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!
Corbynomics: A Dystopia
Comments
-
In the south east I think not.
They bought in the west Midlands.
London is only about 13% of the housing stock the SE about the same again. The other 80% of the country is very affordable.
Also we should not base the criteria for housing on a couple on minimum wage. Vast majority earn more than that.0 -
In the south east I think not.
Why would it be a mindset problem for me I have a very nice house just I realise in large parts of the country the more heavily populated parts it's impossible for people on low wages to buy.
Will you accept that in 75% of the country property is very affordable? Often cheaper than even council housing0 -
The council could buy house for £105 a month and pay £105 a month why give the couple a house.Why should the council buy the house and pay £105pm in interest and then let it to the couple for £450 a month when the couple can buy directly and pay £105 a month?
You keep crying about people who can't afford at any price. Not at £70k not at £60k not at £50k....not at £10k. While true there are pelnty of people who couldn't afford a house for £10k does that then mean if house prices were £10k the at housing would be unaffordable?0 -
No maybe geographically but not for a percentage of population after all almost 33% of population England lives in London and south east and that doesn't include the part Essex.Will you accept that in 75% of the country property is very affordable? Often cheaper than even council housing0 -
No maybe geographically but not for a percentage of population after all 33% of population England lives in London and south east and that doesn't include the part Essex.
Back to talking to a brick wall.
Which of these regions are unaffordable?
Scotland. NI. Wales. NE. NW. W-Midlands E-Midlands. SW. Y&H. East? Those regions represent about 75% of the population and housing stock of the UK and all those regions are affordable. Do you disagree?0 -
For a start east includes Essex most if not all the other regions have expensive areas what you are saying is in just because Stoke is cheap all of the West Midlands.Back to talking to a brick wall.
Which of these regions are unaffordable?
Scotland. NI. Wales. NE. NW. W-Midlands E-Midlands. SW. Y&H. East? Those regions represent about 75% of the population and housing stock of the UK and all those regions are affordable. Do you disagree?0 -
I thought you were proposing to let people use housing benefit to pay a mortgage.
Yes.
Are you suggesting the council buy it for £105 a month and rent it out for £105 per month? It doesn't work like that. The council adds overheads. I'm just on my phone so I don't have the ONS spreadsheet so just going off memory it's something like £400pm for the average social flat. So you can think of it as £300pm overheads
Also it wouldn't even cost £105 a month for the governments to buy homes. It would cost a lot less they are more likely to be paying 1% on the interest in which case a £80k home would only be about £67 a month in interest. Sounds silly but economically speaking why not just buy a £80k home off an estate agent and put a social tenant in it. £67 a month cost vs £400pm to keep them on a social home. The social home costs also rise each year. Think of it as a social tenant using their right to buy discount to buy a private house and leave their social home.
You are looking at less than 18 years for the government to recoup that money in lower benefits (or sell the social home to pay for it) You also give a poor person an asset and help their family with an inheritance once they die. Surely better than perpetual intergenerational on the benefits0
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