Why? You could alternatively see prices rising as BTL's move in, or schools and hospitals getting into trouble with poor service, or wages rising (unlikely since local hospitals and schools dont set wages AFAIK), or no effect at all if teachers and nurses are an insignificant percentage of the population.
Given Gordon Browns rather hapless record with taxpayer money, it must be a certainty they'll now be a property crash. eg Gordon sold off all our gold reserves at a record low price, then put the proceeds into euros just before they fell.
I bet a lot of the FTB's he's helping will walk away when negative equity strikes and we the taxpayers left holding the baby.
One has to wonder at what f*ckwit came up a measure which will inevitably increase demand in a market where chronic under supply is the real issue.
Because 2 faces Prescott can step in.
Surely the people who live there *should* have the say? It is their property that would be affected for goodness sake!
... crikey, there's another reason the people of Hull shouldn't have voted for Labour...
but at what scale?
It's my house, I can do what I want with it? - no, that effects your neighbours, they are also affected by what you do.
It's our road, we can do what we want with it? - no, that effects the surrounding roads too..
etc. etc. Why is the correct scale the local council?
Jim.
Each aspect of planning should be done at the appropriate level. For example, whether shadow from a proposed extension will affect a neighbour requires input from the two houses involved; for changes to a road layout that affects other roads, a council can take that into account; for changes that affect the whole town, a council can take that into account.
To suggest that housing issues are the government's responsibility presupposes that employers will not move as a result of employment issues from too few staff.
That most people want to live in the south east does not mean that they should be able to. The pressures on house prices are economic and the market will work them out. I would personally like house prices lower, but I don't want planning protection to be overruled in order for that to be realised.
I think you're missing the shortage of supply, the only places where there are surplus supply is in decrepid terraces in inner northern inner-cities and similar homes which few people have an interest in living in. Whether it's the south-east or anywhere else, more homes are needed, yet more homes are generally not being built at anything like a realistic rate due to the excessively tight planning regulations. That doesn't mean that I'm saying central government to control all of it, you read in way too much into my claims that the local level is not the appropriate level for all planning decisions, I'm sure Milton Keynes wouldn't exist if the original villagers controlled planning.
Jim.
not really, remote faceless officials define policies and structures without recourse to the public or the market. They then get to pass plans at appeal.
Local elected representatives get to accept or reject plans against that structure, but the mismatch arises in the construction of a vision that doesn't match what people want.
So the result is planning policies to build houses in flood risk areas where builders can't sell houses because they won't get insurance. Or developers applying to build in an area where housing was not planned (but somebody wanted it) while ignoring areas where it is planned (but nobody wants it).
Phil
PERCENTAGE OF FIRST-TIME BUYERS
1984 - 50% 1994 - 55% 2004 - 29% Source: Council of Mortgage Lenderslatest figures for FTB's show % dropping to about 18% this year.
18% is getting nearer sense but some of your figures still seem very high. there's also a lot more singles households forming so perhaps it is just idiosyncratic counting as andy suggests....
regards....
X-No-Archive: yes In message , abelard writes
A component that's being overlooked is today's hot fashion for divorce and two-home families. Never has divorce and broken homes been so popular. The result is that a family that once occupied one house, now does the Blair-friendly thing by splitting up and needing two homes.
As the owner of several properties, I warmly welcome this pocket-lining trend and pray that it continues.
What exactly are they going to do - picket estate agents? :)
In uk.politics.misc on Sun, 22 May 2005 at 12:41:02, John Gilbert wrote :
Some young couples are themselves Jewish...
I wondered that... if they can't afford the homes they can hardly go on strike.
Just like his tax on pensions. GB is an idiot.
They're not MY figures, they're from the Council of Mortgage Lenders, although Im not sure how reliable anything they say is.
No. They are going to stop buying houses until prices come down to more reasonable levels ie 30 to 40% reductions. Its called 'voting with your feet'.
Prices have been dropping for 11 consecutive months(todays Hometrack report) and house sales have dropped 35% from this time last year.
Many FTBs could buy a house, its just that they are not prepared to throw away money on an overpriced box in a crap area, particularly when prices are on the skids and will be a lot lower in 6 months to a years time.So they can go on strike...from buying a house, until prices drop a lot further.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required