[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
politics

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 90725)
Message
File  []
close
file-20180813-2906-1uahnf1.jpg
907259072590725
>> No. 90725 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 5:49 pm
90725 spacer
>Mr Johnson also channeled the spirit of Thatcher's 1980s revolution by pledging to save the dream of home ownership for a new generation, with the government underwriting 95 per cent mortgages for around two million first-time buyers.

>The government has yet to give details, but it seems some of the 'stress test' rules imposed on banks after the 2008 financial crisis could be relaxed to facilitate long-term fixed rate mortgages at 95 per cent of a property's value. The government could instead accept some of the risk through a guarantee scheme - although this would leave the taxpayer on the hook for potentially huge sums.

https://www.If I post a link to this website again I will be banned..co.uk/news/article-8810043/Boris-Johnson-sets-vision-post-Covid-Britain.html

Let's overheat the housing market further by softening the measures brought in as a result of the financial crisis. What could possibly go wrong?
Expand all images.
>> No. 90726 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 6:16 pm
90726 spacer
Do people in power benefit greatly from ridiculous house prices?
>> No. 90727 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 6:29 pm
90727 spacer
>>90726

They do if they own property.
>> No. 90728 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 6:50 pm
90728 spacer
>>90726
Lots of politicians are landlords. A lot of donations to the Tory party come from property developers. Fuck knows how much has been lent out via Help to Buy, which has a vested interest in property prices rising.
>> No. 90729 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 7:30 pm
90729 spacer
As long as you aren't in the South East raising the deposit amount isn't that difficult. The fact that most houses cost far more than 4.5x your salary is. This scheme does nothing.
>> No. 90730 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 8:04 pm
90730 spacer
Sub-prime mortgage crisis 2: Conservative boogaloo except this time the government bankrupts itself or the taxpayer? NICE.
>> No. 90731 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 8:25 pm
90731 spacer
As someone looking to buy a home in April-ish, I'm intrigued. Although my understanding is the banks aren't giving mortgages at even 10% deposit at the moment, it would have to be awfully generous.

Oh, and green-top for life. The proper milk to have in your tea, I've noticed that full-fat fans are all not really milk drinkers.

>If I post a link to this website again I will be banned

Not him but this is silly. We get it 2007, the Daily Mail is a rag but this is a thread where we have a cunt-off over the correct milk.
>> No. 90732 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 9:22 pm
90732 spacer
>>90731
As far as I'm aware blue milk is only encouraged for very small children.
>> No. 90733 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 9:48 pm
90733 spacer
>>90732
And yet we reserve blue cheese for adult pallets. Ironic.
>> No. 90734 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 11:31 pm
90734 spacer
I might be an outlier because I'm the kind of decadent bastard who could drink cream out of the pot, but nothing beats blue milk in a coffee or on cereal.

It's not for hydration, it's for flavour. If you want something watery drink water.
>> No. 90735 Anonymous
7th October 2020
Wednesday 3:26 am
90735 spacer
I wish the government would just hurry up and build council houses with a view to immediately selling them off. Everyone's happy that way (well, except cunts with investment properties, but if the government would stop culling badgers and start culling them I wouldn't complain.)
The government could actually turn a profit if it manages to build the houses at reasonable rates, since prices are so obscene that selling a house at half it's market value would still leave you with a lot of money to build the house. (And you could either have the government notionally retain ownership of the underlying land, or [ab]use its power to buy up land cheaply.) People would be able to actually afford houses again. Some of the houses could still go into the general social housing stock rather than being sold. It's a win for both Tory and Labour principles. The problem with right to buy was never that people would buy up all the houses: It's that councils weren't allowed to build more. Drop the dogmatic opposition to social housing that Thatcher had and it's actually not a bad way of boosting home ownership.
>> No. 90737 Anonymous
7th October 2020
Wednesday 6:02 am
90737 spacer
>>90734

Blue milk in tea is too creamy, it overwhelms the flavour of the brew.

>>90735

The government is willing to do anything to make home ownership more affordable, so long as it doesn't bring down house prices. Baby Boomers have treated housing as an infallible store of value rather than somewhere for people to live and they substantially outnumber the young people who are stuck in shitty buy-to-let rents. At some point in the last couple of decades, being a slum lord became a respectable middle-class pursuit.
>> No. 90738 Anonymous
7th October 2020
Wednesday 7:40 am
90738 spacer
>>90737
>At some point in the last couple of decades, being a slum lord became a respectable middle-class pursuit.

Tonty Blair is behind this. Under New Labour it became a lot easier to obtain a buy-to-let mortgage, which led to a campaign to push being a landlord as acceptable and remove the stigma associated with it. The dot.com bubble happened so people became wary of stockmarket investing and pumped their money into property due to the continually rising prices and the reassurance of it being a tangible asset. Whilst this was going on there was continual property porn on the telly thanks to the likes of Kirstie Allsopp, Sarah Beeny and Kevin McCloud. Labour left housebuilding down to the market, but it turned out they'd rather limit supply and push prices up.

This is without even mentioning population growth. What is often overlooked in the housing crisis is that a lot of family homes have been converted into HMOs thanks to both the boom in the student population and the rise in net migration, which has cut the supply even further.
>> No. 90740 Anonymous
7th October 2020
Wednesday 8:33 am
90740 spacer
>>90737 The government is willing to do anything to make home ownership more affordable, so long as it doesn't bring down house prices.

Inflation used to do that. Remember inflation? It's been a while...
>> No. 90850 Anonymous
19th October 2020
Monday 7:44 am
90850 spacer
>The average asking price of homes coming on to the market in Britain has hit a record high, according to figures from the property website Rightmove, and for the first time estate agents are listing more homes as sold than they have for sale.

>The website’s monthly snapshot of new listings showed sellers are asking for an average price of £323,530, an increase of 1.1% since last month, and 5.5%, or £16,818 more than this time last year.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/oct/19/average-asking-price-for-homes-in-britain-hits-record-high
>> No. 91692 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 1:24 pm
91692 spacer
Don’t pay your mortgage, urge climate activists

Extinction Rebellion has called for supporters to stop making mortgage payments and take out loans with no intention of paying them back in an attempt to force the government and banks to take further action towards reducing carbon emissions.

The environmental campaign group, which has urged the government to declare a climate and ecological emergency, called for people to engage in “financial disobedience” by refusing to pay debts including credit cards and payday loans. It even suggests taking out loans or opening bank accounts to run up a “small” overdraft with no intention to pay it back. The lobbyists said that the campaign, which is called “Money rebellion”, would aim to donate the money saved by refusing to pay back loans and mortgage repayments to support those worst hit by the negative impacts of climate change.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dont-pay-your-mortgage-urge-climate-activists-s83bzjwzr

Whatever will those ker-azy krusties think up next?
>> No. 91693 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 1:27 pm
91693 spacer
>>91692
What could possibly go wrong with that?

Other than bankruptcy, homelessness and the worst credit record ever. Seems legit.
>> No. 91694 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 1:37 pm
91694 spacer
>>91692
Well, I suppose it eliminates the problem of middle class hippies if they're all living in debt slavery. Extinction Rebellion gets activists who never grow up, landlords get lifetime renters and I'm sure people under crushing debt are easier for the police to control. Everyone's a winner.
>> No. 91695 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 2:23 pm
91695 spacer
>>91692

It would work if they got a critical mass of people to do it, but I can't imagine that happening.

This is basically the background plot to Fight Club but with tweets instead of bombs.
>> No. 91696 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 2:29 pm
91696 spacer
>>91695
One of the cofounders of XR has said of it:

>I hope that this campaign is embraced by everyone who is a reasonable person who’s willing to have a conversation.

They're like PETA. People agree with the underlying cause but they have a habit of turning people against them with stunts like this - no wonder she's also bemoaning that they're seen as out of touch lefties.
>> No. 91697 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 2:54 pm
91697 spacer

suffrage11.jpg
916979169791697
>>91696
>> No. 91698 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 3:15 pm
91698 spacer
>>91695

That;s the crux of the matter isn;t it. If enough people did it it'd be devastatingly effective- the same way we could leave Jeff Bezos penniless within the week if we just all decided one day to stop buying things on Amazon. You could say it about an incredible number of things. If the entire NHS had gone on strike earlier this year, the PPE thing would have been solved within hours and they'd all have a nice payrise- They couldn't afford to sack any of them in March, they could have taken the government fucking hostage.

