Do migrants push up house prices?

cells

The eastern EU nations got free movement in May 2004 if we look at terrace house prices from July 2004 (takes about 2 months to buy) to today we can have a look at how much the migrants might have added to house prices

Birmingham £96k to £102k

North East £71k to £66k

North West £66k to £70k

West Midlands £91 to £97k

East Midlands £84k to £92k

Yorks&Humber £74k to £78k

Wales £77k to £82k

South West region and East of England Region are also down in real terms today v when Poland and co joined. The south East is about flat in real terms

cells

12 years on from the Eastern European migrants getting the right to settle in the UK and with 5 million more added to the UK population, only one region is more expensive in real terms (London), one region about flat (SE) and all the other regions cheaper in real terms.

Generali

cells wrote: »

Should have been a question mark? but wont let me edit it.

Anyway 12 years on from the Eastern European migrants getting the right to settle in the UK, 5 million more people, only one region more expensive in real terms (London), one region about flat (SE) and all the other regions cheaper in real terms.

Use advanced edit.

cells

Thanks


I think the conclusion I am drawing from this is that the 'mass' migration of eastern Europeans and the rapid population growth over the last 12 years saved the regions of England.

The migrants did not push prices up, prices in all but one region (London) are the same or lower in real terms. But they may have stopped prices from Crashing.

Maybe some would like cheap Birmingham to be another another 1/3rd cheaper but if house prices got that cheap its likely that we would have little to no new build construction in most the regions. A sector that employs about 1.5 million people and provides about 5% of GDP and taxes. Actually its even more than that as its not just homes the migrants saved but businesses too.

Sapphire

cells wrote: »

The migrants did not push prices up, prices in all but one region (London) are the same or lower in real terms. But they may have stopped prices from Crashing.

The migrants I know (Poles in London) all tend to live in rented accommodation, rather than to buy places…

lisyloo

Sapphire wrote: »

The migrants I know (Poles in London) all tend to live in rented accommodation, rather than to buy places…

Err yeah, but someone has to buy the BTLs to meet the demand, so they are in effect buying by proxy.

vivatifosi

If prices aren't going up, it would be interesting to see if the impact comes up in other figures. For example, has housing occupation density risen over the same period instead?

kinger101

You don't have a control set of data from a parallel universe in which migration was more restricted. The short answer is if more people are wanting to buy the same property (including LL to let to immigrants), then property prices will increase. Why do you think London is more expensive than Merthyr Tydfil?

Have you ever considered becoming a politician? You're in the habit of cherry picking data to make your point.

cells

kinger101 wrote: »

You don't have a control set of data from a parallel universe in which migration was more restricted. The short answer is if more people are wanting to buy the same property (including LL to let to immigrants), then property prices will increase. Why do you think London is more expensive than Merthyr Tydfil?

Have you ever considered becoming a politician? You're in the habit of cherry picking data to make your point.

As far as I am aware I had no say in picking the day the eastern EU migrants were given free movement nor do I control the price of homes today so how is picking today and the month the Eastern EU migrants were given free movement cherry picking?

It is clear that mass migration has no pushed up prices because all bit one region (London) is priced the same or lower than mid 2004 in real terms when the migrants were let in

The only thing you can argue for is that maybe the eastern EU migration averted a Mich bigger property price crash in the non London regions. But no you would rather argue that picking mod 2004 when they for free movement is cherry picking

kinger101

cells wrote: »

As far as I am aware I had no say in picking the day the eastern EU migrants were given free movement nor do I control the price of homes today so how is picking today and the month the Eastern EU migrants were given free movement cherry picking?

Whether they have come from inside the EU or not, did not all arrive here on one day. There is a constant flux. People come and go all the time. There's a whole lot of data between these two dates. In late 2006, your conclusion would be entirely different to the one you've come to now, which demonstrates the flaw in your reasoning.

It is clear that mass migration has no pushed up prices because all bit one region (London) is priced the same or lower than mid 2004 in real terms when the migrants were let in

It isn't clear to me at all. We don't know what house prices would have been if we had for example decided to exclude Poles. You're choosing to simply compare two variables, and then look for a qualitative answer (higher/lower). The truth is house prices are affected by many variables, such as availability of credit, employment rates. And the answer isn't qualitative. If house prices are lower in one place than they were in 2004, it is of course also possible that they could have been even lower in the absence of immigration.

The only thing you can argue for is that maybe the eastern EU migration averted a Mich bigger property price crash in the non London regions. But no you would rather argue that picking mod 2004 when they for free movement is cherry picking

If it wasn't cherry picking, is was an unsupported conclusion based on limited facts.

Crashy_Time

cells wrote: »

As far as I am aware I had no say in picking the day the eastern EU migrants were given free movement nor do I control the price of homes today so how is picking today and the month the Eastern EU migrants were given free movement cherry picking?

It is clear that mass migration has no pushed up prices because all bit one region (London) is priced the same or lower than mid 2004 in real terms when the migrants were let in

The only thing you can argue for is that maybe the eastern EU migration averted a Mich bigger property price crash in the non London regions. But no you would rather argue that picking mod 2004 when they for free movement is cherry picking

So can we agree than that as many people in the UK and other parts of the EZ are fed up with mass movement of people houses can only get cheaper in the future?