Osborne: Scrapping HTB would be "intergenerational theft"

Graham_Devon

My question would be....why is he saying this now?

Generali

alberty wrote: »

I would keep protecting people from themselves in the blind panic of the London housing market, 3.5x -4x mortgage lending cap. The cash buyers buy in the knowlege they will make money from mortgaged buyers when they are ready to sell. It would take policy intervention to New York-ify whole towns of London not just just convert a few more victorian terraces and charge for each flat what the whole thing cost a year before.

The Government can't and shouldn't protect people from themselves.

If a graduate accountant takes on a 5x salary mortgage, the chances are that in 3 years it'll be a 2.5x salary mortgage and, if they get together with a fellow grad at work, within 5 years it'll be 1x joint salary. What protection does someone like that need?

The rest of your post, frankly, is a nonsense. Current buyers have no idea who they'll sell to.

System

alberty wrote: »

My (totally unresearched) question is, the slightest easing of mortgage restrictions that we saw last year resulted in a 25% boom in london. If the mortgage market was unrestricted and only buyers nerve restrticted what they could borrow prices would probably double, so by the time town planning and increasing the housing supply has happened there will be a catastrophic imbalance between what early and new buyers have paid for the same value property, which shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Sorry, what is your question?

alberty

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

Sorry, what is your question?

That's besides the point , which was answered: two grads on 45k (rising to 70k after 3 years, not that rare in London) could pay off a 5x mortgage in 10 years or less and need no state imposed restrictions. I checked that using the MSE overpayments mortgage calculator (say overpaying 2k a month.) I certainly wouldn't want to give them that power right now to outbid me on a railway cottage in zone 5, but once I buy I'll be the biggest supporter of free markets.

the_flying_pig

risible, witless, sh1te from not-so-gorgeous george.

until about 1980 government was consistently building 100k council houses per year. that housebuilding was win-win for the younger generations of the time.

i suppose you could argue that stopping the building was an act of "inter-generational theft", if you were particularly given to melodrama & lyrical flourishes, but HTB [rules allowing people to borrow lots & lots], a policy that nearly all neutral commentators hate, a policy which clearly unambiguously benefits far fewer young households than the council houses did [since its knockon effect of higher prices hurts young people who don't actually use it]...

how much had he had to drink when spewing out that particular quote?

Graham_Devon

the_flying_pig wrote: »

until about 1980 government was consistently building 100k council houses per year. that housebuilding was win-win for the younger generations of the time.

It's all a load of nonsense really, and we shouldn't be dancing around the elephant here.

Those who support HTB, are, almost exclusively, those who have no reason or desire to use it. The only thing they all have in common is they have property investments.

It's wrapped up in a facade that they support it as it helps people get on the ladder.

Thing is, you mention what you do, and suggest councl housing should be built and the very same people who are so concerned about people getting housing come up with a million and one reasons as to why council housing is not the answer.

No...the only answer is policies which, it just so happens, pushes up the value of their investments.

Remove those people from those who support HTB and the support drops off a cliff.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Thing is, you mention what you do, and suggest councl housing should be built and the very same people who are so concerned about people getting housing come up with a million and one reasons as to why council housing is not the answer.

I'd prefer 200k houses were built pa using HTB than 200k council houses. The cost to the taxpayer (both short and long term) will be dramatically lower. Council housing should be for people who really can't arrange their own housing i.e. Life's unfortunates rather than those who CBA.

Of course the ideal would be for planning to be relaxed to reduce the need for big departments in companies to deal with the red tape and 'investments' in the local community. The new house premium would fall and so would the premium for land with planning. HTB would wither on the vine. We'd all live happily ever after.

Instead the generational rubbish will continue because people don't understand that houses are allocated based on ability to pay and people with more years under their belts are better able to pay.

Without substantial building we'll go from blaming the boomers to blaming gen X, Y etc. Anything to avoid the obvious.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's all a load of nonsense really, and we shouldn't be dancing around the elephant here.

Oh dearie me.....

Graham, you've been dancing around the elephant in the room for the last 7 years, constantly trying to find ever more bizarre and incredulous explanations for HPI in the UK except the real one, supply and demand.

If are going to cure the shortage of housing, we must also cure the shortage of lending. The last 7 years of mortgage famine only made the shortage worse.

It really is that simple.

And we did warn you at the time, that rationing mortgages would only reduce house building to record lows, enrich landlords, and prevent millions of people from getting their own house.

