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!
How to bring down London house prices (LSE Blog)
Comments
-
North East. (ie there are that only gets £5 per head compared to Londons £2,700)
Durham to Sunderland is 13 miles, yet it takes over an hour on public transport.
Many jobs are shift work, buses finish at 10:30/11:00, people can't get to & from work
the reason that London needs good public transport is that it is IMPOSSIBLE for people to commute by car.
Is it IMPOSSIBLE for people to drive between Durham and Sunderland?
And anyway, lots of people that commute to London take more than a hour.0 -
the reason that London needs good public transport is that it is IMPOSSIBLE for people to commute by car.
Is it IMPOSSIBLE for people to drive between Durham and Sunderland?
And anyway, lots of people that commute to London take more than a hour.
If you don't drive, yes.
Anyway you're missing the point.
London is in a mess though it's own(governments) making.
Most other countries 2nd city's population is ~50% of it's 1st.
London 8m ---> Birmingham 1m
There's the problem.
If you chuck all resources at the place it will grow at the expenses of others. The country really needs a re-balance.0 -
If you don't drive, yes.
Anyway you're missing the point.
London is in a mess though it's own(governments) making.
Most other countries 2nd city's population is ~50% of it's 1st.
London 8m ---> Birmingham 1m
There's the problem.
If you chuck all resources at the place it will grow at the expenses of others. The country really needs a re-balance.
London isn't a mess.
Why do you say it is?
The transport system of London has lagged behind the growth of economic activity and not the other way round.
people has chosen to come there and set up businesses: transport and housing have lagged behind.
Maybe the NE has lacked behind London but building transport links that no-one uses is a poor use of resources and won't bring industry there of itself.0 -
London isn't a mess.
Why do you say it is?
House price wise it is
The transport system of London has lagged behind the growth of economic activity and not the other way round.
It's still ahead of the rest of the country & as such sucking the life out of the place
people has chosen to come there and set up businesses: transport and housing have lagged behind.
Yes, it has more jobs than the regions. My brother had to relocate 300 miles south in order to get a job in his chosen field
Maybe the NE has lacked behind London but building transport links that no-one uses is a poor use of resources and won't bring industry there of itself.
People would use the if there were jobs.
accepted it's a bit chicken & egg situation
...............0 -
-
If you don't drive, yes.
Anyway you're missing the point.
London is in a mess though it's own(governments) making.
Most other countries 2nd city's population is ~50% of it's 1st.
London 8m ---> Birmingham 1m
There's the problem.
If you chuck all resources at the place it will grow at the expenses of others. The country really needs a re-balance.
Resources aren't chucked at London though. London is chucking resources at the rest of the country.
http://www.cebr.com/reports/how-money-in-some-regions-subsidises-others/In the UK there is considerable variance in tax receipts as a share of GDP between regions – from Northern Ireland where tax is only 27.7% of GDP to London where tax is 45.2% of GDP. These differences are about half the variances in public spending as shares of GDP. But for some taxes the regional differences are huge. The bulk of Stamp Duty Land Tax is paid in London and the South East. The 50p income tax rate is also largely a London and South East tax.
But the taxes and public spending reinforce each other. So whereas in London tax exceeds spending by 10.3% of its GDP, in Northern Ireland spending exceeds tax by 39.3% of its GDP.
To standardise this, you need to subtract the total deficit which on this definition (a few small items are excluded so it is not completely comparable with normal PSNB numbers) is 10.0%.
So London provides a net subsidy of 20.3% of GDP. Northern Ireland receives a net subsidy of 29.4%, while Wales receives a subsidy of 26.0% and the North East 22.2%.
So more than a fifth of the money that the Government spends in the North East of England is provided by the extra tax Londoners pay. Without the London subsidy, Government spending in the North East would have to fall by over a fifth.
The North East should probably arrange for a nice thank you card to be sent to the people of London once a year for their largesse.0 -
house prices are high because people want to live there : half of London are foreign born who have chosen to come there
Without London you would be in poverty:
why do you think the jobs would have gone to Durham rather that Berlin or Paris or Brussels etc?
People want to live there, because that't where the jobs are.
Simple as.
The NE has the highest unemployment & lowest house prices.
It's not rocket science.
Without London, there's no reason why any of it could be located elsewhere.
Actually thinking about it, Banking crisis that happened in London didn't it (with it being what it is? )
Can we have our money back?0 -
Resources aren't chucked at London though. London is chucking resources at the rest of the country.
http://www.cebr.com/reports/how-money-in-some-regions-subsidises-others/
So more than a fifth of the money that the Government spends in the North East of England is provided by the extra tax Londoners pay. Without the London subsidy, Government spending in the North East would have to fall by over a fifth.
The North East should probably arrange for a nice thank you card to be sent to the people of London once a year for their largesse.
Chicken & egg
London sucks the life out of everywhere else0 -
People want to live there, because that't where the jobs are.
Simple as.
The NE has the highest unemployment & lowest house prices.
It's not rocket science.
Without London, there's no reason why any of it could be located elsewhere.
Actually thinking about it, Banking crisis that happened in London didn't it (with it being what it is? )
Can we have our money back?
Until Government borrowing hits 23% of GDP, there is no subsidy from the North East to London. All that happened in the banking crisis is that the subsidies fell a little.0 -
Until Government borrowing hits 23% of GDP, there is no subsidy from the North East to London. All that happened in the banking crisis is that the subsidies fell a little.
Again..............
Governments create an environment whereby they make it more attractive to invest in London. As such other regions get left behind.
There's a much much bigger picture than that your painting
It's not as simple as saying London raises x, the rest does y0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards