Houses are affordable!

Balabalabala_and_Volare

ukcarper wrote: »

It’s not quite as don’t live there if that’s where your job is there is no point in moving to an area where jobs are harder to come by. The other being to function the south east needs these lower paid jobs so it’s not just a problem for the individual, the problem is that not only are prices high rents are to.

Then wages will follow rent levels. Supply and demand. If you cannot get a cleaner for £7 an hour because they have to pay HUGE rents, then cleaners will attract a higher hourly rent. Housing Benefit, sadly, distorts this market at the taxpayers expense. The less government intrudes into markets, using taxpayers money, the better.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

Beat me to it, he could move out a bit and commute but then he couldn’t buy there.

It is such a silly argument. Who will do the vital services in an expensive area?

Supply and demand will provide. If there is no one to do a vital service the pay offered would go up and up until until it is attractive for someone to do it despite the higher living costs. Or of course we do not need a man with a stay at home wife and 6 kids to deliver the post in London they should live in Birmingham and the London students can deliver the post or the social tenants can do the job or we can put postage costs up in London and pay the postal workers in London more.

It certainly is not a problem that needs micro managing by me or you

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

I know you also don’t like social housing so who are going to post letters.

I love social housing it keeps people who do not need to be in inner London in inner London!
If inner East London sold off their social housing I would lose a lot of money so I am all for social housing.

GreatApe

Balabalabala_and_Volare wrote: »

Then wages will follow rent levels. Supply and demand. If you cannot get a cleaner for £7 an hour because they have to pay HUGE rents, then cleaners will attract a higher hourly rent. Housing Benefit, sadly, distorts this market at the taxpayers expense. The less government intrudes into markets, using taxpayers money, the better.

Why dont a lot more people get that?
The free market works because it is free and does not needs multiple extra layers of command and control

The lefties worry about the postmen living in London.
What next the sandwich maker, the tomato deliverer, the barber clipper oil supplier.
This is why central control doesn't work first get quantities wrong with their price floors and ceilings and it adds many layers of paper shufflers

Red-Squirrel_2

GreatApe wrote: »

It is a low productivity task that is not necessary in the modern world but that aside

Sorry, but no, not 'that aside'. I still get post every day, please answer the question properly.

Red-Squirrel_2

GreatApe wrote: »

It is such a silly argument. Who will do the vital services in an expensive area?

Supply and demand will provide. If there is no one to do a vital service the pay offered would go up and up until until it is attractive for someone to do it despite the higher living costs. Or of course we do not need a man with a stay at home wife and 6 kids to deliver the post in London they should live in Birmingham and the London students can deliver the post or the social tenants can do the job or we can put postage costs up in London and pay the postal workers in London more.

It certainly is not a problem that needs micro managing by me or you

Doesn't seem to be happening though, does it? What's happening is that the low paid workers in the expensive areas are living in worse and worse conditions with less and less security and stability paying more and more of their wages just for somewhere to sleep.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

I think something needs to be done in London and surrounding area, but I don’t think it will be done anytime soon. It we be good if jobs and therefore demand could be more evenly spread around country but I don’t think that will happen.

The 'problem' is that it costs a lot of money to build in London because it is already mostly full

You need to buy 500 properties at market value, plus compensation for the owners due to the disruption and moving costs etc. You need to knock them down and then build 1000 properties in its place.

It is a slow expensive process


There is also a secondary problem. Lets say you find a way to massively increase building in London and London becomes as affordable as say Birmingham. What will happen? Well the population of London instead of growing by 100,000 people a year might grow at 400,000 people per year. How are you going to manage that? Also what about the negative impact on the rest of the country as London drains (of course slowly) the population from the other regions? I am not saying London should not become cheap if that is your aim, however there are secondary consequences not considered. Personally I would not object to a massive build out in London I do not actually see inner London properties suffering a price drop from London expanding. The commuter towns and further reaches of outer London would be harder hit

GreatApe

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be happening though, does it? What's happening is that the low paid workers in the expensive areas are living in worse and worse conditions with less and less security and stability paying more and more of their wages just for somewhere to sleep.

Lefty propaganda

poor people do not pay for housing
And the quality of housing is much better today than it was 30 years ago
And London is a lot nicer and safer

So if you are a postman today vs 30 years ago in both circumstances you would likely be renting and the government picking up most of that cost. So is it better to be renting today in inner London or 30 years ago in inner London on a low wage? I would pick today but that is because I lived in inner London today and 30 years ago so can speak from experience why you conjecture all day long

GreatApe

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Sorry, but no, not 'that aside'. I still get post every day, please answer the question properly.

Dont worry I will build you a printer that sticks to your front door and when companies want to spam you with paper they can just print it straight into your house.

That is what productivity is. When human wages rise companies build new technologies or more productive practices and we all get richer from it

Balabalabala_and_Volare

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be happening though, does it? What's happening is that the low paid workers in the expensive areas are living in worse and worse conditions with less and less security and stability paying more and more of their wages just for somewhere to sleep.

Because of the distortions introduced by the state. Tax credits, housing benefits etc. If employers in expensive areas had to pay the true costs of their employees, the taxpayer cold be relieved of a huge burden.