But people are never collective enough. When was the last time a large enough group of people acted coherently to force something like this? It certainly wasn't within my lifetime, and this set of bloody posturing dickheads think they'll get the whole country to stop paying its mortgage?

Of course, they don't think that at all, they're just doing it for the controversy publicity. I don't know if I hate that even more cynically, but I do feel a bit sorry for the naive student types who'll take out massive loans and bury themselves in debt because Twitter told them to.
>> No. 91699 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 4:57 pm
91699 spacer
>>91695
I don't see how not paying off a secured loan hurts anyone except the one not paying it.
>> No. 91700 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 5:07 pm
91700 spacer
>>91699

If you stop paying your mortgage, it's your problem. If everyone stops paying their mortgage, it's the bank's problem. Which by extension is your problem, because it'd cause a financial crash worse than the great depression.

Related reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_strike
>> No. 91701 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 5:27 pm
91701 spacer
>>91695
>>91700
I think the problem they will immediately run into is that banks will cotton on pretty quickly to a surge of new applications (even if they didn't announce it and possibly before staff suffer a nervous breakdown). Any surge of demand will see tightening of lending requirements and fees which would hurt real people fighting over limited credit thanks to piss-takers.

The proper solution from my mind would be to engage in shareholder activism which already happens under ESG criteria. It wouldn't even be hard to pass a collection plate and use monies to collectively invest to this end as a kind of fund which has the side benefit of educating your membership. Then again, I imagine suggesting that would get you put in the wicker man.
>> No. 91702 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 8:01 pm
91702 spacer
Does taking out an overdraft and not paying it off even hurt the bank that much?
I assume the money is supposed to grow into a giant glob of unpaid debt over time, and then the bank will write that on their balance sheet as money that they expect to receive in future until for one reason or another they've got to recognize they're never getting it. But I can't decide if our banking system is weird enough that such a "loss" is considered an actual loss, considering all that was actually lost was the initial small sum.

I suppose if everyone does it it's supposed to dry up credit or something, but I'm more interested in that narrow effect.
>> No. 91703 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 8:05 pm
91703 spacer
>>91700
But it's a mortgage, not rent. They'll just foreclose to get their money.
>> No. 91704 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 8:06 pm
91704 spacer
>>91702
Hooray! Someone gets it.
>> No. 91705 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 8:28 pm
91705 spacer
>>91702

>the bank will write that on their balance sheet as money that they expect to receive in future until for one reason or another they've got to recognize they're never getting it

The process is a little bit more precise than that. The 2008 crisis was triggered by people defaulting on their mortgages, so banks are now required by the Basel Accords to report detailed information on delinquency and defaults to their national regulator. An increase in the default rate triggers a sequence of increasingly stark interventions to prevent another Northern Rock.

The estimated probability of loss and loss given default are baked in to the cost of credit, which is why some people can get 0% on their credit cards and some people pay 399% APR to QuickQuid; the big systemic issues occur when banks have under-estimated the PD and/or LGD for a significant proportion of their lending.

>>91703

It costs money to repossess a house, it costs money to sell it and if a lot of people default at the same time you're selling into a depressed market. Defaults are a cost of doing business for any lender, but the banks would very much prefer that you keep paying your mortgage.
>> No. 91706 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 8:55 pm
91706 spacer
I, for one, welcome our bankster landlords.
>> No. 91707 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 9:09 pm
91707 spacer
>>91703

But if enough people do this, who are they going to sell these houses to?
>> No. 91708 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 9:22 pm
91708 spacer
It looks like they're also advocating tax evasion:

Tax Disobedience

The Government continues to pour our taxes into fossil fuel subsidies, condition-free bailouts for polluting industries, and HS2, an aviation shuttle service that is destroying nature. It continues to judge the success of our economy by growth in GDP, instead of growth in the social and environmental measures that a majority of UK citizens want.

The government isn’t using our taxes to keep us safe. So small business owners are holding some back – and donating it to those that are showing the government how it’s done.


https://extinctionrebellion.uk/act-now/resources/money-rebellion/
>> No. 91709 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 10:58 pm
91709 spacer
>>91708
I'm starting to think they've been compromised by MI5 and this is all a plan to get everyone who follows them bankrupt and/or thrown in jail.
>> No. 91711 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 11:22 pm
91711 spacer
>>91708
Any environmental group opposed to HS2 is well sus. The railway south of Rugby is full. Literally. There's no room to put more services or lay more track. The only way to get more passenger trains on that route is to run fewer freight services, which means moving more cargo by road. A significant length of HS2 is being built along disused alignments, particularly the GCR north of Amersham.

In short, anyone that doesn't want HS2 implicitly accepts more polluting traffic on the roads.
>> No. 91712 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 11:31 pm
91712 spacer

You are wrong.png
917129171291712
>>91707
Me and probably multinational investors seeing as how property in this country is safe as, well, houses. All those idiots are going to need to rent somewhere so we'll live like feudal lords. I can certainly also see businesses getting quickly snapped up at auction by chains should owners try and pull a fast one on this.

Imagine getting a prime location bakery on the cheap and having a constant stream of cinnamon swirls and hot sausage rolls.
>> No. 91713 Anonymous
23rd November 2020
Monday 11:58 pm
91713 spacer
>>91712

Point taken, though you couldn't pay me to run a bakery, what a living nightmare that is.
>> No. 91716 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 8:27 am
91716 spacer
>>91711
Why don't they just build a normal railway if that's the case, and not one that's a mile wide? If you think we need more travel capacity there and the only answers you give are a false binary of more cars or cutting a mile wide swath through the country then your reasoning is "well sus".
>> No. 91717 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 8:36 am
91717 spacer
>>91716

U WOT M8?
>> No. 91718 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 8:36 am
91718 spacer
>>91716
That would approximately double travel times and make the resulting railway far less useful. People commute by time, not distance.
I'm also quite skeptical of the mile wide figure.
>> No. 91719 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:09 am
91719 spacer
>>91718

According to the DfT, it's 22 metres wide fence-to-fence.

https://hs2ltd.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/railway-cross-section.pdf
>> No. 91720 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:09 am
91720 spacer
>>91718
>That would approximately double travel times
How does 20 minutes faster translate to double?
>I'm also quite skeptical of the mile wide figure.
I'm quite sceptical of how well informed you are on the matter.
>> No. 91721 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:12 am
91721 spacer

121464992_241896104173396_7741086473408016660_o.jpg
917219172191721
>>91719

22 metres wide on level ground in open country. The area around it needs levelling and being made "open". Does this look like 22 metres total?
>> No. 91722 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:17 am
91722 spacer
>>91721

Do you think they're just going to leave it like that when they're finished?
>> No. 91723 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:19 am
91723 spacer
>>91721

It certainly doesn't look like a mile.
>> No. 91724 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:29 am
91724 spacer

hs2-response-2-655x434.jpg
917249172491724
>>91722

Yes. Or do you think they're going to put the ancient trees they cut down back? I'm guessing that if the people profiting from it say they will, you'll believe them.
>> No. 91725 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:54 am
91725 spacer
>>91724
Alright, pipe down Treebeard.
>> No. 91726 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 9:55 am
91726 spacer
>>91721
Show us a bit that isn't a tunnel entrance.
>> No. 91727 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:06 am
91727 spacer
>>91724

It's funny that a commercial forestry block becomes a sacred ancient site after a couple of hundred years. I've got furniture older than most of the trees people are bleating about.

Britain is a giant factory farm and has been for nearly a millennium. We don't have any "natural sites" and anyone who says otherwise is sadly misinformed. If you're sentimentally attached to certain remnants of old commercial agriculture then that's your prerogative, but don't pretend it has anything to do with the environment.
>> No. 91728 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:11 am
91728 spacer
>>91726
What about trees planted in memory of dead kiddies?

https://www.bucksherald.co.uk/business/hs2-slammed-grieving-parents-after-destroying-memorial-site-3040675
>> No. 91729 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:31 am
91729 spacer
>>91727
"Don't pretend that the few bits of forest we have left have anything to do with the environment if they aren't as arbitrarily old or natural as I decide. We've been slowly destroying our nature for nearly a millennium, how dare anyone suggest this isn't a good thing?"
>> No. 91730 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:33 am
91730 spacer
>>91720
>How does 20 minutes faster translate to double?
By taking the figure for London-Manchester rather than London-Birmingham
>> No. 91731 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:41 am
91731 spacer

hs2 chilterns.jpg
917319173191731
>>91726
>> No. 91732 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:44 am
91732 spacer

broadwells woode.jpg
917329173291732
>>91731
>> No. 91733 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 10:46 am
91733 spacer

calvert nature reserve.jpg
917339173391733
>>91726
>> No. 91734 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 12:10 pm
91734 spacer
>>91731

Breaking news: building sites look like building sites.
>> No. 91735 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 12:21 pm
91735 spacer
Seeing trees cut down makes me sad. Perhaps we should scrap the whole thing and build something less harmful to the environment. I propose using aeroplanes for our intercity travel needs, which won't involve cutting down any trees or any other forms of environmental damage like ugly, nasty trains.
>> No. 91737 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 12:39 pm
91737 spacer
>>91735
It's not as though people can travel less and work from home more. No! Infinite growth! Progress! I am a cartoon character wearing a top hat and smoking a cigar!
>> No. 91738 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 1:24 pm
91738 spacer
>>91737

Every job is an office job.

I am a different cartoon character, wearing blinkers.
>> No. 91739 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 1:29 pm
91739 spacer
>>91738

Enough are that it's more or less irrelevant. It's okay, though. You just keep reciting HS2 Ltd's lines, I'm sure they're more trustworthy than those sus protesters who know far more about it than you, they must have ulterior motives. Anyone who claims to be doing good must be; you'd know.
It's not as though HS2 Ltd have anything to gain by misleading you.
>> No. 91740 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 1:52 pm
91740 spacer

22metres.jpg
917409174091740
>>91716
Shit's got to move. People have the option of moving or not moving. Stuff does not - it has to move no matter what. Do you want that moving on rails, hauled by electric engines drawing power from an increasingly decarbonised grid? Or on the roads, hauled by diesel tractor units?

>>91719
The spec is 22m for two tracks with safe access. Here's what 22m for two tracks with an access path looks like.
>> No. 91741 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 1:52 pm
91741 spacer
>>91739

For fuck's sake mate. We're in the midst of a climate crisis that threatens to wipe out most of the East Coast of England by the end of the century and render most of Africa and the Middle East uninhabitable. A bunch of NIMBYs are trying to block a major piece of green infrastructure because they like pretty trees.

Cutting down those trees is carbon-negative, because they're being replaced with a far greater number of faster-growing trees that sequester more carbon. Even if we weren't building a big electrically-powered railway that will prevent millions of tonnes of CO2 emissions, cutting down those trees and replacing them is good for the climate.

They aren't dogooders, they're dobadders. They're actively trying to make the world worse for everyone but themselves, because they prefer pretty trees to human lives. Their proposed alternatives aren't alternatives at all, they're just the environmental equivalent of Qu'ils mangent de la brioche - if everyone just eked out the most meagre existence possible, we could save the climate without cutting down any pretty trees or building any ugly wind turbines and scary nuclear reactors.

I was there at Newbury, I drank Merrydown with the Dongas, I shifted spoil for Disco Dave. I was wrong then and they're wrong now. We can't afford to be parochial or sentimental, we can't leave any option off the table; we need massive infrastructural and technological change to survive this crisis. We need a positive vision for a zero-carbon future, otherwise our species will see our final generations slaughtered in resource wars over the last dregs of drinkable water and the last scraps of arable land.
>> No. 91742 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 1:58 pm
91742 spacer
First XR, now HS2. All we need is someone to bring up trannies and we have the trifecta.
>> No. 91743 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 2:30 pm
91743 spacer
>>91739
Is this Nimbyism? I can't tell any more. The lines are all blurred. Anyway, I'm all for better transport links in this country. I don't think we have it as good as continental Europe or Japan.

Those Nimby twats were protesting outside the council before lockdown, because some houses were being built. Where are you even meant to build if everywhere is protected? We can't all just become forest elves.

I was hoping Boris would make it easier, just to shit on these Nimby twats.
>> No. 91744 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 2:51 pm
91744 spacer
>>91743
Ah, yes, fucking NIMBYs.

>We need more housing, now!
>No, not there, somewhere else!
>> No. 91745 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 2:52 pm
91745 spacer
>>91742
Now you can get tranny action on the web: http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/
>> No. 91746 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 4:12 pm
91746 spacer
>>91741
>Cutting down those trees is carbon-negative, because they're being replaced with a far greater number of faster-growing trees that sequester more carbon. Even if we weren't building a big electrically-powered railway that will prevent millions of tonnes of CO2 emissions, cutting down those trees and replacing them is good for the climate.
Are you lying or just thick? Those trees won't sequester anything like that much carbon in time, particularly if they just die and get replaced every year because that's cheaper than watering -
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/hs2-trees-dead-drought-water-woodland-environment-a8925501.html
although at the time of writing they haven't actually even been replaced. Not to mention the equal threat of biodiversity loss which just planting a load of saplings can't replace.
Nothing else in your post warrants a response.
>> No. 91747 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 4:36 pm
91747 spacer
>>91746

“The summer of 2018 was the hottest on record in England, with an average of just 35.4mm of rain falling in June, half the usual amount.

“We estimate it would have cost around £2m to water the trees during the drought, so replacing these plants is a much more cost-effective solution, as well as a more ethical use of resources during unprecedented conditions at the height of summer.”


Jog on m8.
>> No. 91748 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 6:48 pm
91748 spacer
>>91746
Biodiversity? In England? Didn't the sheep-farmers kill everything already? England is just a massive park.
>> No. 91749 Anonymous
24th November 2020
Tuesday 6:50 pm
91749 spacer
>>91747
Weird, almost as though what they're doing doesn't work.
>> No. 92434 Anonymous
24th February 2021
Wednesday 9:29 am
92434 spacer
>Rishi Sunak is preparing to extend the stamp duty holiday by three months until the end of June in an attempt to keep the property market firing as Britain emerges from lockdown.

>In July last year the government exempted most buyers from the levy if they completed their purchase before March 31, 2021. The holiday enables people to save up to £15,000 in tax. The chancellor has faced pressure to extend the deadline amid concerns that it would create a “cliff-edge”, jeopardising hundreds of thousands of sales.

>The Times has been told that Sunak will use his budget on March 3 to move it to the end of June, bringing it into line with the easing of lockdown restrictions. The extension to the policy, which covers sales of properties worth up to £500,000, could cost about £1 billion.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stamp-duty-holiday-will-be-extended-to-end-of-june-gc0qfrckz
>> No. 92435 Anonymous
24th February 2021
Wednesday 11:34 am
92435 spacer
>>92434
I'm sick of this communist government and its efforts to abolish private property ownership. There are many people like me who are now able to buy a first home due to forced saving but have seen house prices rise to prop up the rich shits who can easily afford the 2.5k tax.
>> No. 92436 Anonymous
24th February 2021
Wednesday 6:56 pm
92436 spacer
>>92435

Heres hoping Sunak cans SDLT permanently and replaces it with a land value tax.
>> No. 92446 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 11:00 am
92446 spacer
>A new mortgage guarantee scheme to help people with small deposits get on the property ladder is set to be announced at next week's Budget. The government will offer incentives to lenders, bringing back 95% mortgages which have "virtually disappeared" during the pandemic, the Treasury said.

