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.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
shortage of homes in the UK?
Comments
-
just because the house builder has a large land bank doesn't mean they have planning to build on all of it
getting plan for large developments can take years and even longer if there's a public enquiry0 -
Was there no credit crunch in France? Build rates did not fall 50% there
Why?
Socialism, innit?“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”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »They've not been building for the last few years primarily because of mortgage rationing.
House building fell by 50% after the global financial crisis and credit crunch.
Because builders won't build what they can't sell.
Actually this country did not build enough homes prior to that during the labour government to accomodate the 5million or more immigrants (approx 1/3 from Europe) that arrived under the last government. I suspect paving over the countryside would have been just as unpopular then when people know why and people would have questioned the immigration policy earlier.
The world population continues to grow would you wipe out all wildlife?0 -
I'm a "voter" for "No way would I accept our countryside being paved over in order to house an increase in population, since our own population is staying static and the increase does seem to be largely down to immigration".
Why would we accept that, as we never had the chance to vote for or AGAINST it? Heels dug firmly in here...0 -
Wrong. A major factor has been changes in the family. Divorce splits a family in two and so may give rise to the need for an extra house. People are living longer and elderly people are staying in their homes rather than moving in with their children or moving to a care home. In the old days children often lived with their parents until they married and then moved as a couple into a new home. Now they dont. All these factors have caused a significant reduction in the average number of people per household.
You are the one that is wrong.
Net immigration of about 300K pa and their high birth rate is the reason for our bulging population. Prior to NuLabour, our population was declining.
The indigenous birth rate is slighly over 1.6, the required birth rate to maintain the same level of population is roughly 2.10.
These are facts,in there is no arguing with them. A bit like London, is now only 45% white British.
I invite the multiculturalists to squeeeeem waycist, at me, but I am merely stating facts, whether you like them or not.0 -
lord_tyrannus wrote: »just because the house builder has a large land bank doesn't mean they have planning to build on all of it
getting plan for large developments can take years and even longer if there's a public enquiry
There are 400,000 plots with planning on them, planning problems is a false issue put about by the house builders to make their job easier.
The fact is that traded companies have a primary responsibility to their shareholders, not to anyone wanting to buy a house. They keep the share price high by squeezing out a few houses at maximum profit, and never going into oversupply. Even when a large estate of houses is being built, they only release in phases to make people think the supply is more limited than it is to keep people paying the maximum price.
The idea that building more will reduce prices is a pipe dream, the housebuilders will make sure of that.0 -
The world population continues to grow would you wipe out all wildlife?
Population in Europe has peaked already, and global population will peak by 2060.
The issue today isn't about controlling population growth, that argument ended a decade ago, but rather competing with other countries for vital human capital to avoid becoming a nation where pensioners outnumber workers and the burden of aged care on the young becomes crushing.moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »I'm a "voter" for "No way would I accept our countryside being paved over in order to house an increase in population, since our own population is staying static and the increase does seem to be largely down to immigration".
Our own population is not static.
Even with zero net migration, we'd still need to build 50% more houses than we do today for the next 30 years just to keep up with the new household formation caused by the baby boom of the last decade, the increase in single person households, and the increasing life expectancy.Prior to NuLabour, our population was declining.
False.
Population has increased every year in the UK since 1978.
And again, it's also utterly irrelevant.
Those people are here now, they are mostly now British, and their children are British.
They're not going anywhere, and the existing million house shortage isn't going away.
No matter whether the need for future housing is 200K a year for a couple of decades (with zero net migration) or 300K+ a year with the required level of migration to keep the balance between pensioners and workers what it is today.
We need to build more houses.
Or the prices of houses and rents will continue to soar.
Now that immensely benefits me personally, as someone that owns multiple properties, but even I can see that the housing shortage is beyond critical and has to be tackled.“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”0 -
There are 400,000 plots with planning on them, planning problems is a false issue put about by the house builders to make their job easier.
The fact is that traded companies have a primary responsibility to their shareholders, not to anyone wanting to buy a house. They keep the share price high by squeezing out a few houses at maximum profit, and never going into oversupply. Even when a large estate of houses is being built, they only release in phases to make people think the supply is more limited than it is to keep people paying the maximum price.
The idea that building more will reduce prices is a pipe dream, the housebuilders will make sure of that.
if that is indeed the case then
: there are thousands of builders in the UK not just a few big boys: are they all in on the conspiracy?
if not then why don't small builders make a fortunate by just building and making large profits from the inflated prices
: the big boys' sales dropped after 2008, their share price collapsed and they stopped paying any dividends to their shareholders and several nearly went bankrupt.
Was that a clever ploy to keep house prices up?
Were shareholders delighted when their dividends stopped and share prices collapsed.
:given most of the big boys are PLC with publicly available accounts:
you can easily determine the amount of dividend per house sold... why not tell us what it's been over that last few years?
: given you believe they do better the fewer properties they sell, why are sales increasing now?
: some people see a correlation between the collapse in sales of new builds between 2008-2011 and the financial crisis and lack of mortgages : presumably you don't agree?0 -
if that is indeed the case then
: there are thousands of builders in the UK not just a few big boys: are they all in on the conspiracy?
if not then why don't small builders make a fortunate by just building and making large profits from the inflated prices
: the big boys' sales dropped after 2008, their share price collapsed and they stopped paying any dividends to their shareholders and several nearly went bankrupt.
Was that a clever ploy to keep house prices up?
Were shareholders delighted when their dividends stopped and share prices collapsed.
:given most of the big boys are PLC with publicly available accounts:
you can easily determine the amount of dividend per house sold... why not tell us what it's been over that last few years?
: given you believe they do better the fewer properties they sell, why are sales increasing now?
: some people see a correlation between the collapse in sales of new builds between 2008-2011 and the financial crisis and lack of mortgages : presumably you don't agree?
Well put.
The conspiracy theories about builders simply not building is just stupid.
In the uk the councils simply dictate the amount to be built in their local plans and give out an according number of stamps. The number yhey give out is yoo few and that is the reason we build close to 100k a year and France builds closer to 400k a year.
The housing situation will get far worse until people realise government (more local than national) policy is keeping build rates down.
We need to build at French levels. Both countries have similar populations and growth rates yet we are building in a decade what they do in 3 years0 -
There are 400,000 plots with planning on them, planning problems is a false issue put about by the house builders to make their job easier.
The fact is that traded companies have a primary responsibility to their shareholders, not to anyone wanting to buy a house. They keep the share price high by squeezing out a few houses at maximum profit, and never going into oversupply. Even when a large estate of houses is being built, they only release in phases to make people think the supply is more limited than it is to keep people paying the maximum price.
The idea that building more will reduce prices is a pipe dream, the housebuilders will make sure of that.
The French builders......the laws of economics don't apply to them right?
We build close to 100k a year they build close to 400k a year
Why?
None of the **** you posted becuase that applies in both countries0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards