Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Professionals send Brixton property prices surging by 15%

Gramsci said:
u made fair enough point. I wonder if in a few years time when the governments social housing and Housing Benefit "reforms" kick in this process of pricing people out will extend further. This government clearly wants to end social housing as we know it. Also will do nothing to put a brake private landlords and buy to let merchants rent increases.
Click to expand...

I think both attitudes are destructive, and are likely to blow up in this government's faces if they're not careful. Next April is a milestone, and I expect civil unrest within 6 months, when HB claimants, working or not, find out the hard way just how limited local authority discretionary funds are.
 
Frumious B. said:
Here we go again. How many more times do we have to demolish this argument? It's about as redundant as flat earth/Obama birther idiocy. Can't we just classify it as trolling and banworthy?
Click to expand...
I think there is potentially a point in there, albeit badly expressed.

If the last wave of incomers just mutter into their beer about newbies, that is, indeed, hypocrisy.

However, we have all (most) explained why the current situation is so much more worrying than 6,10, 20, whatever years ago- that this time it isn't just more new people adding to the general mix, it is an aggressive wave of money backed up with central government policy and local government lack of it that threatens to make this another homogenous dormitory suburb
 
lighterthief said:
You are the one drawing distinctions about who is entitled to live somewhere, not me. Why don't you tell us?
Click to expand...
no, he really isn't- otherwise he'd be joining VP with the pitchforks. He is making a point, an entirely valid one, about volume, engagement with the community and price rises
 
Diamond said:
Housing demand has risen so out of proportion because we have, aside from France, one of the most highly centralised state's in Europe.

Simple as.
Click to expand...

Simplistic bollocks of the usual order of your thinking.
The reason why demand is so far out of proportion with supply is a direct result of a set of policies put in place during the second Thatcher government, which have never been rescinded or re-legislated because of their political convenience and economic and financial benefits. The effects of those policies continue to play out.

1) The re-jigged "Right to Buy" legislation itself (the original Labour version only covering voids "in significant need of repair/modernisation".
2) The secondary legislation in 1984 that prevented local authorities from building replacement housing, and instead vested all development of social housing in Housing Associations, funded through the quango known as "The Housing Corporation", a move that has meant that in no year since 1984 has development of social housing matched need. In some years it didn't even match the year-on-year increase in need.
3) The legislating of disposal of local authority landholdings (aka "landbanks") to private developers at less-than-market prices. This move set in motion the preference for greenfield development over brownfield that is still playing itself out on green spaces around the country

All those policies have had direct knock-on effects on supply that have almost nothing to do with degree of centralisation (unless you're claiming that legislating on a national scale is "centralisation"), and everything to do with ongoing shoring-up of bubble pricing through limiting of supply. That's "the market", in all it's cartelised glory, working its' "magic", lining the same pockets as usual.

Who really wants to contemplate living in Birmingham ffs, even if that was on the cards?

Birmingham, really?
Click to expand...

WTF is wrong with Brum?

The snobbery in u75 lives next door to the gentrification of Brixton. To deny otherwise is ludicrous.
Click to expand...

The only snobbery I can see is yours.
 
Manter said:
no, he really isn't- otherwise he'd be joining VP with the pitchforks. He is making a point, an entirely valid one, about volume, engagement with the community and price rises
Click to expand...

You've really fixated on the pitchfork thing, haven't you? :p :D
 
Rushy said:
I guess the point being made is that many of those being so protectionist about Brixton are incomers themselves who brought their own 'ways' and economic impacts to the area. Whilst there are wider socio-political-economic arguments to be had, the generalisations and scaremongering about incomers is desperately ugly.
Click to expand...
Until about 20 years ago the impact was minimal, nudging on negligible, because most "incomers" were going into social housing of one sort or another, or squats. In my experience a large part of the difference in the last 20 years is that incomers have progressively been monied, and the shift in class demographic is rapidly shifting Brixton's social structure (including things as apparently everyday as what sort of shops are in the market) in a way that is disturbing for some of us who aren't incoming owner occupiers, or able to afford the sort of rents now being asked.
As I've said on another thread and this one, I don't mind anyone who comes here with the intention of settling - they become part of the community - or because Brixton is all they can afford and still not end up in the sticks, but I don't think it's "desperately ugly" to plainly state that those incomers who come here with purely instrumental concerns around using Brixton's primary schools and then selling on are desperately ugly themselves.
 
Manter said:
I think there is potentially a point in there, albeit badly expressed.

If the last wave of incomers just mutter into their beer about newbies, that is, indeed, hypocrisy.

However, we have all (most) explained why the current situation is so much more worrying than 6,10, 20, whatever years ago- that this time it isn't just more new people adding to the general mix, it is an aggressive wave of money backed up with central government policy and local government lack of it that threatens to make this another homogenous dormitory suburb
Click to expand...

There's also the factor that dare not speak its' name: Class.
 
ViolentPanda said:
Until about 20 years ago the impact was minimal, nudging on negligible, because most "incomers" were going into social housing of one sort or another, or squats. In my experience a large part of the difference in the last 20 years is that incomers have progressively been monied, and the shift in class demographic is rapidly shifting Brixton's social structure (including things as apparently everyday as what sort of shops are in the market) in a way that is disturbing for some of us who aren't incoming owner occupiers, or able to afford the sort of rents now being asked.
As I've said on another thread and this one, I don't mind anyone who comes here with the intention of settling - they become part of the community - or because Brixton is all they can afford and still not end up in the sticks, but I don't think it's "desperately ugly" to plainly state that those incomers who come here with purely instrumental concerns around using Brixton's primary schools and then selling on are desperately ugly themselves.
Click to expand...
Spot on.
 
ViolentPanda said:
There's also the factor that dare not speak its' name: Class.
Click to expand...
Which is a tough one as no one can really change what class they are, only how they behave. So there are middle class people who have always lived here, and those that are new in and no issue, and some that are new in and profiteering. And probably some that always lived here and are now profiteering... and the volume now is different.
 
lighterthief said:
I'd be curious to know how many posters on this thread were actually born and raised in Brixton.
Click to expand...

Odd question - my daughter was born & raised in Brixton - I don't think that gives her some god-given right to be allowed to live here for the rest of her life.
Apart from anything else - Brixton has a history of absorbing transient populations & sometimes they add to the character of the place as much as people who are born & bred here. People do move on, but come back to see friends, to use the market, even to go to the Rec, for years after they've left - that's partly why it's bigger as an entity / a community than it's physical size would suggest. This isn't unique to Brixton btw.

I can still be concerned about the pace & type of change that's going on here
 
ViolentPanda said:
Until about 20 years ago the impact was minimal, nudging on negligible, because most "incomers" were going into social housing of one sort or another, or squats. In my experience a large part of the difference in the last 20 years is that incomers have progressively been monied, and the shift in class demographic is rapidly shifting Brixton's social structure (including things as apparently everyday as what sort of shops are in the market) in a way that is disturbing for some of us who aren't incoming owner occupiers, or able to afford the sort of rents now being asked.
As I've said on another thread and this one, I don't mind anyone who comes here with the intention of settling - they become part of the community - or because Brixton is all they can afford and still not end up in the sticks, but I don't think it's "desperately ugly" to plainly state that those incomers who come here with purely instrumental concerns around using Brixton's primary schools and then selling on are desperately ugly themselves.
Click to expand...


editor said:
Spot on.
Click to expand...

I agree that many were moving into squats or social housing. But disagree that the impact was minimal. It was just different. The gradual flight of people with money and the influx of those both dependant on local council services and financially non-contributory (e.g. some did, but loads of squatters never paid council tax) had a massive impact on the area. Including everyday things such as your example of the type of shops available.