>The coronavirus pandemic has meant there are few low-deposit mortgages available, the Treasury said, with just eight on the market in January. Low-deposit mortgages are often seen as riskier by banks as they are more vulnerable to negative changes in property prices - meaning people hold more debt than their home is worth. Under the new scheme, which will launch across the UK in April, the government will offer to take on some of this risk. It is not restricted to first-time buyers or new-build homes, but there will be a £600,000 limit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56218952

What we've been crying out for is the government to underwrite mortgages for those with an income of ~£125k so they can get a house worth £600k with a deposit of about £30k.
>> No. 92447 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 11:23 am
92447 spacer
>>92446

I hate this shit. Deposit is not the issue. I have just under £30k saved but 4.5x my salary gets me nothing.
>> No. 92448 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 12:36 pm
92448 spacer
>>92446

It's almost as if the government are propping up the property market for the benefit of boomer BtL scum.
>> No. 92449 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:08 pm
92449 spacer
>>92447
I'm not sure having banks lend more, with the resulting rise in interest, would be a good idea. The 5% mortgage and Help to Buy are mental enough and will no doubt cause problems in a rising interest rate scenario while bumping house prices.

I'm in a similar situation living in London but have found that if you go outside of the South-East it's not so bad. If the government had instead stumped up on making these places viable by encouraging employers to offer a guaranteed option of living in the provinces then it would be much more sustainable.

>>92448
I don't see how this would help BtL. These programmes are for first-time buyers.
>> No. 92450 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:28 pm
92450 spacer
>>92449
>It is not restricted to first-time buyers or new-build homes, but there will be a £600,000 limit.
>> No. 92451 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:57 pm
92451 spacer
>>92448
Why wouldn't they? Many politicians are landlords, the Tories get a substantial amount of donations from property developers and the higher property prices go up, the more the government will be paid back by people who took out Help to Buy mortgages.
>> No. 92562 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:10 pm
92562 spacer

kornheiser two fingers.png
925629256292562
>>92447
I got banned from 4chan (I plan to appeal) and now I'm looking for somewhere else to post. Sorry if this post is awful. Anyway: I just want you to know that I am in the exact same position as you. Like, exactly. It used to be 4.75x your salary that you could borrow, which would net me a comfy 160-grand house in the ghetto right by my work. I could walk home each lunchtime. When I started this job four years ago, houses were £120-£140,000.

Of course, homeowners tend to vote Conservative, so the blue boys don't want us to afford a house because house prices must be high, and the red boys don't want us to afford a house because then we'll stop voting for them. There is a universal consensus against us.

There's also the issue of muh family values. If I had a wife, we could pool our incomes and get the mortgage. But I don't, and therefore I am like Shamima Begum to them.
>> No. 92563 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:22 pm
92563 spacer
>>92449
>if you go outside of the South-East it's not so bad
But then your salary goes down accordingly. I looked up my job on job websites a year or two ago, to see what other companies pay. In Andover, my exact job, identical in every way, pays 40-60 grand a year. In Manchester, I get paid 20-30 grand for it. So I could literally double my salary overnight just by moving, but I couldn't buy a house still because the houses are suddenly 400 grand.

I have been advised that I could buy a cheaper house somewhere remote, and just drive 40 miles to work each day. And house prices will of course go up. But they'll go up everywhere, so I won't get any richer By the time I can afford 160 grand, houses closer to my work will be 250 grand. It's some of the worst advice I have ever heard.
>> No. 92564 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:25 pm
92564 spacer
>>92563
Buy a house in one place and pay it off while living in another place but renting the house in the first place out to make up the difference?
>> No. 92566 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:28 pm
92566 spacer
>>92564
You mean buy-to-let? Boooo, hisss. Get him, lads.
>> No. 92568 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:30 pm
92568 spacer
>>92566
No, I mean let-to-buy.
>> No. 92569 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 12:46 pm
92569 spacer
>>92568
I have thought that I could do that, because the profits from being a slum lord would increase my income and qualify me for better mortgages, allowing me to expand my property empire. It's not good and it's not right, and it would of course rob me of my deposit and make me rent for a load more years, but it would technically work.

I'm 33 years old, by the way. If I retire at 65, which I obviously won't but the banks still assume I will, I don't have many years left before it's too late to get another mortgage.
>> No. 92573 Anonymous
21st March 2021
Sunday 1:31 pm
92573 spacer
>>92563
>I have been advised that I could buy a cheaper house somewhere remote, and just drive 40 miles to work each day. And house prices will of course go up. But they'll go up everywhere, so I won't get any richer By the time I can afford 160 grand, houses closer to my work will be 250 grand. It's some of the worst advice I have ever heard.

You're missing the real kicker which is that prices will rise unevenly so that your shack on the outskirts of Milton Keynes will hardly appreciate compared to the prices in the cities. Then there is the fact that transportation costs are already ruinously expensive if you need a season ticket and that seems unlikely to change.

Still, I suppose you'd better buy now before property becomes completely unaffordable. It doesn't seem like the bubble will ever be allowed to burst.
>> No. 92808 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 8:43 am
92808 spacer
>>91692
They're at it again.

>Extinction Rebellion is planning to step up its campaign against the banking system with a series of direct action protests and debt strikes in the coming weeks aimed at highlighting the financial sector’s role in the escalating climate crisis.

>Last week the group targeted Barclays Bank’s headquarters in London and the Bank of England as well as high street branches across the UK as part of its Money Rebellion protest. One of XR’s founders, Gail Bradbrook, broke the windows of the Barclays branch in her home town of Stroud to kickstart the campaign. “This is an escalation in tactics,” she said. “As the suffragettes said, better broken windows than broken promises. What do we need to do to shake the system, to change the system that is killing us … I literally do not know what else to do.”

>XR said more direct action protests were planned for this week as part of a campaign that will also involve debt, tax and mortgage strikes. One group of activists have taken out loans totalling £4,000 from Barclays that they are refusing to repay and have instead donated the money to the human rights group Survival International. Later this month XR is planning to launch a tax strike during which campaigners will withhold a percentage of theirs – about 3.5% from business or income tax. The money, which the group has calculated is the percentage the government spends on “harming the planet”, will be withheld for a year, and if by that time ministers have not met the group’s demands – including telling the truth about the climate emergency and cancelling “destructive projects” – the money will be donated to Wilderlands, a project to support nature in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/05/extinction-rebellion-to-step-up-campaign-against-banking-system-climate-crisis
>> No. 92823 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 12:05 pm
92823 spacer
>>92808
> £4,000 from Barclays that they are refusing to repay
They won't know what hit 'em!
>> No. 92825 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:06 pm
92825 spacer

16292304-7268425-image-m-37_1563655258446.jpg
928259282592825
>>92808
>One of XR’s founders, Gail Bradbrook, broke the windows of the Barclays branch in her home town of Stroud to kickstart the campaign. “This is an escalation in tactics,” she said. “As the suffragettes said, better broken windows than broken promises. What do we need to do to shake the system, to change the system that is killing us … I literally do not know what else to do.”

Why must they be so insufferable? Would though.
>> No. 92826 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:12 pm
92826 spacer
>>92825
Why does her armpit look like a fanny?
>> No. 92827 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:26 pm
92827 spacer
>>92826
Why does your fanny look like an armpit?
>> No. 92828 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:44 pm
92828 spacer
does fanny look like an armpit?
or
does armpit look like a fanny?
>> No. 92829 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:59 pm
92829 spacer

CMC_Bradbrook__30a-scaled.jpg
928299282992829
>>92825
>> No. 92830 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 3:19 pm
92830 spacer
>>92825

INSUFFRRAGETTES
>> No. 92831 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 3:19 pm
92831 spacer
>>92830
>RR

GOD
>> No. 92835 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 3:34 pm
92835 spacer

184bjaoxc1qp5jpg.jpg
928359283592835
>>92825
They had the same attitude about the actual suffragettes. Funny how things repeat.
>> No. 92838 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 4:27 pm
92838 spacer
>>92825
Banks are insufferable too, though. "Ooh, look at me, I make millions just from holding onto money that isn't even mine. Ooh, no, don't come to me on a Saturday when you have free time; I'll be closed then. Look at me, I'm so big, I'm too big to fail." Wankers. Fuck their windows.
>> No. 92839 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 4:40 pm
92839 spacer
>>92835
I know what I said. Don't try and gaslight me on who I would have sexual relations with. And that goes double for insufferable hippy chicks. How I suffer the curse of wanting to bone that which I cannot stand.
>> No. 92840 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 6:38 pm
92840 spacer
>>92839

I'm pretty sure there are photos in circulation of her baps from the Shire Hall protest, but I think you might be disappointed.
>> No. 92947 Anonymous
12th April 2021
Monday 12:03 pm
92947 spacer
Feels weird to have been on .gs/Britchan for the best part of a decade and only now has my quaint home county of Gloucestershire come up because of some angry hippies
>> No. 92971 Anonymous
13th April 2021
Tuesday 2:59 am
92971 spacer
>>92829
That looks like a Knog Frog, they're decent enough as "be seen" lights. The more concerning part is:
> Stroud

It's a lovely place where the stink of champagne socialism almost covers up the smell of no-poo soap free natural body care.
>> No. 93119 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 7:28 am
93119 spacer

xr hsbc.jpg
931199311993119
They're smashing up HSBC now. Is this some form of middle class female thing? They sat there nicely waiting for the police to arrest them, knowing their position of privilege means they'll get an easy ride.
>> No. 93120 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 8:52 am
93120 spacer
>>93119
4/5 Barclays and HSBC customers were unaware that their banks invest so heavily in fossil fuels. Barclays is by far the worst and HSBC alone has something like 80 to 81 billion invested in them. What those women did was get that into almost every major mainstream media outlet as well as most of the other channels too - even here.
>> No. 93121 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:31 am
93121 spacer
>>93120

Banks are invested in major industry, fucking hell! what other secrets are they not telling us!
>> No. 93122 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:31 am
93122 spacer
>>93119
>knowing their position of privilege means they'll get an easy ride.
Tends to be the case when you're part of a demographic that's known to be fairly placid.
>> No. 93123 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:52 am
93123 spacer
>>93121

It must take very deliberate effort to be as obtuse as you are.

Corporations go out of their way to "greenwash" themselves and maintain a good public image, regardless of where their investments actually are. Other banks also manage to get by and remain profitable despite investing to a lesser degree in fossil fuels.

The public can be forgiven for not keeping track of which banks are best in this regard, and if we had any real integrity in our press that reported on issues of public interest people might be more informed as to these issues (even though their choices are ultimately quite limited when it comes to more ethical banks).

Bank accounts are a necessity, but our financial system is underpinned by investment in industries which actively work against public interest. In this context, protests are absolutely valid to bring attention to this kind of systemic flaw.
>> No. 93124 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:52 am
93124 spacer
>>93119
You must have been living under a rock to not know that one of XR's primary tactics is to attempt to overwhelm the state by giving themselves up for arrest.
>> No. 93125 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:56 am
93125 spacer
What is so wrong with investing in fossil fuel companies? It reminds me of Monbiot's hissy fit earlier in the week about the Science Museum taking donations from Shell, with most of the commenters giving him a dose of reality.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/21/science-museum-shell-money-exhibition-climate
>> No. 93126 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:57 am
93126 spacer
>>93121

Be as sarcastic as you like, people really don't know.
https://www.energylivenews.com/2021/01/29/almost-80-of-barclays-and-hsbc-customers-unaware-of-their-banks-fossil-fuel-investments/
>> No. 93127 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:59 am
93127 spacer
>>93125

Dare I suggest Monbiot knows what he's talking about better than you or some random commenter do?
>> No. 93128 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:34 am
93128 spacer
>>93127
Sometimes he does but often, as is this case, he talks out of his arse when he strays from his narrow range of specialism.

Like it or not, the likes of BP and Shell are going to involved in the move from fossil fuels to renewables.
>> No. 93129 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:35 am
93129 spacer
>>93121
I always get a smile when I remember the HSBC adverts they did about their close links with China. You'd really think if anyone would be attacking their offices to basically no effect it would be the Chinese.

What if it's all a plot by Big Window. Notice how the vandals smashed an odd number so they couldn't enjoy the BOGOF.
>> No. 93134 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 1:26 pm
93134 spacer
>>93128
>Like it or not, the likes of BP and Shell are going to involved in the move from fossil fuels to renewables.
I don't deny this is probably the case, so don't take this as an argument that they shouldn't be, but there's something grotesque about the sentiment. There is no god given reason for this to be the case. By politics or by market forces that may not have to be the case, but you jump to accepting that it is going to be the case and that there's nothing anyone can do about it.
It is the attitude of the status quo I'd most like to see destroyed. A complete surrender to powerful entities, usually by powerful entities. (Say, the UK government deciding it can't take on BP.)

Now for the jokes:
Yes, of course BP and Shell are going to be involved in the move from fossil fuels to renewables. They've already had extensive involvement in delaying and frustrating it.
My personal view is that BP and Shell's involvement in any transition should be compelled. Legislate their present business models out of existence and let the market decide whether they can use their incumbent position to their advantage or whether they go the way of Britannica. If you consult with them and so on then it's in their interest to bugger it up.
>> No. 93136 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 1:50 pm
93136 spacer
>>93134

>There is no god given reason for this to be the case.

Not god given reason, but a lot of good reasons. They have an insane amount of money, but know that they don't have a long-term future. Unless they invest that money in something with high growth potential (like sustainable energy), the stock market is going to desert them. Converting petrol stations to EV charging stations is an appealing prospect - if you're hanging around for 20 minutes while you're waiting for a rapid charge, you're probably going to buy something from the shop, which drives most of the profit.

Corporations are almost by definition amoral profit-seeking entities; if we expect them to actually have values, we'll be sorely disappointed. It's the job of government and consumers to align the profit-seeking motives of corporations with the ethics of society. The fact that tobacco companies are investing in vaping and oil companies are investing in sustainable energy is utterly cynical, but it's also a sign that we're actually making progress. Tobacco companies spent decades denying that fags cause lung cancer and oil companies spent decades denying the existence of climate change; if they no longer see denial as a viable strategy, then we're doing something right.

We could wish for a world where corporations genuinely care about something other than profit, but it's far more realistic to use regulation and consumer pressure to make unethical behaviour unprofitable.
>> No. 93137 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 1:53 pm
93137 spacer
>>93136
>but it's far more realistic to use regulation and consumer pressure to make unethical behaviour unprofitable.
Guess what's an effective way of doing that?
>> No. 93140 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 2:12 pm
93140 spacer
>>93137

Writing an article in the Guardian?
>> No. 93142 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 2:36 pm
93142 spacer
>>93140
What a facile response. You want the Financial Times.
>> No. 93143 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 3:04 pm
93143 spacer
>>93136
>Converting petrol stations to EV charging stations is an appealing prospect - if you're hanging around for 20 minutes while you're waiting for a rapid charge, you're probably going to buy something from the shop, which drives most of the profit.

I hadn't thought about this predicament. If you were Tesco-Esso you could stick a few EV stations in a supermarket car park on a low-cost and you'll have a captive market to recoup the loss.
>> No. 93144 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 5:44 pm
93144 spacer
>>93143
Why would tesco want Esso's help? It's not as if EV charging is tricky (until you get up to supercharger speeds). A charging station is a big relay , a connector on a cable and a trivial microcontroller, the rest is billing which you can tie to existing clubcards.
Cheapish and slowish charging while you're in the store, to keep you in there a bit longer, hard to see why Tesco wouldn't bite, as long as they can get a few more megawatts pulled to the store.
>> No. 93145 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 6:35 pm
93145 spacer
>>93144

>A charging station is a big relay, a connector on a cable and a trivial microcontroller

An AC charger is, but most EVs can charge at no more than 7kW on AC. Anything even vaguely rapid is DC, which requires rectification and regulation. A current-generation "rapid" charger is 50kW, but they're already bordering on obsolete because they take the best part of an hour to get a long-range EV up to 80% charge. Next-gen rapid chargers are going up to 350kW. A standard three-phase installation will only deliver 70kVA (70kW at unity power factor), so in the vast majority of cases you'll need a dedicated substation.

Rapid EV charging is complex and you really need a partner organisation with specialist expertise. There are a lot of potential candidates to provide that expertise, but oil companies are well placed to offer a complete turn-key solution; they also have the capital to finance this sort of infrastructure.

I'm a green nerd and a massive EV fanboy, I have no interest whatsoever in perpetuating the oil industry, but I'd rather see them become part of the solution than die off as part of the problem.
>> No. 93146 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 6:54 pm
93146 spacer
>>93145
That's why I said I expected Tesco to offer lots of slow slots. They'll want you to top up and take your time in the store, mooching round for an extra 20 minutes loading random crap into the trolley.
They may have a couple of fast slots, but my money is much more on a few rows, or scattered, leading to saturation, of slow.
Not everyone is in the middle of a dash to Scotland with a completely empty battery, a few hour-long topups a week will do a fair amount for a car that's only used to pop to the shops.
Tesco won't be trying to save the world, they'll be trying to maximise profit and maybe do some PR good with greenwashed bollocks.
>> No. 93152 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 8:36 pm
93152 spacer
Relevant video:

>> No. 93153 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 8:40 pm
93153 spacer
>>93146

>Tesco won't be trying to save the world, they'll be trying to maximise profit and maybe do some PR good with greenwashed bollocks.

Bag for Lifes will be a full quid by 2025, screenshot this.
>> No. 93154 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:29 pm
93154 spacer
>>93152
Meh. Loads of petrol stations have turned into hand car washes (with a side order of money laundering), porno huts and outdoor urinals. I can't see this changing much. Perhaps robot brothels in a few years. Drop in for a 20 minute charge and a Kenwood handjob. Get blackmailed by russian / chinese mob.
The future will be glorious.
>> No. 93155 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:33 pm
93155 spacer
Thinking further, cube hotels / hostels for the zero hour underclass to grab some shuteye waiting for the next gig. Put partition walls in the underground tanks and pack them in. Pay extra for aboveground luxury hovel with genuine air.
>> No. 93161 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:38 pm
93161 spacer
>>93153
They're already getting smaller, and have been for some time. And flimsier. I could have sworn the original law said the money from charging for bags had to go to green charities, but the supermarkets are clearly all profiteering from it.
>> No. 93163 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:46 pm
93163 spacer
>>93155

Alright Dom, the leaks about Bozzer and Daveycambles were spicy enough. You don't have to post George Osbourne's personal literotica too.
>> No. 93638 Anonymous
13th May 2021
Thursday 8:59 pm
93638 spacer

indianvariant.jpg
936389363893638
They bois
>> No. 93640 Anonymous
13th May 2021
Thursday 10:06 pm
93640 spacer
>>93638
ITZ COMING
>> No. 93641 Anonymous
13th May 2021
Thursday 10:40 pm
93641 spacer
>>93638

is triple alarmist code for it went from 1 to 3? Or should I actually care?
>> No. 93643 Anonymous
13th May 2021
Thursday 11:53 pm
93643 spacer
>>93641
It's low yet focused in some communities which might mean they're going to target those areas for a surge with vaccines to stop it's spread. The mystery is that it's seemingly popping up in places far away from each other with no way to account for the travel. I have no evidence but a bloke in a pub garden told me that a girl's school on Rotherham must have an outbreak. That or a perfectly non-racist explanation.

Polite sage because this is the 'I'm never going to own a home' anger thread.
>> No. 93644 Anonymous
13th May 2021
Thursday 11:59 pm
93644 spacer
>>93641
520 to 1313.
>> No. 93646 Anonymous
14th May 2021
Friday 2:02 am
93646 spacer
How have we even managed to get the Indian one, hasn't travel to India been barred for ages?
>> No. 93647 Anonymous
14th May 2021
Friday 6:11 am
93647 spacer
>>93646
Foreigners travelling from India were banned from entering the UK on 23rd April but people have been circumnavigating this by travelling to somewhere like Turkey instead. British nationals and those with the right to reside in the UK can still travel to and from India but they should quarantine on their return. I have a colleague who has travelled freely to laplanderstan and back throughout the pandemic.
>> No. 93688 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 1:06 am
93688 spacer

Untitled.png
936889368893688
>>93646

We left it too late by about three weeks. We also gave advanced notice of the travel restrictions, giving people plenty of time to fly home before the quarantine rules came into effect.

Throughout the pandemic, the government has habitually closed the stable door after the horse has bolted. Doing the right thing doesn't help if you do it too late.
>> No. 93690 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 1:16 am
93690 spacer
>>93688
I've said on multiple occasions that quarantine restrictions should have been imposed on zero notice where possible, especially after the first quarantine with France given with several days' notice resulted in a mad dash for the Channel ports.

People going on holiday knew there was a fucking pandemic and knew there was a risk that quarantine could be called but went anyway.
>> No. 93694 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 3:51 am
93694 spacer
>>93690
>People going on holiday knew there was a fucking pandemic and knew there was a risk that quarantine could be called but went anyway.

I would literally lock up all the people travelling to/returning from non-green countries right now. It's a fucking scandal.
>> No. 93695 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 5:22 am
93695 spacer
>>93688
Banning Indian travel has no meaningful impact. You cannot stop it getting in, we are talking about a week or two delay realistically, not prevention.
>> No. 93696 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 5:24 am
93696 spacer
>>93646
Because countries other than India exist.

The same reason why we could never keep covid out, once it's here it's here, that's all there is to it.
>> No. 93699 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 2:25 pm
93699 spacer

Jacinda-Ardern-Photo.jpg
936999369993699
>>93695

Yeah nah mate.
>> No. 93700 Anonymous
18th May 2021
Tuesday 5:03 pm
93700 spacer

6791c073b615c3a39ed9ef5563ecaede.jpg
937009370093700
>>93696
>Because countries other than India exist.

Countries are Indian!

Think about yah. Millions of people under one name, working to benefit overweight men sitting around in antiquated clothing - Indian family. Spend centuries living under the guardianship of another and once you get an independent place of their own nothing has changed - Indian. The flowers of a generation conscripted into a senseless struggle? Indian shopkeepers.
>> No. 93752 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 2:12 am
93752 spacer
>House prices rose at the fastest annual rate in nearly 14 years in March, official data showed on Thursday, after a tax cut and a mortgage guarantee scheme for first-time buyers further stoked a sharp surge in activity. Prices will rise 5.0% this year, the May 11-21 poll of 21 property market experts found, a sharp increase from a February poll which predicted they would flatline. Next year and in 2023 they will rise 3.0%.

>Many Britons have sought to buy larger houses with gardens in less urban locations as they work more from home, the Office for National Statistics said. But demand is returning fast for apartments and other city-centre property, which buyers had avoided during the coronavirus pandemic, a survey by online property portal Rightmove showed on Thursday. "People starting to venture into their local high streets and once again experiencing the buzz of their city centres, along with greater mortgage availability for first-time buyers, means city centres are staging a much-needed comeback," Rightmove's director of property data, Tim Bannister, said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-property-boom-set-roll-savings-unlocked-2021-05-21/

Well that's that then, if you've not already been priced out then you surely will be soon. Thank god the government threw billions at the housing market otherwise those investors might've lost out on a few percentage points of growth. My taxes were well spent.
>> No. 93755 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 6:51 am
93755 spacer
Wouldn't it make more sense if HM government charged a per acre tax and mortgage tax to reduce speculation and price bubbles? Considering all mortgage lenders seem to borrow, at least indirectly, from central bank lending facilities? Because there is limited room in Britain.
>> No. 93760 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 8:31 am
93760 spacer
>>93755

But then how would our impoverished MPs make money on the side?

There is no problem with the housing market or rental market. The system is working as intended.
>> No. 93761 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 10:55 am
93761 spacer
I'm pretty sure it'd all be fine if it wasn't for BTL owners on interest only mortgages.

Slap a big fat tax on those and a great deal of the problem would go away, I think. In fact, isn't there some kind of tax relief on them how it is right now? Get rid of that and watch it instantly loose all appeal, and suddenly millennials can buy the houses their parents have been hoarding.
>> No. 93763 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 11:00 am
93763 spacer

great-britain-image305.jpg
937639376393763
>>93755

>Because there is limited room in Britain.

