Capping House Price Inflation

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Banning holiday lets could reduce tourist income in areas heavily dependent on it, thus reducing jobs. You may have more housing for locals but more chance of them being unemployed.
I do agree that some control over the number of lets in some areas would be a good thing, but god knows how you'd make it fair.
 
mind_the_goat":2cy8q0mr said:
Banning holiday lets could reduce tourist income in areas heavily dependent on it, thus reducing jobs. You may have more housing for locals but more chance of them being unemployed.
......

I can understand that argument for a seaside resort as there are a significant number of holiday lets and it is in effect an 'industry' and so does bring in employment etc cafes, restaurants, shops etc. But there are many places such as round me where the holiday letters bring in diddly squat in terms of opportunity for jobs etc
 
Surely I am not alone in being a bit cynical that having heard the current gov blaming all our troubles on the previous property bubble, they now propose it as a way out of our current troubles.

The answer, of course, lies in generating wealth and employment through industry combined with more control over a finance industry which is, by definition, without morality.
 
Lons":1h86t26x said:
Only those with money to speculate can make real gains but such is the case in any area of investment.

Ah - not so. You've forgotten the "clever" eighties trick, discussed at dinner parties up and down the land.

Buy a house with a 95% mortgage, keep it for 3-4 years, and sell at a 30% (or better) gain.

You only need enough capital to stand the 5% deposit and 3-4 years of mortgage payment.

As long as the capital rise is enough, you're in serious clover.

It's called leverage, and it's considered "sophisticated financial engineering".

BugBear
 
finneyb":ecroqy4g said:
BoE Governor says interest stay low until unemployment reduces to 7%
This is looking to be sooner that he expected
If interest rates go up, I'm in clover- my rightful place :), but those with a mortgage are really going to feel it - the rise from 4% to 6% interest is a 50% increase in payments. If that happens you won't need a cap.

Having said that I can remember 16% mortgage interest rates -went from 8% in the June of 1973 to 16% by December - we didn't have two months with the same payment - we moved into the house in the June.

Brian

That means that interest rates will NEVER go up. Someone should inform him of the last time that the (genuine) unemployment rate was as low as 7% !!! Probably sometime in the '60's. Yes, that's nigh on 45 years ago. I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
 
BoE Governor hasn't used the word 'genuine' before unemployment :) He has given himself a wide circle of error and could use any unemployment measure if it suits when the time comes.

Brian
 
Of course! That's the only way it's ever going to get to 7% - a bit of a fiddle here, a bit of a fiddle there. 30 separate attempts to fudge the figures and suddenly it's 7%!! Just have to get creative.
 
finneyb":3bs4iy7g said:
Lons":3bs4iy7g said:
Stop all extra mortgage borrowing unless buying or significantly upgrading a home, i.e. no more hols and cars "on the mortgage".

AH BUT - it's that borrowing that drives the economy and politicians get elected easier with a rising economy. So that ain't going to change. The end result of course is that we end up disappearing up our fundamental orifice - much like 2008.

Brian

Apart from the fact that this time round, a significant percentage of house purchases are with cash. Around 35% compared to 10-12% the last time any 'bubble' happened. That is a significant increase.
 
Lons":25ln708m said:
Inflated prices are caused largely by supply and demand. Increase supply and the market finds a sustainable level.

Hi Bob, read your post with interest as it mirrors much of my life. I'm glad that all you rhard work and financial prudence are now paying off.

I also agree that like most commodities supply and demand sets the price people are willing to pay.

But I now firmly believe that rather more houses, what we need is less new build houses. It seems to me that every tiny square foot of land is being built on whenever possible. Yes we have green belt and all that stuff but it is still the case that there are too many people on this tiny island and everyone can not have a home unless you concrete over every bit of grass and chop down every bit of woodland. If people lived with parents for longer and those parents taught them the value of saving and planning for the future (As yours did) then some of the problem would be solved.
 
When people say "too many people on this tiny island" etc. I always suggest that they should do the decent thing and jump in a pond or something. But it always turns out that they don't see themselves as surplus - it's always somebody else! Surprise surprise!

The real issue is not too many people but rather too little constructive government/management to provide for the needs of all. And the answers are simple too - build more is one. Another would be to occupy underused housing - 2nd homes, holiday lets etc. Perhaps by the incentive of a massive increase in bedroom tax extended to the whole population but means tested to avoid punishing the poor as the amazingly stupid current system does. Perhaps make the tax take equal to the cost of building the public housing still needed. That'd be simple and fair.
We've got the tax principle in place , why not use it? There is more surplus wealth around nowadays than there ever was - for starters we could tax this lot very easily - I bet all their bedrooms aren't in use!
 
I'm afraid Losos that, while I agree with you that we have too many people in this country chasing the available resources especially things like NHS, it is a myth that we'd need to concrete over the country. Less than 7% is 'urban' and even that has 50% of green space. Urban includes rural building and roads... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096
 
RogerS":1his6vik said:
I'm afraid Losos that, while I agree with you that we have too many people in this country chasing the available resources especially things like NHS, ....
I take it you won't be chasing NHS services yourself. That's very noble of you.
 
RogerS":20rtfgvx said:
Jacob":20rtfgvx said:
..... to avoid punishing the poor as the amazingly stupid current system does......

Where is your evidence to support this...other than in Jacob-land?
It's in all the paper and the news everywhere, not just the Guardian. It's even been reported back to the UN as a breach of human rights. You should keep up with the news Roger!
 
Jacob":akovuqcs said:
RogerS":akovuqcs said:
Jacob":akovuqcs said:
..... to avoid punishing the poor as the amazingly stupid current system does......

Where is your evidence to support this...other than in Jacob-land?
It's in all the paper and the news everywhere, not just the Guardian. It's even been reported back to the UN as a breach of human rights. You should keep up with the news Roger!

Same old...same old. I make the mistake of taking you off Ignore only to discover that you are still up to your old tricks. Throw out some bleedin' heart Liberal bullsh*t and then when challenged to justify it with evidence come up with a load of waffle such as your reply above.

Two things, Jacob.

1) Life's a bitch so get used to it

2) You're back on Ignore
 
Jacob, How on earth can it be against someone's human rights not to give them something? You've never given me anything so I suppose I should report you. The communist Brazilian half wit should try sorting out the millions living in her own slums.
 
It's not that simple. Maybe you need to get up to speed on reading the news. Perhaps talk to Roger, he seems out of touch too.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top