Whilst I understand (rather than agree with) the principle that everyone should be entitled to social housing, the reality is that there is not even enough for the genuinely vulnerable. People turning up here and joining the council house lists could have turned up elsewhere or, in some cases could have supported themselves. The reality is that their choice only really made it harder for local people in need and caused a greater strain on resources. I'm not criticising those who made that choice - I'm sure each one had their own reasons. The area suited their social and / or economic needs and they were as entitled as anyone to come here. But they had an impact. And I just can't bear listening to the blinkered carping of those who did so and then decide to (fairly viciously) bang on about how others are pushing people out, changing things and putting strain on local housing. These are also people acting on their own social and economic needs.

As for settling, you have no idea who will settle. When I arrived I'd never lived anywhere more than 3yrs. I didn't anticipate that I'd still be here 15 years later. My reasons? I had a job in London, I liked the vibe in Brixton and I could afford a home larger than a rabbit warren. My neighbours were renting from squatters who got adverse possession, remortgaged on a buy to let and then moved away to Wales. Some of my neighbours were welcoming. Some (quite a few) were blatantly not. But Brixton worked for me. Of my friends who moved in after me - some moved, some stayed. Some got jobs elsewhere. Some didn't like it here. Some simply slotted in. You can only generalise about any group in ignorance.
 
lighterthief said:
So "long term residents" and "trendy incomers" are all equally welcome in Brixton?
Click to expand...
What's their welcome (or lack of it) got to do your claim about people supposedly "drawing distinctions about who is entitled to live somewhere"?
Maybe it's time to stop digging?
 
Rushy said:
My neighbours were renting from squatters who got adverse possession, remortgaged on a buy to let and then moved away to Wales
Click to expand...

That is hilarious.

I know someone who did that in Mervan Rd - they still buy-to-let that out and have bought in Dulwich!
 
Rushy said:
And I just can't bear listening to the blinkered carping of those who did so and then decide to (fairly viciously) bang on about how others are pushing people out, changing things and putting strain on local housing. These are also people acting on their own social and economic needs.
Click to expand...

As u quoted Violent Pandas post Do you mean VP as well?

I have always thought that VPs post are not aimed at individuals but are thought out and political. You can disagree with his politics but he is not carping.

People do not act out there social and economic needs in a vacuum. Social and economic needs are a result of politics.

I was talking to one of the shopkeepers about the increasing pressure on rents for shops. This affects sole traders in a way that multinationals like Starbucks can manage. Starbucks can run some stores at a loss if necessary. Also offset losses by shuffling there money around there corporate empire. They are acting for there own economic needs. Is that a moral failing of there's? No. Its the way the system is set up that lets them do it. Its politics.
 
leanderman said:
I come from Devon. Please don't send me back.
Click to expand...

I know how u feel.:D

Time to get my pitchfork out.

Thats Violent Panda on the horse.;)

revolting+peasants1.jpg
 
Ms Ordinary said:
Odd question - my daughter was born & raised in Brixton - I don't think that gives her some god-given right to be allowed to live here for the rest of her life.
Apart from anything else - Brixton has a history of absorbing transient populations & sometimes they add to the character of the place as much as people who are born & bred here. People do move on, but come back to see friends, to use the market, even to go to the Rec, for years after they've left - that's partly why it's bigger as an entity / a community than it's physical size would suggest. This isn't unique to Brixton btw.

I can still be concerned about the pace & type of change that's going on here
Click to expand...

Correct.

In that excellent TV series about London streets Arnold Circus was an early example of social housing. First immigrant community was East European Jews. After that came the Bangladeshis. ( Who got the flats by squatting them). Then to the present day- Buy to Let has gradually meant the well off professionals are moving in. So no longer will that corner of London be a place that the next wave off migrants to London can move to.

Central London in the future will have "transient" populations. But these will be from the global elites and professional who work in the City.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
House prices in Brixton
Replies
18
Views
2K
Shippou-Sensei
Shippou-Sensei
editor
Cyclist killed in Brixton
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
T & P
T & P
blameless77
After work pint in Brixton?
Replies
12
Views
759
editor
editor
isvicthere?
film about brixton by zazza the italian (scroll through the crap camden bit) with English subtitles.
Replies
1
Views
432
isvicthere?
isvicthere?
editor
Homophobia in Brixton
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
Tulster218
T
Back
Top Bottom