Action must be taken on house prices in London

Cornucopia

There is no way the present Mayor/Government are going to do anything to reduce incoming foreign investment in the UK. (Probably no way any Government would do it).

mayonnaise

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm drifting away from this forum due to these sorts of posts (hurrah I here you all say, but it's a bit quiet without any other viewpoint, isn't it!).

Not quiet at all.

There's interesting debate about Scottish Independence, perception of income brackets, Labour tax policy,...

Admittedly, there's less of The Graham Devon Show, but surely we can all agree that's a good thing. :beer:

Graham_Devon

Cornucopia wrote: »

There is no way the present Mayor/Government are going to do anything to reduce incoming foreign investment in the UK. (Probably no way any Government would do it).

They will do anything if the pressure builds up enough.

That pressure can come from many angles. Just the rising housing benefits to keep people residing in London (and the many more that become eligible as house prices rise) is one pressure.

When the pressure from other factors outweighs the "investment" of someone buying a house and leaving it empty, they will look to do something. That pressure is building, hence the EY Item Club's response.

It should be noted that the EY Item Club are very influencial when it comes to the BOE, as the BOE use their reports and analysis apparently.

Cornucopia

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They will do anything if the pressure builds up enough.

Personally, I doubt it. What is this "pressure" you speak of?

That pressure can come from many angles. Just the rising housing benefits to keep people residing in London (and the many more that become eligible as house prices rise) is one pressure.

That's not how HB works. If the HB cannot stretch to a 5-bed mansion in Chelsea, then the claimant will not get a 5-bed mansion in Chelsea. And the big prices do not (generally) extend to social housing areas.

When the pressure from other factors outweighs the "investment" of someone buying a house and leaving it empty, they will look to do something. That pressure is building, hence the EY Item Club's response.

If the number of empty properties becomes enough of an embarrassment, then they *might* do something. And that something is likely to be a tax on empty properties.

It should be noted that the EY Item Club are very influencial when it comes to the BOE, as the BOE use their reports and analysis apparently.

Never heard of them, myself.

I have to say that you seem a little obsessed with the idea of central Government action towards the housing market, which is clearly completely unprecedented in recent UK history. All flavours of English politician are now committed free-marketeers.

michaels

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They will do anything if the pressure builds up enough.

That pressure can come from many angles. Just the rising housing benefits to keep people residing in London (and the many more that become eligible as house prices rise) is one pressure.

When the pressure from other factors outweighs the "investment" of someone buying a house and leaving it empty, they will look to do something. That pressure is building, hence the EY Item Club's response.

It should be noted that the EY Item Club are very influencial when it comes to the BOE, as the BOE use their reports and analysis apparently.

Surely selling London flats to foreigners is what lets us afford all those ipads, Mercs, Samsung tellies etc?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm drifting away from this forum due to these sorts of posts (hurrah I here you all say, but it's a bit quiet without any other viewpoint, isn't it!).

There does seem to have been an inverse correlation between the state of the economy and your rate of posting. Could it be that you're just a foul weather poster? Have bought a house? Other life changes?

You've endured much worse than the odd bit of pedantry during your years here so seems unlikely to be the real reason.

CLAPTON

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm drifting away from this forum due to these sorts of posts (hurrah I here you all say, but it's a bit quiet without any other viewpoint, isn't it!).

The sheer pedantism of replies is just not worth the time or effort. We can't discuss anything any longer as it's all out nit picking, pedantism and point scoring.

The article states:
Granted, I missed out "prepared".

But hell, some of the outright misleading and incorrect titles posted on here by others leads me to believe it's not about the title at all. It's about doing anything to demean the article or the poster. Which is fine. But it's alienating lots of discussion.

virtually every economic statement warms about the possibility of action in the future ( with loads of ifs and maybes)

that is entirely and hugely different to saying action is needed now.

in fact the article seems to rule out action now

System

wotsthat wrote: »

There does seem to have been an inverse correlation between the state of the economy and your rate of posting. Could it be that you're just a foul weather poster? Have bought a house? Other life changes?

You've endured much worse than the odd bit of pedantry during your years here so seems unlikely to be the real reason.

I'm looking forward to the flood of returning members the next time an index shows a minus.

BillJones

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The sheer pedantism

Do you mean pedantry?

I think that if you put in a bit more care and attention, and made suer that you were accurately summarising your links, then you may get a few fewer "pedantic" replies. Your constant misrepresentation to fit your agenda really does need people to keep picking you up on it.

MFW_ASAP

BillJones wrote: »

Do you mean pedantry?

I think that if you put in a bit more care and attention, and made suer that you were accurately summarising your links, then you may get a few fewer "pedantic" replies. Your constant misrepresentation to fit your agenda really does need people to keep picking you up on it.

Exactly this.