Gordon brown to become unpopular if house prices come down ...

Hermia

blue_monkey wrote: »

Whenever they put houses up they are huge spanking 4 bedroom houses that cost minimum 500k or apartments that cost £250k+ and this has been the norm for the last 10 years and there have been nothing put up that cost less than this.

Oooh, this really annoys me. There is a housing shortage where I live because they have built a huge business park here and obviously lots of young people have come into the area because the business park contains loads of companies. There are very few flats here (not sure why), the only blocks of flats I know of are council ones. We desperately need flats and small houses, but everytime they announce a new housing development it's always full of 4 bedroom houses!

Gorgeous_George

My tenant could not afford to buy a house but she can afford to rent my BTL. Therefore, BTL makes housing affordable.



GG

ReportInvestor

If Gordon thought house prices were going to go into reverse we'd have an election before you could say "Second Thursday in October".

DontBelieveTheHype_4

GB cannot win this one.
If prices deflate he will be criticised for failing to control boom and bust and a return to negative equity, reposessions etc.
(We all remember his "no return to boom and bust" statement)
If prices continue to inflate he will be criticised for failing ordinary people with no hope of getting onto the property ladder after claiming that affordable housing is his top priority

Deals_2

well that is a start. but whether these policitians keep to their words is another thing. was speaking to a friend of mine in dublin and she says the reason house prices is static is because the stamp duties go up to 9% (even though the government has said it no longer needs the money) but they have not done anything about it. well it sounds like stamp duty over £250k here is also an issue so unless you are excessively wealthy or have lots of equity i htink the only ones benefitting are these people and the government!!!

dannyboycey wrote: »

It depends on what demographic you fall into. The conservatives are notorious for looking after the middle classes and high earners. Cameron trying to connect with the working classes by using 'street talk', and 'hugging hoodies' doesn't wash with me. Hard working people on below average incomes, single parent families, and those with disabilities will get screwed under a tory government.

Deals_2

here near london lots of apartments being built -though not cheap of course.

Hermia wrote: »

Oooh, this really annoys me. There is a housing shortage where I live because they have built a huge business park here and obviously lots of young people have come into the area because the business park contains loads of companies. There are very few flats here (not sure why), the only blocks of flats I know of are council ones. We desperately need flats and small houses, but everytime they announce a new housing development it's always full of 4 bedroom houses!

sm9ai

DontBelieveTheHype wrote: »

GB cannot win this one.
If prices deflate he will be criticised for failing to control boom and bust and a return to negative equity, reposessions etc.
(We all remember his "no return to boom and bust" statement)
If prices continue to inflate he will be criticised for failing ordinary people with no hope of getting onto the property ladder after claiming that affordable housing is his top priority

Have to agree, I fail to see how Gordon can win this, he is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't. But since he has had ten years to prevent this he deserves to be unpopular!

dannyboycey

DontBelieveTheHype wrote: »

GB cannot win this one.

This is why he's put a numpty in charge of the economy. To act as a scapegoat. He'll also blame HIPs. GB is still going to take a lot of the heat when the house of cards falls down though.

budget_counsellor_shaz

Found this......

http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUKL1392138120070713

Shaz

blue_monkey_2

Personally, with both labour and conservation both supporting the murder of 200,000 unborn children per year, I can't support either of them.

But that's slightly off topic perhaps :-)

Peter

Yes, off topic but if they had been born and unwanted we'd either be sticking the 16 year old mothers in council accomodation and paying them benefits or trying to find the unwanted kids adoptive or foster parents. This would cost more money for us taxpayers wouldn't it.

No I do not agree with it BUT a woman should have a choice and for some pregnancy is not a choice they can go through with so maybe we should respect that. I could give 50 reasons as to why but it has to be down to personal choice and I do not think any party should stop people having abortions. The world would be in chaos with dumped babies and illegal abortions - I shudder to think about it in all honesty.