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!
Two thirds of private rental landlords will leave sector if Labour win
Comments
-
Not in the interests of all the people, in the best interests of the city. We need more houses, the private sector isn't building enough and has never been able to build enough.....
Why ever not? The French seem to manage it. So it can't be that difficult.... Building houses is something councils can do and have done successfully in the past. ....
A council that wants something built will invite bids. From the very private sector that you claim can't do it....The solution is obvious.
Magic solutions always are to those that propose them.0 -
The problem as I see it that some people seem to think that only the private sector can solve the problem and others think only the state while what is needed is a mixture of both. I really can't see how you can build enough property in London and surrounding areas to bring prices down to a level where low paid workers could afford to rent let alone buy without help from government.0
-
We have a rental property, its my wifes previous home, it will be mortgage free in under a year. Our tenant has been in place for about eight years so we will not sell when the mortgage is clear as we consider it their home.
While it would be financially beneficial to keep it as long as possiblr we may sell when they moved out.
I do think private rents should be better controlled, especially if we focus on the state of the property, I have viewed some dives in my time, including a house without a bath or shower! It should be easier for both tenants and landlords to resolve issues and I would be happy if it was a legal requirement for all landlords to pay for this service on a yearly basis and to have regular inspections to make sure the property is fit for purpose and everything has been done properly eg gas safety as there is no way I would trust an estate agent to verify anything. If a landlord fails they should have x time to rectify all issues otherwise be heavily fined until they get their finger out.
The worst private rentals often home the most vulnerable and we need to ensure they are appropriately safe guarded.
The private and public sector really do need to work together to improve housing in the UK.0 -
No, obviously in that sentance I was talking about something Maggie STARTEDSo when you posted;
We were all supposed to guess that by 'Maggie' you didn't mean Thatcher, you meant every PM since 1979?:)
No where did I ever say the Blair or anyone else post Thatcher did a good job of building houses, quite the opposite. Since Maggie's reforms house building has been woeful under all governments. Primarily because nobody has reversed them and reintroduced council's building whole estates.
But yet the statistics I have quoted show that the failure to "build enough houses" was far more acute under Blair than Thatcher.
She had the idea of leaving it to the private sector, which completely and uttery failed. Quoting total houses build whilst she was prime minister is irrelevant since she didn't magically change the rules as soon as she came to power. If you look at the statistics you'll see that houses being built per year went down under Thatcher.Thatcher had the idea of not building houses? Who knew?
Here's a lovely graph since you can't understand what I am saying with basic english:
So you can see that Thatcher cut the number of council houses built and successive governments carried on with her policy. It has failed.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0 -
No, obviously in that sentance I was talking about something Maggie STARTED...
No it isn't obvious. And you'd be wrong anyway. Thatcher did not start not building houses....No where did I ever say the Blair or anyone else post Thatcher did a good job of building houses, quite the opposite. Since Maggie's reforms house building has been woeful under all governments. Primarily because nobody has reversed them and reintroduced council's building whole estates.
Doesn't matter whether you did or didn't. I'm just pointing out that the statistics show that the failure to build insufficient houses happened in the 00s and not the 1980s....Here's a lovely graph since you can't understand what I am saying with basic english:...
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by posting a graph that only serves to illustrate the statistics I've already thrown at you...So you can see that Thatcher cut the number of council houses built and successive governments carried on with her policy. It has failed.
So now you're back to council houses. Just now you were complaining that those very statistics were a "little misleading".:)
And you're still blaming everything on Thatcher.:rotfl:0 -
Not in the interests of all the people, in the best interests of the city. We need more houses, the private sector isn't building enough and has never been able to build enough. Building houses is something councils can do and have done successfully in the past. The solution is obvious.
Exactly - instead of throwing hundreds of billions at banks via QE/FLS etc etc the Government could have used creative ways productively to deliver more assets (inc housing) not just push up the prices of existing assets. But short termism won - as it does now with today's career politicians who believe in nothing bar getting re-elected.
Post WWII and in the 1930s we were on the breadline, close to bankruptcy and literally had nothing - yet the Government and local councils delivered more housing in a single year than current governments manage in 5. Now since we outsourced the process to developers little or nothing is built - relative to the housing pressures faced.
As you say - maybe we should go back to a system that actually worked and delivered the sort of large scale affordable housing we need. That graph above speaks volumes - it could make you cry. And lets not blame Mrs T for it all - she delivered about thirty times as much council housing in 10 years than New Labour managed in 13!0 -
From what I can see the graph show when the decline started falling from almost 150,000 in 1979 to under 25,000 in 1989 and falling to a less than 10,000 at the end of Major government with further small decline at the beginning of Blair government.No it isn't obvious. And you'd be wrong anyway. Thatcher did not start not building houses.
Doesn't matter whether you did or didn't. I'm just pointing out that the statistics show that the failure to build insufficient houses happened in the 00s and not the 1980s
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove by posting a graph that only serves to illustrate the statistics I've already thrown at you.
So now you're back to council houses. Just now you were complaining that those very statistics were a "little misleading".:)
And you're still blaming everything on Thatcher.:rotfl:0 -
....Post WWII and in the 1930s we were on the breadline, close to bankruptcy and literally had nothing - yet the Government and local councils delivered more housing in a single year than current governments manage in 5. Now since we outsourced the process to developers little or nothing is built - relative to the housing pressures faced....
In the 1930s we had a boom in private sector house building, fuelled by cheap land and cheap finance. Hence the reason why we have so many 1930s semis still knocking around.
http://brickonomics.building.co.uk/2011/10/why-a-1930s-style-private-housing-boom-seems-highly-unlikely/
In the aftermath of WWII, 1,016,349 new homes were completed between August 1945 and December 1951. Or about 170,000 a year. That's actually not a huge number. And a lot of them were prefabs. It's only since the 2007 crash that UK house building that we've been building less than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Attlee....As you say - maybe we should go back to a system that actually worked and delivered the sort of large scale affordable housing we need....
Which one? Are you advocating a 1930s style private sector boom, or a 1940s style public sector programme only achievable by physical restrictions on private sector building?..And lets not blame Mrs T for it all - she delivered about thirty times as much council housing in 10 years than New Labour managed in 13!
Let's not blame Mrs T for it at all. Let's deal with facts rather than party politics.0 -
If you want to involve party politics in this, right to buy was first mooted in Labour's 1959 manifesto.0
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
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards