Diamond - I am also interested in how you see this building playing out? Do you see a huge programme of social housing...which would have immense ramifications, inasmuch as it could kickstart a new dawn in the construction industry, creating skilled apprenticeships and so forth...or just executive family houses with large gardens, built by private developers. In theory, I would be happy to subscribe for another round of housebuilding similar to the 1930s-50s, but as far as I can see, practically all the new builds in Cambridge, for example, are advertised abroad and sold abroad, as investments...and given the parlous quality of much of this building, it is clearly evident that these were never meant to be seen as family homes but tend to be small, one and 2bed apartments (bijoux or boutique are 2 favourite appellations) almost entirely for transient tech workers and buy to let landlords and destined to fall apart in 30 years. This is a disaster and only skews the market even further out of reach.
Greedy landlords rub their hands with glee as Londoners queue in the cold to buy flats
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
mentalchik
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit."
Am in Slovenia now with intermittent internet access and therefore am less able to respond bit when challenged as I have been in the manner that has occurred on this thread, I am.minded to respond as and when I can.
Do you have difficulties with understanding this also?
Your homebuilding programme is free market fundamentalism. You want to tear up the planning restrictions, ffs, and just let builders do it where they want. And what is your funding mechanism? Is it, by any chance, allowing building companies to decide what they want to build and where, with no regulation and no government direction?
You don't get to say that dismantling regulation is somehow an intervention!
It's dwyer.erm
I would certainly be in favour of investment in more social housing, what's more I do not think that "affordable housing" or part-ownership solutions are remotely effective substitutes either. It seems to me that to achieve that investment would require government intervention at a national and regional/council level.
However, I also think that another, equally as important issue, is concentrations of demand in the South-East and London. This causes a host of problems, not least the compound impact of people looking for a safe investment vehicle competing with those looking to buy or rent in the same area. The answer, it seems to me, is to try and diversify demand away from London.
However, I think that vilifying the investor category, particularly because they are from abroad, and through using sharp journalistic practices, is of no merit whatsoever and that if you're ready to buy such an approach uncritically, that sheds light on one's own views.
Stop trying to second guess my point of view.
You are quite evidently not very good at it
You made a massive song and dance about how intervention in a marketplace is bad and leads to "distortions".
Yes, generally I take that view and particularly when you are trying to crudely control prices in the short term.
When you are looking to encourage supply to meet a profound lack in this instance, I think such interventions make much more sense.
Also, reducing the centrality of London and the South East to the UK is a policy that works in a number of different ways, with a solution to housing being just one of many benefits.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
It's an answer. It's just a very long way from being the best one. It's a bit like widening a motorway by another lane. It eases traffic for a while on the sector that has been widened. And then more traffic is encouraged onto the lane and that sector is as bad as ever, and the surrounding sectors are even worse.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
It's good of you to keep me entertained on your limited net access, flailing for the highground as you are
editor
hiraethified
Now that is truly priceless hypocrisy. Well done!
No, I am vilifying the investors because they are investors. The only reason I mentioned abroad is because this is where these are advertised EVEN BEFORE they come on the UK market. Please stop insinuating racism....although I am bloody angry, regardless of whatever nationality involved - it is about the distortions of capital. Personally, I would definitely like to see house prices tagged to inflation - up until around 1980, it was perfectly possible to take out a mortgage which was around 3-4 x the buyer's salary. Housing costs appreciated largely in line with inflation and wages...and a balance was achieved, with a large social housing sector (which I benefit from) to plug gaps. Housing was exactly what it was supposed to be - a home, and not an investment opportunity. So yes, I would like to see a return to the fair rents of the late 60s and 70s, a huge programme of govt. funded building and we would all find that the market would stabilise since housing would no longer be such a failsafe investment opportunity, the housing benefit costs would diminish, a new generation would be given hope and aspiration, everyone benefits...except those who merely want to increase their profit margin...so true, I am deeply, hopelessly and bitterly prejudiced...against landlords and profiteers.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
I'd really like to know where he thinks it's cool to be building? All areas within the M25 fair game? Outside the M25? Where, it's awfully vague.
That's a laughable metaphor - it gets into don't build because it'll only encourage them.
To what I wonder? Want to own a home? Breed perhaps?
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Where on the greenbelt do you propose to build?
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Here's a map of it:
More insinuations, Diamond? Want to accuse me of something?
It's an excellent metaphor, actually. The point is that by taking such a reductionist, simplistic approach to the problem, you discourage a proper structural response.
How come there was previously enough housing in London but now there isn't? London's housing prices has grown at double digit rates for decades. Has the population growth been likewise? Or could it be that there is something else going on?
If you want to see how your unrestricted house building plays out, go and look at Spain.
Can we just get this really exceptionally clear once and for all?
My argument that singling out the one foreign guy in an article because of dodgy reporting practice has nothing, literally nothing, to do with racism.
It is however to do with the otherness of someone from the outside.
Or to put it another way, one of the investors wanted a pied a terre thay would rarely be used. They weren't from London but were treated more fairly than a non-national.
No-one has made out the racist insinuation argument and no-one will because it is a groundless misrepresentation of my position that does not stand up to any serious scrutiny.
Last edited:
Here you go, Diamond:
London's house price index has grown by 31% since its peak before the financial crisis.
And that peak was already overinflated.
Has London's population grown by 31% in that time? Or is this, just possibly, more than just a problem of how many people want to live in London?
London's house price index has grown by 31% since its peak before the financial crisis.
And that peak was already overinflated.
Has London's population grown by 31% in that time? Or is this, just possibly, more than just a problem of how many people want to live in London?
But there was never the demand In Spain that justified the plan.
That was a glut of supply, unjustified by demand.
Here we have massive restrictions on supplyand roaring demand.
Maybe I give you too much credit but I suspect you knew that already and are pretending otherwise.
erm
Not sure which bit of my post you disagree with. I'll be glad to explain if you'll be specific.
The common factor is that both markets were viewed as investment opportunities first and foremost and housing supply second. Both markets saw astronomical price inflation in that period. The difference is that London is still seen that way whereas Spain is not.
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
What's the fucking difference?
More stats:
http://www.nationwide.co.uk/about/house-price-index/house-price-calculator
Nationwide's house price index. Since 1985, London prices have grown by 736%, so a £100k house in 1985 is £836k now.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...tion-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html
Inflation calculator -- general price inflation has been about 180% in that time.
So house prices have risen by a factor of 4 compared with general price inflation.
Has the population of London grown by a factor of 4 in that time?
http://www.nationwide.co.uk/about/house-price-index/house-price-calculator
Nationwide's house price index. Since 1985, London prices have grown by 736%, so a £100k house in 1985 is £836k now.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...tion-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html
Inflation calculator -- general price inflation has been about 180% in that time.
So house prices have risen by a factor of 4 compared with general price inflation.
Has the population of London grown by a factor of 4 in that time?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
he literally can't stop with it- the real joy is he thinks couching it thus will excuse his insinuations. Nobody will have a clue what he means, really, cos he didn't actually say it in black and white.
Thats how thick Diamond thinks everyone else is.
What makes you think this is a supply side problem?
Has the need for a supply grown by a factor of 4 since 1985?
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
For someone who's supposedly had shit loads of education you really are thick as shit.
90% of all new builds to be social housing. Shirley Porter to pay what she owes. Right to buy abolished, proponents head's on spikes on the Dartford Crossing,
It's not hard, the Candy's would be building council housing if there was still a profit in it added to the chance of 10% posho-cunt places.
Similar threads
