We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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 Many Spare Houses Would We Have If ....
Comments
-
Haven't read this thread but agree with the OP.
If there was a shortage of food you would ration it. If there was a shortgage of water you would ration it.
Housing is such a basic need that it should be rationed too.
I would take a different approach, I would grow/produce more food and recycle more water, and extending the same principle to housing, I would build more houses.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 -
Our landlord sold his house this morning. Our next door neighbours put in an offer straight away at asking price to live in. Ended up being a bidding war between those and two investors who originally bid much lower than asking price.
An investor won. So they are stuck renting still, whilst another investor adds another property to his or her portfolio. It's absolutely disgusting.
This needs intervening now. It's getting out of hand.0 -
Haven't read this thread but agree with the OP.
If there was a shortage of food you would ration it. If there was a shortgage of water you would ration it.
Housing is such a basic need that it should be rationed too.
Indeed that is what a socialist would do
winners however, would grow more food, improve distribution, seek more water sources and build better storage and create more houses by removing the obstacles to building0 -
Our landlord sold his house this morning. Our next door neighbours put in an offer straight away at asking price to live in. Ended up being a bidding war between those and two investors who originally bid much lower than asking price.
An investor won. So they are stuck renting still, whilst another investor adds another property to his or her portfolio. It's absolutely disgusting.
This needs intervening now. It's getting out of hand.
what do you have against the new tenants ?0 -
When I was looking to buy most houses were being sold to investors. Agents would be almost offputting, saying "an investor's already put an offer in" even before I'd managed to force them into letting me view. All of the houses I viewed have since appeared on the rental market....
This one, an investor had already made a bid and I went in £2k higher as a "cash buyer". An investor had more clout to outbid me though, if they'd wished to do so. I went to the top of my price .... investors are often more able to go higher as they have, on average, more wealth than regular house buyers.... especially as I am buying at the very very cheapest end of the market in my area. As a rule of thumb there were no cheaper houses than the ones I was viewing that weren't ex-LA.
They just run around buying everything!0 -
You're being facetious. The new tenants are likely only innocent symptoms of this disease that blights the UK housing stock.what do you have against the new tenants ?
If we want to be a country that moves towards renting, then fine. But make it run by local authorities/state.
If we want to live in a country where home ownership is to be aspired to then we stop this BTL culture and something for nothing disease. Housing should not be a tool to make money.
The only people who defend BTL landlords are BTL landlords.
I should add that I am not a bitter tenant, I now own my own home, but I don't have one acquaintance that rents because they want to, it's because they have to.
Building more houses is the primary answer, but this will take time. Hitting BTL investors hard would be a quick and simple fix.0 -
create more houses by removing the obstacles to building
I'd have been happy to self build if there'd been plots available. If an option had presented itself where a house were allowed on a plot and I could get quotes from builders. The 2-3 plots that did come up while I was looking were more expensive than would make it possible - and for 4-bed detached houses, which I'd not need. I'd not have the time/money to have bought a plot with full PP for a 4 bed detached and changed it to two plots with 2-bed detached houses and flogged off the other plot as that's not assured it would ever be allowed. Plus, having to rent while all that was going on would have the potential that I'd no longer have the money left to do the build
0 -
You're being facetious. The new tenants are likely only innocent symptoms of this disease that blights the UK housing stock.
If we want to be a country that moves towards renting, then fine. But make it run by local authorities/state.
If we want to live in a country where home ownership is to be aspired to then we stop this BTL culture and something for nothing disease. Housing should not be a tool to make money.
The only people who defend BTL landlords are BTL landlords.
I should add that I am not a bitter tenant, I now own my own home, but I don't have one acquaintance that rents because they want to, it's because they have to.
Building more houses is the primary answer, but this will take time. Hitting BTL investors hard would be a quick and simple fix.
Where do the 600,000 per annum new arrivals in the UK get to live?
They are unlikely to have sufficient for a house deposit or be eligible for a mortgage.
Where do the approx 1 million young people that leave their parent homes each year, get to live.
Your solution is state control. The state is the problem and not the solution as it has consistently prevented the building of new home.
If you know of no-one the chooses to rent, that simply illustrates that you are completely out of touch with reality.0 -
Indeed that is what a socialist would do
winners however, would grow more food, improve distribution, seek more water sources and build better storage and create more houses by removing the obstacles to building
"Winners"?!
!!!!!! is a "winner" and what country or state could you show me to prove yoru suggestions have worked anywhere, ever?
Seems to me, and the proof seems to imply that the "winners" as you call them (I'm taking it this is the wealthy, or those with the means to do something?) push those lower down the chain out.
Look at Mumbai. Hugely rich country and look at how some live. Look at other hugely rich countries surrounded by slums.
At no point in history has there ever been a country where the "winners" (left to their own devices) sort the country out for the benefit of all. In every single scenario you have people living in extreme poverty often working for the rich.
London would be the same if were not for the socialist element of benefits and in work benefits. Though some suggest it's already going down the slum route with HMO's and people living 14 to a 3 bed terrace.
The capitalist system is a failed system when it comes to providing for all. There are more than often extreme divides all over the world where the system operates, especially where it operated without any restrain. The UK has restrain on the system.....leading to the scenerio in say, Kensington where only the poor and extremely rich can afford to live. No one in the middle can even touch the place.
That being said, the government are planning a scheme whereby all those "poor" in Kensington will be eradicated, leaving on the super rich. Clearly designed with that objective in mind.0 -
Where would people live who need to/want to rent?You're being facetious. The new tenants are likely only innocent symptoms of this disease that blights the UK housing stock.
If we want to be a country that moves towards renting, then fine. But make it run by local authorities/state.
If we want to live in a country where home ownership is to be aspired to then we stop this BTL culture and something for nothing disease. Housing should not be a tool to make money.
The only people who defend BTL landlords are BTL landlords.
I should add that I am not a bitter tenant, I now own my own home, but I don't have one acquaintance that rents because they want to, it's because they have to.
Building more houses is the primary answer, but this will take time. Hitting BTL investors hard would be a quick and simple fix.(AKA HRH_MUngo)
Member #10 of £2 savers club
Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology: Terry Eagleton0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards