Half of UK against house building in their area

[Cyclone]

In a freemarket you wouldn't have an everlasting supply of tenants prepared to pay higher and higher rents.

 

You wouldn't have an ever lasting supply of landlords prepared to drop the price either. Supply and demand would stabilise the price and I doubt it would be any lower than the HB rates are today.

[Bulgarian]

I'd say its more of a road infrastructure problem..

 

And gas, electricity, sewage, public transport, schools, health care etc. etc. all these systems are on the edge of collapse now.

[chem1st]

And they'd live where after refusing to pay the market rate, under a bridge?

 

Somewhere cheaper, in a squat, in social housing, in a tent, in a container, in prefab housing, in a caravan etc.

[muddycoffee]

New decent homes are desperately needed, yet only 11% of the UK is urbanised.

 

The main reason for this is that there is a conspiracy of silence between the land owning aristocrisy, CPRE and the banks, because they refuse to allow their landholdings to be added to the land registry. There is no official record of the ownership and acerage in the vast majority of england and wales.

 

The banks prefer to keep the bulk of the populace living in crowded cities in small houses because it continues to drive the increase in property values and therefore mortgages and mortgage interest payments.

The CPRE continue to wail about "concreting over the contryside" despite the fact that such a threat is massively out of proportion, while their mates in the Tory Party pretend to be empathetic with the working man while jetting off on 4 foreign holidays per year, and securing their own gold plated pensions as they reduce everyone elses.

 

Governments have even got rid of standards about how big a dwelling should be, so they can allow tiny flats to be built by property speculators. The flats built in the 1950s and 60s have massive rooms in comparison. They want to crush as many people in to as small a space as possible.

 

In the rest of europe, property prices are often worked out due to the actual area inside the dwelling, whereas our own corrupt and unregulated system depends upon how many bedrooms, despite the fact that some of the bedrooms can barely fit a bed inside, and many modern garages won't even fit a tiny car and allow the driver to actually get out of the car door.

 

We are being conned by the wealthy system which wishes to protect its own interests.

[Bulgarian]

Unionise, organise a rent strike. Launch a campaign of physical terror upon their landlords. Seize by force, campaign in elections. Refuse to pay the rent.

 

There is a limit to how high the rent can rise, essentially the rent is a form of slavery anyhow.

 

Hopefully in my lifetime this form of slavery can be abolished. If not you might aswell allow for people to be kept as private property again.

 

you're just being silly now, it's renting a house, like people do from the council, not selling your children

[chem1st]

You wouldn't have an ever lasting supply of landlords prepared to drop the price either. Supply and demand would stabilise the price and I doubt it would be any lower than the HB rates are today.

 

So why create these landlords and fix the price via bailing out this chuff who couldn't afford to sell his 2nd home and was struggling with the mortgage. Then providing tenants whom have a floor rent of whatever the local LHA rate is, quite possibly having their rent paid by the state.

 

This guy doesn't even own the property and is in negative equity, he owns less of his property, than the debt he has secured against the property, in effect he OWES his property.

[Bulgarian]

Somewhere cheaper, in a squat, in social housing, in a tent, in a container, in prefab housing, in a caravan etc.

 

I'd rather rent TBH.

[chem1st]

you're just being silly now, it's renting a house, like people do from the council, not selling your children

 

History repeats itself if the same mistakes are made. My generation is getting older and larger in number, and we are very very angry with the situation, believe me.

[Ms Macbeth]

So this guy who bought a home he could not afford and has now moved into ANOTHER home, and could not sell it because he paid to much for it in the first place, gets bailed out by the taxpayer, get's tenants provided by the taxpayer, keeps his 2nd home and is guaranteed a return (along with his bank who should not have lent him the money in the first place).

 

I don't think this scheme makes sense.

 

Mortgage me up scotty! I'll have myself a buy to let and condemn a households to rentier slavery, courtesy of the taxpayer!

 

That guy should have been taxed more heavily, he could sell his home at a loss, it was his own fault for getting into more debt than he could afford.

 

He could go bankrupt, and be in the position of his tenants.

 

I notice you omitted the bit of my post that said he wasn't in the 'buy to let business'.

 

He could afford his home, but he was a single man who had moved in with a partner. They didn't need two homes, and because his home was in negative equity he couldn't afford to sell it either. It wasn't an expensive house, but he probably bought it because like many of us, he couldn't get a council property when he needed somewhere to live.

 

I don't think you realise that some people buy their homes because they have little alternative.

[Bulgarian]

History repeats itself if the same mistakes are made. My generation is getting older and larger in number, and we are very very angry with the situation, believe me.

 

it's old gits that own all the houses, why don't they all move into a care home and free them up ?

 

Not sure how a generation gets bigger though, unless peope are being born at your age ?