised way.

    If it is more cost effective to house those people in social/council housing then surely that is the right thing to do.

    Subsidies don't come into it it is simply a cost of provision.

    If you don't like the cost of that provision fine what do you suggest we do with those in need?

    If I let property cheaply and am satisfied with the yield, based on cost, then that doesn't mean I am subsiding the tenant.
    "If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....

    "big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham
  • So what?

    Market prices deal with the reality as it exists, not some fairy tale of what might be.

    Rents are set by supply and demand.

    Unless you're a council tenant, in which case rents are subsidised by the state at below market value.

    If you build another million council houses, and do so before population rises, then rents will fall.

    Until then, council rents are subsidised, and there's no other way to put it.

    You state that the government are doing the right thing by ending mortgage rationing and lending to more people.

    You then state "if you don't want higher prices, build more houses".

    So I'm wondering, what is the right thing? Is it what the government are doing? Or is it building more houses? and please don't say this will lead to more houses being built. We've had newbuy, firstbuy, funding for lending, help to buy and none of it has boosted newbuilds by any meaningful number. Hell, even at a time of extremely lose lending in 2007, not enough houses were being built then...

    Only we can't build the houses. The government can.
  • Thrugelmir wrote: »
    Bought my first property with a 95% mortgage in 1983.
    .

    BTW graham, does this annoy you?

    That an uber-bear such as Thrug acknowledges that 95% mortgages are historically normal?
    “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.

    Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

    -- President John F. Kennedy”
  • Sibley
    Sibley Posts: 1,557 Forumite
    Ninth Anniversary Combo Breaker
    I bought my first house with a 100% mortgage.
    Worked for me
    We love Sarah O Grady
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.6K Life & Family
  • 259.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.