Rent controls - good or bad?

[geared]

Nowt rong with the 70's!

 

Cept the rampant kiddie fiddling and such.

[SteveJ68]

..............

Edited May 24, 2015 by SteveJ68

[chem1st]

At some point in the future you're going to realise the revolution is never coming. Do you have a plan B? You should really start thinking about a plan b.

 

Some of the things I was saying 10 years ago, once considered fringe viewpoints, dystopian madness, irrational beliefs, leading to me being called all names under the sun, written off as a loony etc.

 

Are now mainstream ideas, from a wide variety of people across the social spectrum. A lot of what I predicted has come true.

 

Now then, the revoltuion need not be violent, and it would be best if it was peaceful, but the way things are going, the likelihood of violent rebellion towards a certain class is growing, and it seems it might end up happening. It'll probably be described as a 'red scare', when it begins.

 

---------- Post added 24-05-2015 at 17:32 ----------

 

Where tf do you get this rubbish from. I'm building three two bedroom flats that weren't there before. There will be toilets and bathrooms and I shall build them to a good standard. People will want to rent them. The people I will rent to would not have built them themselves. It is a win win situation.

 

D'oh. I've fallen for it haven't I? You're trolling aren't you?

 

In your previous post, you said you were 'converting' a property, not building a new one.

 

I'm nothing against building properties to rent.

 

I wouldn't have a problem with people buying properties to let if the market wasn't so rigged in their favour, either.

 

---------- Post added 24-05-2015 at 17:35 ----------

 

He believes this nonsense. Imagine if he saw your new rentals once they were finished, he probably wouldn't have much to say then.

 

What nonsense?

[SOHO]

Now then, the revoltuion need not be violent, and it would be best if it was peaceful, but the way things are going, the likelihood of violent rebellion towards a certain class is growing, and it seems it might end up happening.

 

Forget your revolution, here's a realistic plan B. Encourage people to work hard, save a deposit then buy in an area of affordability regardless of where they currently live. Home isn't where you want to live, it's where you can afford to live. House prices will only get higher long term so those with low incomes will never be able to buy a house and will have to rent where they can afford. Sound like a workable plan to you?

[chem1st]

Forget your revolution, here's a realistic plan B. Encourage people to work hard, save a deposit then buy in an area of affordability regardless of where they currently live. Home isn't where you want to live, it's where you can afford to live. House prices will only get higher long term so those with low incomes will never be able to buy a house and will have to rent where they can afford. Sound like a workable plan to you?

 

No it does not sound like a workable plan.

 

People need to live near to either their families or workplace, ideally both. Encouraging a person to work hard in London, then buy a home in Middlesbrough would be very bad for the economy and the people.

 

They need to live near where they work.

 

House prices may get higher, they may not. They are highly likely to fall in both nominal terms and real terms, and fall considerably. When the current props to the market are removed, the prices of houses in the UK and elsewhere, which are floating in a bubble inside a vessel raising water high above sea level, which fall back to the sea floor so to speak.

 

If you say people on low incomes will be forced to rent, then there is little point in them even trying to buy. There is also little point in them working hard as they will forever be on low incomes.

[SOHO]

No it does not sound like a workable plan. People need to live near to either their families or workplace, ideally both.

 

If that's what they want to do, hopefully they will earn enough to achieve that goal otherwise they will have to commute or move to a more affordable area or get a job transfer or look for work elsewhere. The world doesn't owe anyone a living or a house in the area they grew up in near to family.

 

Encouraging a person to work hard in London, then buy a home in Middlesbrough would be very bad for the economy and the people.

 

Yet lots of people have to do exactly this and they do it and mostly are happier for it.

 

House prices may get higher, they may not. They are highly likely to fall in both nominal terms and real terms, and fall considerably.

 

The property cycle ALWAYS ends up much higher at the end than at the beginning. Short term crashes / adjustments make little difference to the end result.

 

If you say people on low incomes will be forced to rent, then there is little point in them even trying to buy. There is also little point in them working hard as they will forever be on low incomes.

 

I didn't make the rules but their past income levels don't have to equal their future earning levels, that's up to them. You get out of life what you put in. Education is key.

[ricgem2002]

Forget your revolution, here's a realistic plan B. Encourage people to work hard, save a deposit then buy in an area of affordability regardless of where they currently live. Home isn't where you want to live, it's where you can afford to live. House prices will only get higher long term so those with low incomes will never be able to buy a house and will have to rent where they can afford. Sound like a workable plan to you?

most people do work hard but when they faced with a zero hours contract/agency type work how are they ever going to get on the property ladder ?

[RonJeremy]

most people do work hard but when they faced with a zero hours contract/agency type work how are they ever going to get on the property ladder ?

 

Thankfully this is not a large number of people.

[SOHO]

most people do work hard but when they faced with a zero hours contract/agency type work how are they ever going to get on the property ladder ?

 

They can't have worked very hard if the best they can do is a zero hours contract. Come on! if you're on minimum wage you're never buying a house. So do you just give up on home ownership, of course not. You put yourself in a position to EARN more. If you only apply for low paid jobs, don't be too shocked if you find yourself working for low pay. See how that works?

[ricgem2002]

Thankfully this is not a large number of people.

depends on what you call a large number of people cant be bothered to look it up but I bet you its in the millions

 

---------- Post added 24-05-2015 at 19:48 ----------

 

They can't have worked very hard if the best they can do is a zero hours contract. Come on! if you're on minimum wage you're never buying a house. So do you just give up on home ownership, of course not. You put yourself in a position to EARN more. If you only apply for low paid jobs, don't be too shocked if you find yourself working for low pay. See how that works?

no you got it wrong people have worked hard all there lives and now see that companies through gov interferience don't have job security. I look at people applying for private rented accommodation on zero hours contracts not having a look in, I look at companies giving people limited hours working only to be topped up by the taxpayer. remind me again how is this going to get the economy moving ?