Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Where do you get idea that most people don't want more housing?
The housing crisis (London and beyond)
- Thread starter pbsmooth
- Start date
Where do you get idea that most people don't want more housing?
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
For those without direct experience, a useful introduction to some the downsides of "affordable" shared ownership schemes:
How myth of shared ownership has made housing crisis worse
How myth of shared ownership has made housing crisis worse
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Yes. the only way to solve the housing crisis is to build more housing - all tenures, all sizes, all densities.
Anything else just alleviates the symptoms without dealing with the problem.
You can buy a three bedroom market price home in Hull for £55,000. That's affordable without shared ownership.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
Just catching up with this thread, and this bit is fantastic:
All that is needed for evil to be defeated is for good people to implicitly oppose it by remaining silent, or something.
I would've thought he'd be a bit too busy to be posting on here, but who knows?So, my guess is either
Or
But could be Kier…
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Housing is a public policy issue where changing public opinion is all that's needed. We don't need extra money, we don't need to invent new technology, we just need to get rid of the laws banning new housing.
My right to a reasonably priced home is more important than your right to a nice view out of the train window.
What public opinion do you think needs to be changed? I reckon the majority of people think housing should be more affordable.
marty21
One on one? You're crazy.
you can have both - I'd ban ownership of second homes if they aren't lived in most of the time - I'd exempt ones that are let as holiday cottages as I'm fond of staying in those - but the folk who just have a home for the odd weekend, they can fuck right off. I stayed in Walberswick in January, lovely place on the Suffolk coast - when I walked back from one of the two pubs one night - hardly any houses were occupied (they were all dark) I'm guessing this can be replicated in any half-way decent coastal place . Councils to buy at a discount - to rehouse local folk (so they can live near where they work) .
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
That's what people on the left want to believe. Rich people are a useful scapegoat, but in this country we have hardly any empty homes. - far fewer than most other countries, and the ones we do have are, as you say, in coastal towns where there are no jobs. There is no evidence for what you say.
The truth is we need more housing in London, and we need ordinary poor people to stop arguing against their own interest. We could start building more housing tomorrow if everyone stopped opposing it.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Many people (like you I suspect) don't make the connection between supply of housing and price. They don't understand that the more housing we build the cheaper it will become. They resort to what's known as 'folk economics' to explain the price of housing, scapegoating "greedy landlords", or "rich oligarchs". They resort to conspiricy theories of empty homes, or interest rates or landbanking. All of these theories are untrue. The only explanation for the price of housing, or indeed the price of pretty much anything, is the relationship between demand and supply: build more housing and the price will fall.What public opinion do you think needs to be changed? I reckon the majority of people think housing should be more affordable.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
That's why developers never try to build expensive build-to-let luxury flats or anything, they always just try to build socially affordable housing. Because they're doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. I would recommend that you try reading this book, but I'm not confident that you'd be capable of getting much out of it.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
We need more housing. All tenures, all sizes, all densities.
Everyone claims they're in favour of more housing, but just not in their back yard. We need a change in public opinion so that people understand the need for more housing and agree to it in their back yard - all tenures all sizes and all densities.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
House builders will build whatever they can so long as it's legal and profitable. I don't think there's much dispute in that.
Have you read the Isaac Rose book? What's his explanation for why houses are so much cheaper in Grimsby than London? Are the landlords in Grimsby more generous than London?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Can you give us some facts/figures on the amount of land in London that sits undeveloped as housing due to NIMBY opposition?
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
I have, but for someone reason he inexplicably neglected to include a comparative analysis of Grimsby and London in his book about Manchester.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
He gave you not one explanation which is applicable accross the whole country? He had no answer as to why housing costs different amounts in different places? If I were you I'd be asking for my money back on the book.
The price of housing is determined by supply and demand.
In the north of England there is ample supply and little demand. In London there is a shortage of supply and high demand. That's why housing is so expensive in London and cheaper in the North.
If your theory about it all being the fault of developers building expensive build-to-let luxury flats were true, then why doesn't that also apply to the North?
marty21
One on one? You're crazy.
There are plenty of hospitality jobs & there would be more if people could afford to live in these communities.
hitmouse
so defeated, thinks it's funny
It gives an overview of different historical moments which saw different models for housing provision, from the slums of the nineteenth century, to the state-led slum clearances and mass social housing provision of the mid-twentieth century, to the neoliberal attack on social housing and the development of a distinctive "Manchester model" of the city council working with developers to promote urban regeneration. It turns out that there can actually be several more factors involved than the equation you learned from your one page of an economics textbook. It also turns out that there are in fact developers building expensive build-to-let luxury flats in Manchester, even though Manchester is broadly considered to be in "the North" and "outside of London" by most measurements.
WouldBe
Dislicksick
More people want to live in London than the north.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Exactly. And what's the word for when people want to buy something . . . . demand. There is a greater demand for housing in London than there is in cities in the North.More people want to live in London than the north.
By meeting the demand for housing in London by building more housing (increasing the supply), we can all have bigger cheaper houses.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
No matter how housing is built and paid for we just need more of it. I'm glad to hear Manchester is thriving. It sounds like they need lots more housing too. The fact remains that the only way to reduce the price of housing for everyone, is to build more of it. Different interventions may increase or decrease demand or supply or both, but any theory which ignores the basic concept of demand and supply is flawed.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Sure, but coastal towns are generally less prosperous than London.
marty21
One on one? You're crazy.
I take it you haven't been to Suffolk, Devon, Cornwall, Sussex, or Norfolk.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
Even if your point about coastal towns being wealthier than London were true, (which it's not), the fact is that we have very little empty housing tin this country. Empty homes aren't the issue.
Ideally we'd build enough housing so that everyone could have a second home on the coast. Worrying about how many homes other people have is a symptom of the problem. Restricting people's freedom to buy a house only makes sense if there's a restricted supply. There isn't. We can have as much housing as we want. We just have to get rid of the laws saying we can't build it.
Tulster218
Well-Known Member
It's very true I'm afraid. Left wing people say it all the time "Building more housing won't reduce the price". Just look at this thread for numerous examples. It's widespread in the real world too, (to a lesser extent).
I don't know how these people explain the world:
Why would the price of gold fluctuate, if not for demand and supply?
Why would drugs be more expensive in prison than outside, if not for demand and supply?
Why are aeroplane tickets less expensive off peak, if not for demand and supply?
Why does Uber have surge pricing, if not for demand and supply?
It's such a central concept to how the world works, I don't know how people can get by without it.
If they had a house to sell, and no one was interested, would they raise the price to try and get a buyer? Would they lower the price if there were lots of people interested?
discokermit
Well-Known Member
so how come we now have more houses per person yet the price is higher?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Can you give us some facts/figures on the amount of land in London that sits undeveloped as housing due to NIMBY opposition?
discokermit
Well-Known Member
credit supply drives house prices.
Similar threads
