Renters pushed to breaking point as Britain's selfish homeowners gloat their hands

Cornucopia

mwpt wrote: »

Sure. I compromised on area, location, size, etc. But I look at friends who bought even just 10 years ago, and jobs paying less than me, and I couldn't afford their houses now. Nor could they. It's clearly got worse for us, don't know why people deny this.

I'm not sure "deny" is the right word. It's more that (a) it's a pointless, self-pitying observation, and (b) often in these threads we find that the issue is not so much price, per se, but unrealistic expectations at a price.

But I have a right to question the reason for the shortage. I don't believe there are too many people in the world yet.

Not the World. Why would it be the World? SE England, and other areas of the country with local/regional housing shortages.

We have plenty of space to build. We have the ability to build large, good quality apartment buildings, in areas close to employment (east London for e.g.). This would mean younger city workers could afford to move in, free up family homes they were sharing outside. There is plenty of space even within the M25 ripe for development. We definitely have the space, the means, just not the will. I have the right to question and be angry about that.

I'd certainly like to understand what the planning rules inside and just outside the M25 are - is there still the concept of a "green belt", for example? FWIW, I do think planners lack imagination, and have fallen into the trap in many cases of being gate-keepers on development, rather than enablers. However, most city centres have exactly the kind of development you are talking about, and in some cases, they are not favoured by the market. Tiny 2-bed Victorian cottages are certainly what the London market favours - they aren't building any more of those, and never will. Hence in some areas, a 2-bed Victorian conversion flat is more sought-after, and more expensive than a modern 3-bed house.

And I am sorry, it was easier in the the past to afford a much better place, not just in certain years, but on average. And even if there were a few years when it wasn't, I still maintain we as a society should expect housing to improve and remain affordable on average.

It should be like technology - and have got smaller & cheaper? The reality is that there are lower-cost/higher-tech construction methods, but they are not favoured by planners, developers or customers for various reasons. Also, the underlying high price of land makes them commercially less viable than they would be if land were cheaper (i.e. you need to put an expensive building on an expensive piece of land, to justify the cost of the land).

Agree partly with this. I visit pubs or restaurants around "trendy" areas in London, and nearby are very nice, tall ceiling, spacious buildings, and on the steps smoking, sit people who are clearly amongst the poorest in society. It's not that I don't feel for them, but at the same time, I can't help thinking my tax money helps keep them in these buildings that would be far out of my own reach. Doesn't seem fair.

This is another aspect of the topic that annoys older people. Life isn't fair - it never was, and never will be. Some aspects of mine and my peers' childhoods were positively Victorian by modern standards. However, you don't generally see us all bunching up on social media to decry the past and the foibles of our parents' generation who allowed it to happen.

If you are looking to improve matters of fairness in the World, then there are many more deserving and more pressing issues to address before we get to the impossible-to-fix issue of cramming all the people who want to live in Walthamstow "village" into Walthamstow "village" .

But building dreary soul sucking dormitories and filling them with people who need a little help in life doesn't sound like a good way to give them the lift they need.

I agree - I think the "dormitory" concept is poor, divisive and cruel. However, there is good work being done in developing eco-housing, often at a price and in materials that lend themselves to temporary buildings on non-owned land (i.e. land leased/loaned from a Government or corporate owner). For me, that's a way of addressing a short-term lag in permanent construction, and the Government procrastination behind it.

wotsthat

mwpt wrote: »

Sure. I compromised on area, location, size, etc. But I look at friends who bought even just 10 years ago, and jobs paying less than me, and I couldn't afford their houses now. Nor could they. It's clearly got worse for us, don't know why people deny this.

Is this London/South East? The value of my house in the Midlands hasn't kept up with inflation in the last 10 years.

mwpt wrote: »

But I have a right to question the reason for the shortage. I don't believe there are too many people in the world yet. We have plenty of space to build. We have the ability to build large, good quality apartment buildings, in areas close to employment (east London for e.g.). This would mean younger city workers could afford to move in, free up family homes they were sharing outside. There is plenty of space even within the M25 ripe for development. We definitely have the space, the means, just not the will. I have the right to question and be angry about that.

A shortage you say? Good to see the HPC goggles starting to clear.

wotsthat

mwpt wrote: »

Why do people make up their own words when debating something? Where did you even come up with that?

It's what you said.

mwpt wrote: »

Sorry mate, clearly you already own (maybe multiple properties) and I think you view is shaped accordingly. I just don't agree with you, at all.

You don't agree that nicer houses command a higher price or you don't agree that houses will always be comparatively more expensive when compared to record lows?

I don't see how my housing status impacts what was a statement of the bleeding obvious.

lisyloo

For the vast majority, being unemployed isnt a choice and they may have already set up roots,family,school etc and need a little help to get back on their feet.

