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
-
Information is useful only if you understand it...0
-
chucknorris wrote: »Graham, he obviously means:
Potentially cheaper than they might otherwise be, if allowed to be increased above the rate of inflation.
Yer, cheers.
That's what I said.0 -
jjlandlord wrote: »Information is useful only if you understand it...
It's not information when you state "the labour party state they will make rents cheaper".
It's misrepresentation.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »It's not information when you state "the labour party state they will make rents cheaper".
It's misrepresentation.Graham_Devon wrote: »And why do you always have to have these pointless semantics arguments?
Don't know - why do you?0 -
The article does say that;
Recent rapid population increases in a low interest rate and high global liquidity environment has resulted in accelerated house prices increases in Singapore.
A bit like the UK then.
And then goes on to say that the "Singapore housing market is unusual" because of the "extensive intervention of the government in regulating housing supply and demand in both the HDB and private housing sectors".
Which would lead one to conclude that extensive government intervention hasn't prevented acclerated house price increases.
NB. HDB = Housing & Development Board - Singapore's public housing authority
Their current policies may be different to what they were back in the day. Anyhoo, according to this article the nationalisation I'd read about may refer to the 1966 compulsory buy-out of major landlords at sub-market prices.
http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1595&context=soe_researchThere is no honour to be had in not knowing a thing that can be known - Danny Baker0 -
It is this simple
London 1961 - 1991
Lost 1 million in population
Built ~900,000 additional homes
Result: Decrease in occupancy rates and affordable prices
London estimated 2001 - 2031
GAINED 3 million in population
Built ~ 700,000 homes
Result: Increase in occupancy rate and expensive homes
it really is different this time
Simples.....0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »It's not information when you state "the labour party state they will make rents cheaper".
It's misrepresentation.
No, it's a fact.
The reality is that Labour do not know what they are doing, they are just creating spin.
E.g. taken from their website:
"This will stop excessive rate rises out of sync with the market, and help families plan ahead and make sure landlords have a stable income."
Clearly they still haven't understood what 'market' and 'market price' mean.0 -
jjlandlord wrote: »No, it's a fact.
The reality is that Labour do not know what they are doing, they are just creating spin.
E.g. taken from their website:
"This will stop excessive rate rises out of sync with the market, and help families plan ahead and make sure landlords have a stable income."
Clearly they still haven't understood what 'market' and 'market price' mean.
Now isn't that nice of the labour party trying to make sure that I have a stable income, sorry guys, but I'd rather stick with DC.Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
chucknorris wrote: »Now isn't that nice of the labour party trying to make sure that I have a stable income, sorry guys, but I'd rather stick with DC.
Ah great, I had missed that gem!
Note that 'stable income' does not imply any level of income!
They just want to help out by making sure landlords do not receive too much money at a time. So kind of them.0 -
Their current policies may be different to what they were back in the day. Anyhoo, according to this article the nationalisation I'd read about may refer to the 1966 compulsory buy-out of major landlords at sub-market prices.
http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1595&context=soe_research
Even if there was a "1966 compulsory buy-out of major landlords at sub-market prices" it does not appear to have provided much of a long term solution.
As far as Singapore is concerned; "The housing market has been in a severe state of disequilibrium arising from unexpected housing shortage in a supply constrained market with a subsidized sector." That is, it's in exactly the same place as the UK.
It's all down to simple supply and demand.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards