Affa

Dec 12 2014, 09:49 PM

A genuine question - why are we still building red brick houses? Surely there are other technologies, other methods available (or could be) that are so much cheaper?

Pro Veritas

Dec 12 2014, 06:58 PM

RJD

Dec 12 2014, 05:19 PM

Do you not remember what happened last time we tried this?

Yeah.

We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing.
We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer.
Private renters rarely had to rely in housing benefit to make ends meet, so the welfare bill was not unduly increased.
We had a housing market that was, by and large, healthy and sustainable.
And because of a change of housing market pressures we didn't lurch from boom to bust and collapse quite so often, or so violently.

Can't for one second think why anybody would want that again, can you?



All The Best

Tigger

Dec 12 2014, 10:02 PM

......... the downside for lenders is the building can have a lifespan of only fifty years.

Steve K

Dec 12 2014, 10:19 PM

Pro Veritas

Dec 12 2014, 06:58 PM

RJD

Dec 12 2014, 05:19 PM

Do you not remember what happened last time we tried this?

Yeah.

We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing.
We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer.
Private renters rarely had to rely in housing benefit to make ends meet, so the welfare bill was not unduly increased.
We had a housing market that was, by and large, healthy and sustainable.
And because of a change of housing market pressures we didn't lurch from boom to bust and collapse quite so often, or so violently.

Can't for one second think why anybody would want that again, can you?



All The Best

And Pigs flew every day or maybe those 2 for 1 rose tinted nostalgia specs aren't such a good idea

"We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing"

"We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer."

I could go on but I'd die laughing

There isn't a single example in world history where price controls did not lead to either shortages or a police state to implement virtual slave labour.

Affa

Dec 12 2014, 11:05 PM

Tigger

Dec 12 2014, 10:02 PM

......... the downside for lenders is the building can have a lifespan of only fifty years.

Thanks;
The rebuild is relatively cheap though and in some ways a desirable alternative - it'd be great to re-design the home every so often.

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 12:20 PM

Steve K

Dec 12 2014, 10:19 PM

Pro Veritas

Dec 12 2014, 06:58 PM

RJD

Dec 12 2014, 05:19 PM

Do you not remember what happened last time we tried this?

Yeah.

We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing.
We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer.
Private renters rarely had to rely in housing benefit to make ends meet, so the welfare bill was not unduly increased.
We had a housing market that was, by and large, healthy and sustainable.
And because of a change of housing market pressures we didn't lurch from boom to bust and collapse quite so often, or so violently.

Can't for one second think why anybody would want that again, can you?



All The Best

And Pigs flew every day or maybe those 2 for 1 rose tinted nostalgia specs aren't such a good idea

"We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing"

"We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer."

I could go on but I'd die laughing

There isn't a single example in world history where price controls did not lead to either shortages or a police state to implement virtual slave labour.

Erm.......... in the post war era Britain had price controls on many essential items, this included housing food and energy, and keep in mind that this was an era of shortages where you would almost certainly get price gouging, the result? The economy boomed like never before (or since) inequality was drastically reduced and we once again became a major exporter, we had a healthy trade surplus and the nation became a far far better place for ordinary folk.

Governments are elected by those who live in society and should step in when needed to ensure society is protected and it's interests heeded, sadly we now vote and the politicians do the bidding of their sponsors.

And it's me laughing at you now..............

Steve K

Dec 13 2014, 01:03 PM

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 12:20 PM

Steve K

Dec 12 2014, 10:19 PM

Pro Veritas

Dec 12 2014, 06:58 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

And Pigs flew every day or maybe those 2 for 1 rose tinted nostalgia specs aren't such a good idea

"We had affordable and relatively plentiful social housing"

"We had a private rental sector that did not gouge the consumer."

I could go on but I'd die laughing

There isn't a single example in world history where price controls did not lead to either shortages or a police state to implement virtual slave labour.

Erm.......... in the post war era Britain had price controls on many essential items, this included housing food and energy, and keep in mind that this was an era of shortages where you would almost certainly get price gouging, the result? The economy boomed like never before (or since) inequality was drastically reduced and we once again became a major exporter, we had a healthy trade surplus and the nation became a far far better place for ordinary folk.

Governments are elected by those who live in society and should step in when needed to ensure society is protected and it's interests heeded, sadly we now vote and the politicians do the bidding of their sponsors.

And it's me laughing at you now..............

Why don't you try reading your own posts before you press Submit?

"in the post war era Britain had price controls on many essential items, this included housing food and energy, and keep in mind that this was an era of shortages"

Yep price controls and shortages go together - just like I said.

You do know that we were one of the last nations to end rationing after WW2 don't you? No didn't think so.

As for the sector we are discussing try googling Peter Rachman and he was far from alone. When you over regulate a sector you get shortages and you get the evils that such shortages produce. So go laugh if you like, you won't if you get your way and act of symptoms instead of root causes.

Housing is too expensive because demand exceeds supply. IMHO we have to reduce the demand but I guess we could build even more on green land to increase the supply - there won't be anymore rain though so then you'll get water shortages.

Affa

Dec 13 2014, 01:41 PM

Plenty of rainfall for all ...... the problems with shortages stem from the inefficiencies of those managing the supply to homes etc.

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 01:50 PM

Affa

Dec 13 2014, 01:41 PM

Plenty of rainfall for all ...... the problems with shortages stem from the inefficiencies of those managing the supply to homes etc.

Prior to the privatisation the various water boards had land earmarked for future reservoirs, naturally this was sold off fairly quickly to boost short term profits as the predicted shortfall was more that two decades away, even so there is still vast capacity to be had in tapping rivers and building so called mini lakes which can supply local areas.

Barring exceptional weather water shortages are just another myth in the armoury of the Nimby, the bigger and more expensive problem is treating waste water, not finding new supplies.

Steve K

Dec 13 2014, 02:03 PM

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 01:50 PM

Affa

Dec 13 2014, 01:41 PM

Plenty of rainfall for all ...... the problems with shortages stem from the inefficiencies of those managing the supply to homes etc.

Prior to the privatisation the various water boards had land earmarked for future reservoirs, naturally this was sold off fairly quickly to boost short term profits as the predicted shortfall was more that two decades away, even so there is still vast capacity to be had in tapping rivers and building so called mini lakes which can supply local areas.

Barring exceptional weather water shortages are just another myth in the armoury of the Nimby, the bigger and more expensive problem is treating waste water, not finding new supplies.

Technically some areas of Britain are already semi-arid when you look at av rainfall per resident. IIRC Essex is one such and Kent must be similar. And where does the government want to build more homes . . .

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 01:37 PM

Mainly nonsense.

And as someone who has been in the housing industry for over thirty odd years has shares in several development firms and has a front seat view let me enlighten you.

Firstly, You mention price controls, WE HAVE EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE! we have numerous subsidies for housing such as help to buy, funding for lending, rent top ups for low paid workers and so on, AND YET WE STILL HAVE HOUSING SHORTAGES! The market is rigged to under supply and planning consent is painfully slow, tortuous and generally expensive to obtain, I know it and most politicians know it but choose to pretend the problems are elsewhere.

And the tax system is rigged against those wishing to get on the housing ladder, there are tax breaks for BTL that allow you to outbid first time buyers, and you have to take on loans at artificially low rates. The housing market is a total croc and discourages investment in other areas of the economy because you simply cannot loose money with housing as it is propped up from every direction!

And how about this then, the Post Office just this week commissioned a report from the CEBR which showed that housing had "earned" more in the past year that the average worker! Average house price increase £29,339 average wage £27,271!

No wonder the economy is fucked you could earn more money sitting on your arse! And sadly many do and wish to keep it that way.

Quote:

 

Firstly, You mention price controls, WE HAVE EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE! we have numerous subsidies for housing such as help to buy, funding for lending, rent top ups for low paid workers and so on, AND YET WE STILL HAVE HOUSING SHORTAGES! The market is rigged to under supply and planning consent is painfully slow, tortuous and generally expensive to obtain, I know it and most politicians know it but choose to pretend the problems are elsewhere.

Quote:

 

And the tax system is rigged against those wishing to get on the housing ladder, there are tax breaks for BTL that allow you to outbid first time buyers, and you have to take on loans at artificially low rates. The housing market is a total croc and discourages investment in other areas of the economy because you simply cannot loose money with housing as it is propped up from every direction!

Quote:

 

And how about this then, the Post Office just this week commissioned a report from the CEBR which showed that housing had "earned" more in the past year that the average worker! Average house price increase £29,339 average wage £27,271!

Quote:

 

No wonder the economy is fucked you could earn more money sitting on your arse! And sadly many do and wish to keep it that way.

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 02:07 PM

This may come as a bit of a shock Steve but you can lay underground pipes and bring in water from elsewhere,Wales for example has a vast surplus of easily potable water. London would be dry if this had not happened more that eighty years ago..........

Affa

Dec 13 2014, 02:34 PM

I've not looked it up, haven't the time right now, but if I recall the Welsh reservoirs are connected to the London supply 'as a back up system for when droughts do appear'. It isn't necessary to have water continuously pumped across land.

Tigger

Dec 12 2014, 09:37 PM

Tytoalba

Dec 12 2014, 06:40 PM

ACH1967

Dec 12 2014, 02:33 PM

Nice Response, Good starting point.

If we could discuss this point by point I stand a chance of learning something.

So if we reintroduced rent controls on the pros side this would make housing more affordable. What would the likely negative effects be?

You first need to decide what a reasonable return on an investment in property should be.
As a simple example, assume the cost of a property to be £100,000 .There will be expenses to pay in maintaining the property insuring and servicing it. and paying tax on profits. So what is a reasonable return taking all factors into account? ! would suggest that 7% is about right , taking into account possible property prices or allowing for a collapse in value
That is £580 PCM or £134 a week. Supply and demand and market forces will decide the price., interfering with it across the country will just make things more complicated, increase bureaucracy and dry up the market. I present again Kipling's The Gods of the copybook headings.

The private housing sector needs shoving out of the way, it has utterly failed to meet the needs of the nation and continually holds the nation to ransom, this has to be stopped.

In just about every area of the economy demand causes a rise in supply which eventually results in lower prices, the exception in the housing market which is clearly rigged to buck this trend.

Time for major reform.

Affa

Dec 13 2014, 02:34 PM

I've not looked it up, haven't the time right now, but if I recall the Welsh reservoirs are connected to the London supply 'as a back up system for when droughts do appear'. It isn't necessary to have water continuously pumped across land.

Steve K

Dec 13 2014, 02:23 PM

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 02:07 PM

This may come as a bit of a shock Steve but you can lay underground pipes and bring in water from elsewhere,Wales for example has a vast surplus of easily potable water. London would be dry if this had not happened more that eighty years ago..........

How strange if such a pipeline has been in place for ""eighty years" that the Welsh say the idea is unworkable

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17343140

Go on where is this Wales-London pipeline you speak of? Certainly Thames Water (that supplies London) web site suggests you had been drinking something far stronger before you posted that supposition.

Water is a bugger to pump long distances at rates the average person will be happy to pay for unless it's down a slope. Last time I looked the Severn River is roughly the same elevation above sea level as the Thames is. But maybe you know different.

Steve K

Dec 13 2014, 02:11 PM

Tigger

Dec 13 2014, 01:37 PM

Mainly nonsense.

And as someone who has been in the housing industry for over thirty odd years has shares in several development firms and has a front seat view let me enlighten you.

Firstly, You mention price controls, WE HAVE EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE! we have numerous subsidies for housing such as help to buy, funding for lending, rent top ups for low paid workers and so on, AND YET WE STILL HAVE HOUSING SHORTAGES! The market is rigged to under supply and planning consent is painfully slow, tortuous and generally expensive to obtain, I know it and most politicians know it but choose to pretend the problems are elsewhere.

And the tax system is rigged against those wishing to get on the housing ladder, there are tax breaks for BTL that allow you to outbid first time buyers, and you have to take on loans at artificially low rates. The housing market is a total croc and discourages investment in other areas of the economy because you simply cannot loose money with housing as it is propped up from every direction!

And how about this then, the Post Office just this week commissioned a report from the CEBR which showed that housing had "earned" more in the past year that the average worker! Average house price increase £29,339 average wage £27,271!

No wonder the economy is fucked you could earn more money sitting on your arse! And sadly many do and wish to keep it that way.

Actually I agree with most of your post

Quote:

 

Firstly, You mention price controls, WE HAVE EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE! we have numerous subsidies for housing such as help to buy, funding for lending, rent top ups for low paid workers and so on, AND YET WE STILL HAVE HOUSING SHORTAGES! The market is rigged to under supply and planning consent is painfully slow, tortuous and generally expensive to obtain, I know it and most politicians know it but choose to pretend the problems are elsewhere.

Yep market manipulation either way is dumb dumb dumb if you've forgotten the law of unintended consequences

Quote:

 

And the tax system is rigged against those wishing to get on the housing ladder, there are tax breaks for BTL that allow you to outbid first time buyers, and you have to take on loans at artificially low rates. The housing market is a total croc and discourages investment in other areas of the economy because you simply cannot loose money with housing as it is propped up from every direction!

Yep

Quote:

 

And how about this then, the Post Office just this week commissioned a report from the CEBR which showed that housing had "earned" more in the past year that the average worker! Average house price increase £29,339 average wage £27,271!

It's the supply v demand effect again. Perhaps you hadn't noticed that one of my red lines for EU renegotiation is we have to regain control on migration.

Quote:

 

No wonder the economy is fucked you could earn more money sitting on your arse! And sadly many do and wish to keep it that way.

I don't see the economy as effed but it's seriously skewed in favour of static wealth and I repeat we have to move the tax burden from those who want to work or create work onto those who want to sit pretty paying sod all taxes but want masses of regulation and crime enforcement to protect their wealth.

Just do not go down the road of price controls, it has never really worked anywhere longer than to influence the next election and the secondary effects are horrendous.

RJD

Dec 13 2014, 03:51 PM

Tigger

Dec 12 2014, 09:37 PM

Tytoalba

Dec 12 2014, 06:40 PM

ACH1967

Dec 12 2014, 02:33 PM

Nice Response, Good starting point.

If we could discuss this point by point I stand a chance of learning something.

So if we reintroduced rent controls on the pros side this would make housing more affordable. What would the likely negative effects be?

You first need to decide what a reasonable return on an investment in property should be.
As a simple example, assume the cost of a property to be £100,000 .There will be expenses to pay in maintaining the property insuring and servicing it. and paying tax on profits. So what is a reasonable return taking all factors into account? ! would suggest that 7% is about right , taking into account possible property prices or allowing for a collapse in value
That is £580 PCM or £134 a week. Supply and demand and market forces will decide the price., interfering with it across the country will just make things more complicated, increase bureaucracy and dry up the market. I present again Kipling's The Gods of the copybook headings.

The private housing sector needs shoving out of the way, it has utterly failed to meet the needs of the nation and continually holds the nation to ransom, this has to be stopped.

In just about every area of the economy demand causes a rise in supply which eventually results in lower prices, the exception in the housing market which is clearly rigged to buck this trend.

Time for major reform.

Ignorant rubbish increases in demand can also result in price hikes. It is oversupply that reduces prices.

I doubt that Joe Public would accept State allocation of accommodation. Last time we tried this nepotism ruled and the quality of the housing stock declined.