Help to Buy is nothing but an election ploy....

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Yes my comment was tongue in cheek.

There's a general election looming and the coalition is looking shaky. Political motivations will trump economics even more than normal for the next 18 months.

Graham has been posting ever longer lists of people/ organisations that are against HTB (or warning about some of the possible consequences at least). At the point the political advisers determine that HTB is a vote loser it'll be dropped like a sack of spuds. When/ if that point comes then Osborne is sitting pretty because he'll be taking full credit for a recovering economy and will have the full support of Vince Cable who has said the economy is now in a very different place - the double dip never happened and things are on the up.

...and house prices will still keep rising with or without a watered down HTB so if people vote Tory because their house has increased in value then nothing's been lost.

In the meantime the recovering economy will render HTB superfluous as deposit requirements fall with increasing competition in the mortgage market and appetite for risk amongst lenders. HTB will start to look like an expensive way to buy a house.

A rising tide floats all boats. Although for balance I should point out that if they've got a hole in them they will sink and swimming lessons would be advisable for anyone taking to sea.

Well clearly, your glass is full to overflowing here with your thoughts on how any removal of the scheme will be handled and consumed by the press.

I don't think the government will quite get away with dropping help to buy quietly, based on a "recovering economy".

Pulling HTB, will be very damaging to the government. They had so many warnings on the scheme before it was actually put into place it will be nigh on impossible for the government to pull it without them being accused of not listening to warnings.

Secondly, pulling it early will leave all of those bought into the scheme, whom clearly won't be effected, but will probably feel greatly miffed that they were sold up the river. That will be the focus of the news....not that they got the house. Families buying into something which was put in place even after warnings, and then pulled due to it's damaging consequences will be given air space.

Basically, this will be seen as a political project gone wrong. But with the amount of ignored warnings. David Cameron going on TV and stating this won't cause any of that that was warned about etc...it's not going to be easy to hide from and fabricate into a good news story.

Pulling it early due to the damage it's doing will be a political train wreck. Imagining it can somehow be glossed over by the fact it's "no longer needed" after so many warnings by so many groups, economists etc is dreaming, at best.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well clearly, your glass is full to overflowing here with your thoughts on how any removal of the scheme will be handled and consumed by the press.

I don't think the government will quite get away with dropping help to buy quietly, based on a "recovering economy".

Pulling HTB, will be very damaging to the government. They had so many warnings on the scheme before it was actually put into place it will be nigh on impossible for the government to pull it without them being accused of not listening to warnings.

Secondly, pulling it early will leave all of those bought into the scheme, whom clearly won't be effected, but will probably feel greatly miffed that they were sold up the river. That will be the focus of the news....not that they got the house. Families buying into something which was put in place even after warnings, and then pulled due to it's damaging consequences will be given air space.

Basically, this will be seen as a political project gone wrong. But with the amount of ignored warnings. David Cameron going on TV and stating this won't cause any of that that was warned about etc...it's not going to be easy to hide from and fabricate into a good news story.

Pulling it early due to the damage it's doing will be a political train wreck. Imagining it can somehow be glossed over by the fact it's "no longer needed" after so many warnings by so many groups, economists etc is dreaming, at best.

If that's what the focus groups, as well as you, think then it won't be pulled or watered down. As I said it's now entirely political - the Tories want to win the next election so HTB will/ or won't stay depending on the votes involved.

I'm less certain. When the scheme was introduced there was talk about a triple dip recession - how long ago does that seem now?

I also think people care less than you think.

Graham_Devon

Feel free to attempt to trivialise it by changing the context, but I never suggested people care passionately.

I suggested the press would take to it...as they do with, well, every political move, especially u-turns.

You seem to be suggesting if it's bad for the tories, regardless of everything else, it won't end. So what do you expect instead? The government to face endless and growing critism and do absolutely nothing about it?

I believe this is a little misinformed.

chewmylegoff

Are there any government policies which have been implemented in the last 3 or 4 parliaments (or indeed ever) which were not "election ploys"?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You seem to be suggesting if it's bad for the tories, regardless of everything else, it won't end. So what do you expect instead? The government to face endless and growing critism and do absolutely nothing about it?

I believe this is a little misinformed.

No I'm not suggesting that.

If the government was facing endless and ever growing criticism and it looked as if they had a deeply unpopular policy on their hands they'd dump it because it would become 'the right thing to do' and they'd 'listened'.

It's just another housing scheme - it's hardly a matter of high principle - they aren't going to risk an election loss over HTB.

If HTB gets dumped or watered down it's because they think that would be better electorally. If it doesn't they don't.

Percy1983

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Are there any government policies which have been implemented in the last 3 or 4 parliaments (or indeed ever) which were not "election ploys"?

This is indeed the bigger problem, the right choice isn't always the popular choice.

But to stay in you need to take the popular choice.

Labour spents years buying votes with benefits, the problem is to then cut said benefits back will lose votes despite it being the right thing to do.

So there will never be the best choice taken, just the best with the most supporters.

CLAPTON

democracy is about voters electing MPs and so the government

what's wrong with that?

Is it being suggested that the important people in 'government' know better that the electorate what is best for the UK?

if so do tell us who these clever people are

Loughton_Monkey

wotsthat wrote: »

.......If HTB gets dumped or watered down it's because they think that would be better electorally. If it doesn't they don't.

.... I agree, but additionally don't see it being dropped before the election.

Criticism from 'reputable' sources - when read carefully - is not criticism at all, but simply backside covering with 'warnings' that it may cause a bubble.....

The predomonantly left wing press know this is a vote winner and latch onto HTB as some sort of right wing plot, welcomed by the majority of potential conservative voters, to introduce the 'feelgood' factor...... which it probably is, but a clever one. Their only weapon is the "rubbish" the scheme as a bubble machine.

There's nothing like a bit of house equity to appease the majority of adults who live in their own homes. The 'wannabuys' who want genuinely to join the club now see a way forward without that dreaded "savings" nonsense.

Wannabuys who are miles away from any realistic hope of buying will be miffed and might vote Labour. Permanent renters don't understand it anyway and just want HB increased so they will vote labour.

As Chewy says, everything is an election ploy.

antrobus

wotsthat wrote: »

Yes but it comes with fees, administration and taxpayer risk..

Anything being done by government will involve fees, administration and taxpayer risk. Come to think of it, doing anything involves fees, administration and risk for someone.

wotsthat wrote: »

...A recovering economy might encourage lenders to do the same thing themselves more efficiently than a government scheme and with potentially less risk to the taxpayer.

You're missing the point. That's HTB2 operating as designed. It is a "temporary measure" designed to deal with a "cyclical issue" in the mortgage market.

antrobus

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

.... I agree, but additionally don't see it being dropped before the election...

HTB2 had an original design life of 3 years. Since the government stuck to its timetable for FFL for mortgages, there is a possibility that it might well keep its word as regards HTB2 as well.:)