Jump to content

Vince right again?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Housing benefit can already be paid to private landlords directly......

 

Didn't the government have a couple of flagship schemes going whereby the rent was paid to tenants to give them a sense of well being when they handed the money over to their landlords?  I seem to remember they quickly discovered that a lot of tenants had more pressing needs than paying rent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think tax-payers would accede to HB being spent on living in a stately home Asp

 

I've told you a million times about over exaggeration Obs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with what Owen Jones is saying here:

 

A common sense policy to create jobs and combat what ails Britain

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/a-common-sense-policy-to-create-jobs-and-combat-what-ails-britain-8604471.html

 

From the article: In the early 1950s – and under a Tory government – local authorities were building 200,000 homes a year.

 

Some people here don't seem to fully understand the difference between market and social housing.

 

 

but when you have nimbys and objectors (a la Peel Hall etc) that will take time and more time with objections, appeals & more appeals

 

Haha, you really never know when to give up do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a cracker Baz - loads of folk desperate for rented accommodation, because they can't afford a mortgage; so Baz rents out to them at a rate that will pay for HIS mortgage - surreal! If they could afford such rates, they'd be buying their own houses. As for facts - "the market" operates on the principle of supply and demand. Low supply with high demand = price inflation, which is basically what we have at the moment. As the market has no moral compass, but profit; we can't expect any altruistic solution from it. That leaves the Government, to ensure it's people are housed, to intervene to ensure they are built. Once supply increases, demand will decrease and pressure on prices generally will recede. A bi-product of such intervention, would be the economic stimulus of creating employment, especially for our young folk in construction trades etc.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No mortgages on mine Obs.... but that is the way things go... drastic measures were needed when Gordon nicked all my pension money!

 

What you are advocating is socialism and at worst Communism... we live in a free market economy of which one by product is the "I want it now" attitude. Kids today don't want to save a deposit and get engaged and leave it for a few years while still living with mum and dad.... they want their own house and they want it now.

 

Mortgage rates are at their lowest they have been for decades and yet; even now with many housebuilders and mortgage companies offering favourable terms and low deposits they still can't "afford" to buy.

 

What they mean is they still can't afford to save a deposit, go abroad on holiday twice a year and have a new car and the latest fashions and go out three times a week..... the thought of sacrifice for the long term would never enter their heads.... believe me; I know people just like that!

 

Haha, you really never know when to give up do you?

 

I know.... but it always gets a reaction!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone willing to fork out £550 a month renting a house they could buy with a mortgage half that amount obviously don't want to buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't describe Vince Cable as a "socialist" or "communist" for advocating the same approach, it's merely a common sense response to a given situation; IE: a housing shortage; which "the market" is completely incapable of resolving. Don't dispute your " I want it now" attitude with modern generations; I've said it myself on here. But, as I've also said; the days of a 25yr mortgage, with a safe 25yr job to pay it off, are long gone. Many youngsters now tend to rely on Mom and Dad to feed and house them, whilst waiting for any elderly relatives to pop their clogs and leave them a house! However, if we ignore the increased demand for housing and other services arising from immigration, there is still insufficient housing to rent or buy, and it's simply unaffordable (indeed always has been) to most at the lower end of the market. So, it's simply a matter of whether you wish to live in a world conditioned by "the market", with an ever widening wealth gap, and all that entails; or whether you wish to live in a modern "civilised" society, where folk are provided with life's essentials. btw. on "saving"; savers are currently being robbed by low interest rates and "quantative easing", and the latest revelations about private pension charges doesn't help either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obs.... where were these jobs for life anyway?

 

In the industry I served my time (Electrical contracting) there was never a job for life and that is the same in many many industries of the 70's and 80's. Granted we had the mining industry and the car industry which had the artificial aura of a job for life, but those were mainly due to the huge influence of the unions. The building industry and many others have never been jobs for life and many people (myself included) took a 25 year mortgage out; knowing I could be out of a job at any time.

 

The same would happen if they ploughed money into building houses now..... 10 years down the line when enough houses have been built, you would have a wave of unemployed house builders all struggling to pay for mortgages they took out when times were good.

 

life is a gamble and you play the hand you are dealt..... some are lucky (and I class myself in that lot) and some are not..... just like people are unfortunate to be Liverpool fans.... you can feel sorry for them, but you wouldn't give them your teams best players just to even things up a bit!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a relative concept; but with a larger public sector, plus major industries, "jobs for life" were there to support mortgage repayments; and I might add, with rather more stringent lending conditions than today. Life is a gamble, in wish for every winner, there are a lot more losers. The social pyramid has very slippery slopes though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a time when people could walk out of one job & into another  & people had confidence to spend their wages in the economy on all the luxury labour saving devices & a family car ,a house even. . I used to surf from job to job at one time until the beginning of the nineties when it was obvious that job availability was drying up & then i settled down to 22 years in my last job. In recent years though the world of employment & the confidence it breeds has been decimated by the onset of employment agencies & the zero hours contract ,leaving many people lacking in confidence to invest in a 25 year commitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hence the reason why more people are happier to rent.... I am just doing a house now that is going to be let to an older couple who have owned their own house for 35 years and are moving to Warrington to be near their daughter.... they don't have a mortgage at all and are preferring to rent rather than buying because they know the house will be fully modernised; new windows, kitchen, bedrooms, carpets, gardens  etc. They get a brand new house in effect without having to stump up the cash to do it

 

there are benefits in everything .... you just have to look for them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Houses around here rent for anything from £800 a month upwards. 

 

There's a terrace not far from us that is for rent for about £900 a month and I saw another one today (well it wasn't a house it was one of those flats near Brian Bevan Island) which was going for well over £1000 a month.  I certainly would not pay that for a terraced house or a flat but for some bizarre reason some people do  !!

 

Surely these rental amounts are the same as a mortgage as many private landlord (who aren't in it for the money) charge what will cover the mortgage on their houses plus a little bit extra to cover the rest.

 

Renting seems like dead money to me with nothing for the renter to show or to get in return (long term) other than having had another person's roof over their heads and the landlord/owner is the only person who will eventually reap the benefits as house prices hopefully rise in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some the only reason to rent is that they are in the area for a short period because of work commitments. For example near me it is doctors doing a year at the hospital before moving to a hospital in another area. to take out a mortgage under those conditions would be pointless. by the time you had sorted out all the paperwork your current work commitment would have finished and you could be moving to the other end of the country to take up another post.

 

or as another example is the bricklayers, they tend to be a migrant bunch who may well have a house somewhere but when you are working at the other end of the country because that is where they are building houses etc then renting is possibly the only option.

 

On a slight side note. this year sees the 30th anniversary of the TV show Auf Wiedershen Pet. A show about a group of bricklayers going to work in Germany.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the face of it, renting is "dead money"; which adds to the reasons that it should be cheaper than paying a mortgage; however, in the case of the career mobile or asset rich, cash poor elderly; it can be an attractive option. For some reason the Brits have always had an obsession with ownership, with roughly a 75 - 25 ratio between the two options, whereas in Europe, the opposite ratio seems to apply, as they don't see any stigma in renting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely it's nothing to do with the 'stigma' of renting' Obs (is there a stigma associated with it?... I didn't think there was) but more to do with 'sense' and looking to the long term.

 

Saying that... if you have rented (privately) for x amount of years and have NEVER defaulted on your rental payments does that put you in a better position of actually  getting a mortgage ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old council house stock was very good & many people throughout Britain  bought their homes for bargain prices when Mrs T sold them off. Many of them became capitalists overnight  & made good profits when selling them on.

 

My mum and dad bought their council house in 1975.... Long before Maggie had even been heard of.... It wasn't just Maggie that sold council houses you know... Labour allowed it too!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to save for a mortgage when landlords are taking the mick with rents

 

yet another stupid comment

 

as I said earlier; landlords buy houses too... they don't get them at a knock down price and make loads of money you know. 22% of any rental income is taken as tax and unless you have a mortgage on a property there is no tax relief.

 

If there were no private landlords Kije, there would be nowhere for millions of Eastern Europeans to live whilst over here either you know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...