You should READ what people say properly if you are going to sit in judgment.
I said LONG term unemployed - which would exclude those needing a bit of help to get back on their feet.
I have great compassion for those who are unable to work or can't work for health related reasons. I know it's a soul destroying state of affairs.

Do you think it's OK for the long term unemployed to sit around in London, whilst those of us who are working cram into cattle trucks?

lisyloo

It's clearly got worse for us, don't know why people deny this.

I'm not one of the people that denies there is a housing issue.

I think we've suffered chronic underinvestment.

It really doesn't help someone's case though if they won't move into a place because they can't walk when it's raining or move somewhere that has brown carpet.
Plenty of those of us who are owner occupiers moved into houses without carpets, curtains and didn't have everything on day 1.
The attitude of "want it all now on a plate" doesn't help.

mwpt

Cornucopia wrote: »

This is another aspect of the topic that annoys older people. Life isn't fair - it never was, and never will be. Some aspects of mine and my peers' childhoods were positively Victorian by modern standards. However, you don't generally see us all bunching up on social media to decry the past and the foibles of our parents' generation who allowed it to happen.

We'll settle to agree on most points that you make. I maintain that there are methods to build decent quality homes in decent locations that would help the majority of society. We need the will, and luckily with the shifting demographics, this is only a matter of time (NIMBYs and other selfish interests beware).

However, I want to address your point above. Life is not fair! That is an unmistakable truth and everyone should know it. BUT, so what? Does that mean because it's the truth people should just sit back and take it? Like I have said a number of times, I've now bought (compromised on a lot). So I'm on this fantasy ladder that people talk about. But that doesn't turn me instantly selfish. I want better housing and just because "life isn't fair" doesn't mean I'm going to keep quiet about it. If there is a forum that has people talking about housing and the economy, I'm damned well going to post my views on the situation! I don't care how little good it does, if it changes one persons views that might help in the future, that's fine.

mwpt

wotsthat wrote: »

It's what you said.

You should be able to quote my post then where I said I wanted to be able to buy at record low prices. I picked the arbitrary figure of 20 years. I could have picked 30, or 10, or 40.

mwpt

wotsthat wrote: »

A shortage you say? Good to see the HPC goggles starting to clear.

Don't be a smug patronising !!!!.

ukcarper

mwpt wrote: »

We'll settle to agree on most points that you make. I maintain that there are methods to build decent quality homes in decent locations that would help the majority of society. We need the will, and luckily with the shifting demographics, this is only a matter of time (NIMBYs and other selfish interests beware).

However, I want to address your point above. Life is not fair! That is an unmistakable truth and everyone should know it. BUT, so what? Does that mean because it's the truth people should just sit back and take it? Like I have said a number of times, I've now bought (compromised on a lot). So I'm on this fantasy ladder that people talk about. But that doesn't turn me instantly selfish. I want better housing and just because "life isn't fair" doesn't mean I'm going to keep quiet about it. If there is a forum that has people talking about housing and the economy, I'm damned well going to post my views on the situation! I don't care how little good it does, if it changes one persons views that might help in the future, that's fine.

I'd agree with most of that but what good is moaning on hidden forum going to do. Unsurprisingly the fortunate people who live in these nice areas overlooking green belt land fight to save it but do you see counter demonstrations by people wanting the planning applications to succeed.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

mwpt wrote: »

I agree with most of your points (and those of other posters) that while we have this shortage, we have to make compromises.

But I have a right to question the reason for the shortage. I don't believe there are too many people in the world yet. We have plenty of space to build. We have the ability to build large, good quality apartment buildings, in areas close to employment (east London for e.g.). This would mean younger city workers could afford to move in, free up family homes they were sharing outside. There is plenty of space even within the M25 ripe for development. We definitely have the space, the means, just not the will. I have the right to question and be angry about that.

I agree completely, you should be angry about it, that we build so few homes in comparison to housing need and have done for so long is little short of a national disgrace.

Hopefully you'll do something constructive with that anger and start lobbying your MP to get more houses built, more finance available for people to buy them with, and fewer restrictions on where they can be located.

The problem with many of the people that come over here from 'that other forum' is that they direct their anger at entirely the wrong targets.

- It's not the fault of a boomer that they came of age to buy a house at a time when there wasn't a housing shortage.

- It's not the fault of a landlord that they saw a commercial opportunity and positioned themselves accordingly.

- And you can't blame people that bought pre-crash on great mortgage deals and have taken advantage of the lowest rates in history since then to lower their lifetime housing costs.

These people are acting rationally given the facts as they exist at the time.

Whereas some people (the ones that got 'crash-fever') chose to act irrationally, in the expectation that they would be right and the majority wrong, and it hasn't worked out for them. They either gave in and eventually bought a smaller house in a worse location than they could have previously, or waited so long they became priced out. The only person they can be angry at is themselves.