94% of land in Britain is undeveloped. There is limited room, but we're very far from even approaching the limit; Britain feels crowded because of artificial constraints on where we're allowed to build.
>> No. 93765 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 11:16 am
93765 spacer
>>93763

How much of it is farmland, though? Just zooming in on google maps shows the entire fucking place is a patchwork of fields.

I say fuck farmers. It's 2021 for fuck's sake. Why are we still an agrarian society. They had politicians on the radio yammering on about protecting British farmers when we get a trade deal with Australia the other day, but fuck them frankly, why shouldn't we just outsource all the cows to places that actually have the space?

It's not as if the people who are currently farmers are particularly happy with their lot in life. They'd make more money selling their land than milk and eggs.
>> No. 93766 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 11:25 am
93766 spacer
>>93763

Therr is limited room if we are to live in decent homes; not flats and tiny semis.
>> No. 93767 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 11:46 am
93767 spacer
>>93766
We already live in flats and tiny semis.
>> No. 93768 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 12:19 pm
93768 spacer
>>93766

Even nice, expensive newbuilds are fucking tiny compared to even the starter homes of 30 years ago.
>> No. 93769 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 12:42 pm
93769 spacer
>>93767
>>93768

The bad news for you lads is that it really ought to stay that way, for the sake of the environment.

We've accidentally done quite well in this country to limit urban sprawl, even if it was largely thanks to nimby-ism rather than environmental concern. Regardless, the America style model of sprawling suburbs is a nightmare for efficient transportation, it costs far more to maintain the infrastructure, and people are even starting to suggest that it has been a big factor in the atomisation and break down of social groups that has left the modern world so polarised.

Don't be scared of urban living. The point is you should own the roof over your head (for reasons of financial independence) and have accessible green space. Low rise flats and let's call them... Cozy semis or terraces are the way of the future if we want to keep things sustainable.

But still fuck the farms either way, they're horrible for wildlife.
>> No. 93770 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 1:00 pm
93770 spacer

Columba_Thumb.jpg
937709377093770
>>93769
>Low rise flats and let's call them

I think we should copy the Swiss and have chalets dotted about.
>> No. 93771 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 1:05 pm
93771 spacer
>>93769
I don't especially hate small homes and flats, but the ones in this country are usually complete shit. Bad layouts, poorly insulated and increasingly built in the armpit of nowhere because the land's cheap so the developers are turning an even bigger profit.
>> No. 93772 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 1:31 pm
93772 spacer
>>93752
Some banks have started doing mortgages that are 5.5x your annual income instead of the previous 4.5x. That means I could buy a shitty ghetto house at last, in theory. And the market didn't collapse completely in 2008 until it reached 7x or thereabouts. So honestly, things are looking better, for me at least. If wages increase too, there shouldn't be a problem (although why would wages increase? Fuck you, peasants).

Every report on the news about the housing market is that it's completely crazy right now, however. It really does feel like this is a foolish time to try to buy a house. I've asked about a couple of houses and been told to eat shit because they already have so many people queuing up to buy that they don't need me too.
>> No. 93775 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 2:16 pm
93775 spacer
>>93763
I think the idea that we're constrained is complete bullshit. If owning a home was all that mattered then it's easily in reach of anyone that wants one. The problem is that people need homes that are actually located in areas of economic prosperity and that can provide decent services.

Land hoarding and waste no doubt exist but I think the biggest problem is honestly how we as a society have changed. Lots of singletons wanting their own patch when before it was family homes which is exacerbated by the fact that leasehold ownership is so Broken in England and Wales that owning a flat (where single people should live) is a ridiculous proposition.
>> No. 93776 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 2:21 pm
93776 spacer
>>93765
>>93769
We need farms to live, lads. That's where food comes from. You might want to argue that we can just import this but such a dependence leaves us critically vulnerable to any disruption whether that be because of global food shortage, a weakening pound or any interruption to the flow of goods.

There's also the obvious fact that from an environmental and animal welfare perspective things are better grown here where proper regulation still exists.
>> No. 93777 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 4:41 pm
93777 spacer

krIN8hc.jpg
937779377793777
>>93776
>> No. 93778 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 5:34 pm
93778 spacer

PBF-Billy_the_Bunny.png
937789377893778
>>93777
>> No. 93780 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 7:12 pm
93780 spacer
Wish we had a government with the balls to look at significant population production, destroy the terraces and let us have big, proper houses. Our houses are such an embarassment to the country.
>> No. 93781 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 7:32 pm
93781 spacer
>>93780
>a government with the balls to look at significant population production
Just how many children do you want Boris to have???
>> No. 93782 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 7:48 pm
93782 spacer
>>93781

Reduction.

Fucking phone.
>> No. 93783 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 8:13 pm
93783 spacer
>>93780
This is a real problem for the 'just build loads of flats in the most expensive real estate on the planet!' shit for me - it's basically just promoting a continuation of our current terrible quality of housing.

We seem totally averse to building houses people might actually want to live in.
>> No. 93787 Anonymous
23rd May 2021
Sunday 11:31 pm
93787 spacer
>>93783
The UK has a love hate relationship with blocks of flats and its based on the leasehold system. Anywhere else you can buy a flat and that means buying into the building commune so that you have a voice in how the building is maintained. Here, you get a leashold and unless the owners get organised some freeholder skims you.
>> No. 93790 Anonymous
24th May 2021
Monday 1:01 am
93790 spacer
>>93787

Leasehold is finally being reformed to prohibit exploitative practices and make it easier for a group of leaseholders to buy the freehold.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-reforms-make-it-easier-and-cheaper-for-leaseholders-to-buy-their-homes

>>93783

Flats are a really important part of the British housing mix, because the number of households is growing much faster than the overall population. Houses are a really inefficient use of land in dense urban areas with a high proportion of single-person households. We do need more houses, but we also need good-quality flats and maisonettes.

People tend to underestimate the impact of just building shitloads of stock, because most British people have only ever experienced life during a severe housing shortage. Building sub-standard housing is only profitable because buyers and tenants are desperate; the functioning of a market with any level of shortage is radically different to the functioning of a market with any level of surplus.
>> No. 93791 Anonymous
24th May 2021
Monday 1:38 am
93791 spacer
>>93780
Population isn't the problem though, it's the move of everyone to the cities. You could afford a very nice house indeed in the North on the prices people pay in the around London's commuter belt.

Scotland now has a lower birth than 1855 but it's not meant that everyone around Edinburgh lives in their villas with mature women abusing the stable-boys. It's meant a rural die-off.

>>93790
Personally I'm still quite sceptical of this. I don't see England and Wales adopting the freehold system that Scotland manages because of the money that is being made shafting people 'owing' a home that effectively isn't theirs and doesn't share the benefit of accumulating wealth while everyone who owns a home gets richer and richer.

And that get's to the point really, we're at the end of the line as far as owning property goes and the shift in the balance of power between the have and have nots in such a world scares me. Truly a world where you will own nothing (unless you had the fortune in owning what everyone else has to rent).
>> No. 93792 Anonymous
24th May 2021
Monday 1:49 am
93792 spacer
>>93790
I agree but I think you understand. A block of flats gets built, the flats get sold off, elsewhere the legal construct means that there's an ownership commune the recompenses the investors and builders but that's where they're involvement ends. Here, thanks to the lease hold none-sense, we're back in the feudal system. You built it or paid for it? Well, your lord owns the ground so you better pay for the privilege.

