From The Daily Mail:
Millions are at risk of becoming ‘OAP mortgagees’ as they buy their first homes later in life. Many are being forced to rent for much longer than intended because of job insecurity and a credit drought.
Banks and building societies are also demanding large deposits before approving loans. As a result, more than a quarter of private tenants currently seeking to buy are now in their 40s. If they do manage to get on the property ladder, they will be faced with either paying off their mortgage faster than the 25-year norm, or being lumbered with repayments well into their 70s.
The number of households renting privately has risen by more than a million in less than a decade – from 2.1million in 2001 to 3.4million in 2010...
Claptrap
9 hours ago
12 comments:
I don't think most people who are so called home ownerists have a goal.
Their thinking is not really that joined up. It usually quite contradictory!
How many of the "increase" in "renters" are immigrants/asylum seekers/travellers (oh really)/illegal immigrants.
Don't be shy, spill the beans.
Anonymous @ 1129.
Any chance of putting that in English?
Anon 11.29, Homey propaganda is self-contradictory, but the goals are simple.
Anon 11.42, I don't know and I don't really care, maybe half a million?
It appears that the powers that be let in far too many such people, but can you explain to me why it is exclusively young people, lower earners and UK people on council house waiting lists who should bear the brunt while the Homeys rake in the profits?
I agree with you about the pernicious power of vested interests.
Round here, even a modest proposal to build a few houses on a scrubby bit of land is being opposed tooth and nail. What do they think the future holds for their kids?
Their kids inherit an inflated asset and have a headstart trying to corner another bit of the land market.
This whole theory is rather holed below the waterline by the fact (as I have pointed out before), that we had almost exactly the same planning regs/NIMBYs/HomeOwnerist conspiracy when house prices crashed twenty years ago. The fact that prices plummetted, then soared without any of this framework changing does rather suggest that some other agency is behind it all, like, er, the cost of borrowing money. The only part of the conspiracy that has any causality, AFAICS, is the "my home is an investment" mentality, the thinking behind the bubble behaviour. All the rest is mere coincidence.
Only half a million - bollux
Exclusively young and low earners more bollux - most young people are low earners, don't you remember?
We are in this situation due to HomeOwnerists driving up house prices & pricing out the young. The fact that banks have suddenly come to their senses and shock horror, reinstated lending standards that were the decade long mean is neither here nor there.
AKH, everybody is a vested interest to some extent, and as long as the government takes into account all the diametrically opposing vested interests and ignores the lot of them, this is fine. But when one vested interest is deemed to overall all the others, it will always go horribly wrong.
Rob, but the people doing the inheriting are usually middle aged who already have a house, and they inherit a house only to find out that the aged parents have MEWed to the hilt, it's wealth cascading UP the generations, not down.
B, which whole theory? John Major didn't go all out to prop up house prices or bail out banks, and Home-Owner-Ism was only just emerging as the dominatnt economic-political ideology. IIRC, under John Major, interest rates were just set as always, i.e. inflation plus a couple of per cent, for good or for bad.
Anon 17.19, do you have a better figure? Why do ask questions if you know the answer? Why don't you just tell us your figure and quote your sources?
As to the second part of your comment, the whole foundation of Home-Owner-Ism is basically f-ing over young people. They are of course by and large also lower earners, so they suffer four times over from more immigration and NIMBYism. But it's exactly the Home-Owner-ists who think that immigration is a good thing (Nulab were indisputably the Kings of Home-Owner-Ism and the current lot are struggling to keep up), because immigrants tend to be young so there are yet more young people whom they can f- over.
Anon 18.32, yup.
"B, which whole theory?"
The theory that there is a bunch of people (Home-Ownerists) who are deliberately preventing new housing being built so as to prop up existing house prices. I can remember exactly the same behaviour by home-owners before the 1990s crash, the same "my house is an investment" beliefs, the same buying in order to sell at a profit later. It wasn't any easier to build new housing either. Maggie was about as Home-Ownerist as they come, but all those ingredients still failed to stop the housing crash.
If the government now was forced to put interest rates up to, say 6%, there'd be the mother of all house price crashes, and there'd be nothing that the Home-Ownerists could do about it.
B, to get a bubble going, you need various things, one of which is low interest rates, and I'd like to see them reinstate the old rules that interest rates are inflation plus three or four per cent.
I agree that the 'restricted supply' argument is not clear cut, but it must have some impact i.e. Ireland and Spain were building like topsy and still had house price booms, however, their house price falls have been a lot sharper than in the UK.
Post a Comment