Right to buy: Housing Associations

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

This already happens. There are examples of those with business, tax credits, landlords etc littered all over this forum stating they wouldn't vote for X as they would raise corporation tax, ruduce benefits etc.

Knowing this I'd be wary of enlarging the state and letting politicians choose which of their favourites to spend my money on. You'd make it bigger because favourites are fine as long as they're your favourites.

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It never will. You can look back to times of much easier planning in the 70's and even then, private building didn't create enough homes to keep up with demand.

There is not a time in recent history (going back a few decades) where private building in this country has built the number of homes the country needs. I don't know why anyone would think it's going to suddenly change.

trying to compare now to 50 years ago is stupid for so many reasons.

If more planning stamps are given out the private builders build more homes.

You can clearly see this if you look at the build rates on a council to council basis. Some councils issue 3x the national average quota and they build 3x the average. Some councils issue 1/3rd the national average and you see that they build 1/3rd.

You can see an almost 10 x difference between the councils with high quotas and the councils with low quotas. How do you explain that Mr the builders donna wanna build it state musta do it

cells

Council houses in all their glory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPm2Ia_Y_zk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJc0Ri7XKOM

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

Council houses in all their glory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPm2Ia_Y_zk

Private BTL houses in all their glory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot50EhRajdQ

Point being, anyone can pick a video.

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

trying to compare now to 50 years ago is stupid for so many reasons.

Shame then, considering you did it straight away in your very next post.

wotsthat

Building supply has always lagged demand. There's little point in companies or the taxpayer building houses for people that don't exist. Planning doesn't help and the unprecedented increase in population, as well as not helping, has laid the planning problems bare.

The only way we'll ever have enough houses is if people are happy to increase numbers per house or population decreases.

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Shame then, considering you did it straight away in your very next post.

ok here is one thats more recent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJc0Ri7XKOM

all we need is a few hundred such estates up and down the country and everything will be fixed


PS: why did you ignore what I put to you. How and why are the builders able to build a lot more where the bloody council issues a higher quota and why and how are they only building very few where the bloody council issues a lower quota?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Shame then, considering you did it straight away in your very next post.

1976 wasn't 50 years ago.

cells

wotsthat wrote: »

Building supply has always lagged demand.

If you look at the breakdown of the data, building rates for each council, you find that there is a huge HUGE variation. Some councils have been quite good and build more than triple the average. Some have been quite poor and they build less than 1/3rd the average

So build supply doesn't have to lag demand as in some places it actually leads demand. For example Telford council is a very good council when it comes to allow house building. It allows more house building than is needed in the view that it will draw in people from surrounding areas/councils. They do this with a view to expand the size of the town. There is some resistance including the local MP who doesn't want the nice town turned into a Birmingham...... MP does seem to realise or care that would take ~400 years if they kept up the build rate....

The private builders build there about 3x the national average in new homes. What even more surprising is that they are able to achieve such high build rates in a market that is one of the cheapest in England

wotsthat wrote: »

There's little point in companies or the taxpayer building houses for people that don't exist.

The UK needs millions more homes. My guess is there would be no problem if the builders increased build rates towards 250,000-300,000 a year. ie the market can take it. Of course if that were to happen instead of 10% HPI we might get 5%

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Building supply has always lagged demand. There's little point in companies or the taxpayer building houses for people that don't exist. Planning doesn't help and the unprecedented increase in population, as well as not helping, has laid the planning problems bare.

The only way we'll ever have enough houses is if people are happy to increase numbers per house or population decreases.

You are undermining yourself in the very same posts now!

Be easier all round and more respectable to simply say you take issue with the taxpayer building homes for people who cannot afford a home by other means.