You didn't listen then, and it seems you still aren't listening today, even though those outcomes have happened and are now clear for all to see.

It's wrapped up in a facade that they support it as it helps people get on the ladder.

It quite demonstrably does help people get on the ladder.... And help get more houses built.

New housing starts are up 34% since HTB was introduced, and the number of FTB-s has also risen markedly.

It continues to amaze me that you think letting more people buy houses and getting more houses built is a bad thing.

Whether through HTB1 which is only for new builds, or HTB2 which allows chains to progress where someone further up the chain may be buying a new build.

Thing is, you mention what you do, and suggest councl housing should be built and the very same people who are so concerned about people getting housing come up with a million and one reasons as to why council housing is not the answer.

We need more council houses. We need more social houses. We need more private rented houses. We need more owner-occupied houses.

We need more houses..... Of all types.

No...the only answer is policies which, it just so happens, pushes up the value of their investments.

Remove those people from those who support HTB and the support drops off a cliff.

The shortage of housing pushes up the value of housing investments.

HTB has had virtually no impact on price as so few of them have been issued, a truly tiny percentage, and they've created so many extra newbuilds.

In fact there is an inverse relationship between price and the popularity of HTB by area.

The areas with the fewest HTB mortgages have seen the most growth in price.

The areas with the most HTB mortgages have seen the weakest growth in price.

Blaming HTB for price growth is just another desperate clutching at straws attempt to avoid 'the elephant'...... Prices in the UK are high primarily because we have a massive housing shortage.

It wasn't lax lending, it wasn't liar loans, it wasn't sub prime, it wasn't any of the million other things you've tried to blame instead of the real reason.... Which is simply not enough houses.

Now look, I understand why you continue to be a housing shortage denier.... Because to accept that the real reason for high prices is the shortage, is to also accept that the only way prices will ever fall sustainably for the long term is if we build a few million more of them.

And we all know that isn't happening in anything less than a timeframe measured in decades. So your dreams of a crash have gone up in smoke.

But the least you could do is just accept you've been wrong, instead of continuing to spout the same old discredited memes you pick up from hpc, time and time again.

Bantex_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Oh dearie me.....

Graham, you've been dancing around the elephant in the room for the last 7 years, constantly trying to find ever more bizarre and incredulous explanations for HPI in the UK except the real one, supply and demand.

If are going to cure the shortage of housing, we must also cure the shortage of lending. The last 7 years of mortgage famine only made the shortage worse.

It really is that simple.

And we did warn you at the time, that rationing mortgages would only reduce house building to record lows, enrich landlords, and prevent millions of people from getting their own house.

You didn't listen then, and it seems you still aren't listening today, even though those outcomes have happened and are now clear for all to see.



It quite demonstrably does help people get on the ladder.... And help get more houses built.

New housing starts are up 34% since HTB was introduced, and the number of FTB-s has also risen markedly.

It continues to amaze me that you think letting more people buy houses and getting more houses built is a bad thing.

Whether through HTB1 which is only for new builds, or HTB2 which allows chains to progress where someone further up the chain may be buying a new build.



We need more council houses. We need more social houses. We need more private rented houses. We need more owner-occupied houses.

We need more houses..... Of all types.



The shortage of housing pushes up the value of housing investments.

HTB has had virtually no impact on price as so few of them have been issued, a truly tiny percentage, and they've created so many extra newbuilds.

In fact there is an inverse relationship between price and the popularity of HTB by area.

The areas with the fewest HTB mortgages have seen the most growth in price.

The areas with the most HTB mortgages have seen the weakest growth in price.

Blaming HTB for price growth is just another desperate clutching at straws attempt to avoid 'the elephant'...... Prices in the UK are high primarily because we have a massive housing shortage.

It wasn't lax lending, it wasn't liar loans, it wasn't sub prime, it wasn't any of the million other things you've tried to blame instead of the real reason.... Which is simply not enough houses.

Now look, I understand why you continue to be a housing shortage denier.... Because to accept that the real reason for high prices is the shortage, is to also accept that the only way prices will ever fall sustainably for the long term is if we build a few million more of them.

And we all know that isn't happening in anything less than a timeframe measured in decades. So your dreams of a crash have gone up in smoke.

But the least you could do is just accept you've been wrong, instead of continuing to spout the same old discredited memes you pick up from hpc, time and time again.

I would prefer fewer people.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Bantex wrote: »

I would prefer fewer people.

That's nice.

We need more people. So we will get more people.

No matter what the politicians may say in public....;)