"Housing Market Slumps"

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

economic wrote: »

the nurse can live in a reasonable area in london, she can rent!!

No she "needs" to buy there and she "needs" a butler and a child minder and a chauffeur........ oh no sorry I meant "wants".

What's she needs is access to basic shelter. She can have that just about anywhere in terms country. To own it is a want and not a need.

westernpromise

ukcarper wrote: »

Yes I know that is how it is now and has been for sometime, but that doesn't mean it isn't a reasonable if unrealistic aim

I'm not saying that but I don't see it as unreasoned that people who work hard and do a demanding and neccasary job should be able to buy a home.

How should the state ensure this?

Should there be state control of house prices?

Should the state sell houses it owns to nurses at discounted prices?

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

westernpromise wrote: »

How should the state ensure this?

Should there be state control of house prices?

Should the state sell houses it owns to nurses at discounted prices?

My wife's a nurse. Simply yes!

ukcarper

westernpromise wrote: »

How should the state ensure this?

Should there be state control of house prices?

Should the state sell houses it owns to nurses at discounted prices?

No if you read what I have said you will see I have said it's unrealistic but that doesn't mean we should just accept it. I personally don't think there is any practical way of achieving it in London, building more property is the answer and I don't think that is possible.

ukcarper

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

Its funny isn't it. I consider myself to be left leaning, but I get put off when people start demanding equality without any understanding of what equality actually is.

They seem to think equality means take from one social group and give to the other, when in fact is should mean equal opportunities.

Even living oop North there are areas that I couldn't afford to buy in, but that's life. I can't afford a mclaren either so I compromised and bought what I could afford.

No but we are not talking about up north, the cheapest flat economic could find was £175k which is unaffordable to someone on £25k unless they have £75k cash. The cheapest studio as apposed to a room in shared house I could find in London was £850a month rent.

I can't see it changing anytime soon and I can't see practice way of changing it, but that doesn't mean I have to accept that's it OK.

ukcarper

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

No she "needs" to buy there and she "needs" a butler and a child minder and a chauffeur........ oh no sorry I meant "wants".

What's she needs is access to basic shelter. She can have that just about anywhere in terms country. To own it is a want and not a need.

Yes that's all she needs but isn't it reasonable for a person who has studied and is doing a worthwhile job to want to live somewhere better than a room in a grotty flat share.

It might be OK for Crashy but I don't think it should be the case for everybody.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

I've mentioned this before, but I looked into retraining as a paramedic recently and was appalled at how low the London salary was; after spending 3 years getting a degree and having life/death responsibility and shift work.

It's all very well saying they just have to buy where they can afford, the losers!; how far out do you want them to have to travel in to work in order to provide ambulance provision to the millions working in Central London? How many senior, experienced personnel does such a service need, and how is that going to work if the workforce consists of those under 30 in rented houseshares, as the older ones realise they can't buy a family home and move away?

I work in Higher Education and there is starting to be a serious imbalance across the academic workforce here (prestigious London university; it's also a problem in Oxford and Cambridge apparently); there are senior academics in their 50s/60s approaching retirement, and plenty of young post-docs in their 20s, but not enough in their 30s/40s; the age at which they would be looking to establish their own research group. Researchers are doing a few years early on to get the name of this institution on their CV, and are then moving on to universities in cheaper towns (often in Germany).

It's not always good enough to shrug and say "market forces, innit!" A sensible society would look at the long term sustainability of the provision of essential services in their major city.

westernpromise

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

A sensible society would look at the long term sustainability of the provision of essential services in their major city.

And then do what?

Do all these people want to live in a state house? If not, who is supposed to provide them with a house to buy? Should the state enter the housebuilding trade?

Out,_Vile_Jelly

westernpromise wrote: »

And then do what?

Do all these people want to live in a state house? If not, who is supposed to provide them with a house to buy? Should the state enter the housebuilding trade?

Yes I think the state should invest in housing aimed at providing sensibly priced accommodation for workers in certain key jobs. I hope it doesn't make me a raging communist to think it would be cheaper in the long term for there to be a reliable, consistent number of midwives, paramedics, mental health workers and social workers at all stages of their career able to work easily in major cities, especially London. Last I heard they were desperately trying to tempt Australian paramedics to come to London. Wouldn't it be more cost effective to have those we've trained in the UK be able to subsist here?

westernpromise

So the state should build houses and sell them cheap to midwives, paramedics, mental health workers and social workers?

Shouldn't the state actually build starter homes, 2-bedroom flats, houses with gardens that they can buy at different career points?

Should they be forced to sell them back to the state as well when they move?