Great article about the flawed Tory policy of housing supply

Shupufski

http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/new_build_supply_a_panacea

PasturesNew

Cor .... tldr. Huge page, long words, dull, boring .... lost my vote.

I'm off to Google the meaning of one of the words in the title now ....

purch

PasturesNew wrote: »

I'm off to Google the meaning of one of the words in the title now ....

It'll come back as : Drivel :eek:

princeofpounds

By no means do I agree with every statement in the article, but its basic premise - that credit pricing and availability drive housing demand more than physical supply and demand - is indeed correct and well understood in the academic literature (if not by most of the population and a good number of politicians unfortunately).


The reason that physical supply is so important is that it is the healthiest way, economically-speaking, to respond to the high price signal that the demand is generating.


I do think however, than in an environment where we have failed to allow construction, then we need to think about alternative, if deeply unsatisfactory, measures to restrict demand.


However, the article is certainly not a critique of Tory policy. These problems have been longstanding in the UK, through Labour, Coalition and Conservative governments. Just like HS2 and the airport expansions, these are issues that have run over many terms.


The Conservatives are actually the only party that have passed any serious reform of the planning system, and whilst it doesn't go far enough and will not pay off for several years, they should be congratulated for it.


(Often against traditional supporters' opposition, e.g. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/hands-off-our-land/)


The waters are a bit muddied by their missteps, such as demand pumping HTB policies (a continuation of the Labour tradition of ad hoc schemes to be seen to be acting), but those are relatively minor.

cells

Most of England needs additional homes but the biggest problem is London and specifically inner London.

About 800,000 jobs are concentrated in Westminster and the City of London and this creates a problem of mass migration from other parts of London and the SE into these two main central London areas. The cost and time to avoid this mass migration has pushed up inner London prices and rents as well as all the other linked parts

London and the SE needs at least 2 million homes over the next 20 years and the plan should be to concentrate more than half of that into inner London and especially the parts of the boroughs near Westminster and the City

---

The Idea that its all credit induced has been disproved imo as between 2008-13 which was five years of tight credit London did not crash it actually still went up in price.