I quite like the notion of squatting rights, given the limited space we have on this island, but the system really needs a rework. Freehold or communal ownership should be the norm. There's space for short term homes, "hostels" as they exists now etc. But for long term living, owning your space is made artificially more difficult by toffs.
>> No. 93794 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 2:17 pm
93794 spacer
>>93755
House prices go up less poor immigrants can afford them.
Housing shortage now!
>> No. 93795 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 2:19 pm
93795 spacer
>>93763
If they loosen the constrains and let anyone develop anywhere Britain will turn into a shit hole
>> No. 93800 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 3:28 pm
93800 spacer
There was an advert on the radio earlier for shared ownership of houses. I was scandalised. It wasn't even an estate agent; the government used my own taxes to pay a radio station to tell me to get scammed in the name of World King Boris the Great.
>> No. 93802 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 4:27 pm
93802 spacer
>>93795

>Britain will turn into more of a shit hole
>> No. 93805 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 4:38 pm
93805 spacer
>>93800
A lot of people don't seem to realise Help to Buy was also a form of shared ownership. I had a colleague who was incredulous that the amount he had to pay back to the government had gone up in line with the value of his house.
>> No. 93806 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 4:41 pm
93806 spacer
>>93794
Don't worry, the government recently signed a new visa agreement with India and we have Hong Kongers already moving over. I'm sure some of them won't just be our new landlords.

>>93800
Is there actually any conceivable situation where shared ownership is a good thing? Or even a leasehold for that matter?
>> No. 93808 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 9:04 pm
93808 spacer
>>93806
>any conceivable situation where shared ownership is a good thing?
According to the advert, you can own your own home, and it's yours, and you own all of it, and that's great, and then when you have saved up more money, you can just cheerfully rock up to whoever owns the rest and just buy it off them for a couple of quid. They'll be just aching to offload it, of course, you see.

If any of that was how it really worked, it would be fantastic. The only downside is reality. But maybe someone has got lucky and encountered such a charitable and altruistic slum lord, and it was such a delight that the entire housing market should be based on this.

Leaseholds, on the other hand, no. They're bollocks.
>> No. 93809 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 9:48 pm
93809 spacer
>>93808

>But maybe someone has got lucky and encountered such a charitable and altruistic slum lord

Most Shared Ownership properties are sold by housing associations, which are literally charitable and altruistic slum lords.
>> No. 93810 Anonymous
26th May 2021
Wednesday 11:49 pm
93810 spacer
>>93809
It's almost funny to think about that. Most shared ownership schemes are themselves on leasehold so imagine being the owner and watching peasants below you divvying up the land and bankrupting themselves on staircasing a lease while being unable to ever escape because there's nobody to willing to buy the shares.

And I suppose if things get too settled you can just whack them with an extortionate service charge and watch them tear into each other.
>> No. 93822 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 6:27 am
93822 spacer
>First-time buyers in England will be able to apply for a discount of up to 50% on a new-build home under a government scheme.

>The First Homes initiative could save buyers £100,000 or more. But some experts say that with demand for these cut-price homes likely to exceed supply, it could spark a scramble for properties and add more fuel to the house price boom.

>The government says the scheme is aimed at first-time buyers in the area where the homes are built, many of whom will be keyworkers such as NHS staff and those on the pandemic frontline such as delivery drivers and supermarket staff. It is aimed at helping them on to the property ladder by offering homes at a discount of at least 30% compared with the market price. However, local authorities will be able to offer a bigger discount – either 40% or 50% – “if they can demonstrate a need for this”.

>Crucially, the discount will be passed on with the sale of the property to future first-time buyers, meaning homes will always be sold below market value, thereby “benefiting local communities, keyworkers, and families for generations to come”, the government said. “The scheme will support local people who struggle to afford market prices in their area, but want to stay in the communities where they live and work,” the housing ministry said.

>First Homes is the latest initiative aimed at tackling the challenges of getting on the property ladder and follows a government guarantee scheme for 95% mortgages. The scheme is for first-time buyers only; households with a combined annual income of more than £80,000 – or £90,000 in Greater London – cannot apply. Local councils will be able to bring in their own requirements such as prioritising keyworkers or local people. There are also price caps: after the discount has been applied, the purchaser cannot be required to pay more than £250,000, or £420,000 in Greater London. However, councils will be able to make the case for imposing lower price caps.

>The initial First Homes properties went on the market on Friday as part of the opening phase of an early delivery project in Bolsover, Derbyshire.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2021/jun/04/first-time-buyers-in-england-offered-new-homes-at-up-to-50-off
>> No. 93823 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:15 am
93823 spacer
>>93822

... Alright, what's the catch? Other than the fact it's a new build so it'll be held together with string and papier-mâché.

About time I got something good for being part of Are NHS though.
>> No. 93824 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:21 am
93824 spacer
>>93823

The catch is there isn't enough houses, so you won't be able to get one, and prices will go even higher. 100k discount is meaningless if shite one bed new builds are selling for 200k more than they should be already.
>> No. 93825 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:31 am
93825 spacer
>>93824

It says they're capping the value to £250,000 in England and £420,000 in St Londonsburg, though, so there's a limit to how much they can hyper-inflate it. Why would anyone go round the houses with some fancy scheme to get fleeced on a 3'x3' one up one down when you can do that in the normal property market without the middle man?

I'm sure supply will b a constant issue though. Does sound to me like one of those schemes they make a lot of noise about to look good, but never seems to materialise in reality.
>> No. 93826 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:31 am
93826 spacer
>>93823
They're only going to offer this to a limited number of properties, estimated at 1,500 this year and 10,000 in future years, so don't be surprised if high demand leads to a bidding war.

The house would also have to be sold on to a first time buyer at a 30-50% discount so it'll help people onto the property ladder but then they'll get stuck there and struggle to buy another house in the future. I can envisage people paying over the odds as they get into a bidding war thinking they're getting a good deal because of the discount but without really comprehending they have to pass the discount on to the next buyer.
>> No. 93827 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:37 am
93827 spacer
>>93822
Actually said out loud: "Jesus fucking Christ, just build more council houses"
The bit about giving discounts to nurses, supermarket workers, etc, seems completely nonsensical from a local labour supply perspective. If you've got a shortage of nurses how about giving them affordable rental accommodation so they can afford to live in the area rather than playing around with a stupid lottery where 50 people in your area of 500,000 can get a house to own for half the market rate while there remains a chronic shortage of housing.

I hate each and every one of our policymakers personally, even the ones who've had good ideas. (Because they haven't gone over and slapped their less competent colleagues.)
>> No. 93828 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:39 am
93828 spacer
>>93826

So how does that work, have they given any details on it? Does it mean the owner has to sell it for half the price they paid? They can only sell it to another first time buyer?

It really doesn't help anyone onto the property ladder if that's the case, just funnels all the millennials into bizarre aspirational council estates they'll never be able to move out of.
>> No. 93829 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:46 am
93829 spacer
>>93828
Say a house is worth £180k, you'd get a discount of 30% and pay £126k for it. If the house value rises to £200k when you sell it then you'd receive £140k for it, i.e. 70% of the growth, and the new buyer has to also be a first time buyer. If you needed a bigger house, say you had kids or got sick of living in a new build estate, then it'd take you a lot of time to afford a comparable £200k plus property outright.

https://www.ownyourhome.gov.uk/scheme/first-homes/
>> No. 93830 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 10:01 am
93830 spacer
>>93829

You can always get a mortgage on a bigger house once you've cleared the hurdle of being a home-owner in the first place though, right?

The problem most first time buyers face today isn't being able to afford the repayments, it's just getting the deposit together in the first place when you're already paying some BTL parasite's mortgage for them, and the fact banks are craven bastards who are too "risk averse" to give people mortgages for the same value as extortionate monthly rents they have proven they can already afford.

It's not the final value of the house that's really the problem (although obviously it's the root cause), it's the barriers to entry.
>> No. 93831 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 10:36 am
93831 spacer
>>93830
Let's say you have a couple of "key workers" on minimum wage, which works out as a combined income of ~£32,400 if they're both doing 35 hours per week. A mortgage multiplier of 4.5 means the maximum they could borrow is £145,800, so they should be able to save up the 5% deposit needed on a house discounted from £200k to £140k of £7,000. If they wanted to buy a comparable home for £200k outright then, assuming the maximum amount they can borrow stays the same, they'd need to find a deposit of c. £54,200 through either saving up or increased equity in the home. There's no way this scheme isn't going to "trap" people.
>> No. 93832 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 11:16 am
93832 spacer
>>93831

Exactly, the discount is effectively just creating a shortfall they've got to overcome if they ever want to trade up. Which goes back to what I was saying with:

>banks are craven bastards who are too "risk averse" to give people mortgages

Our hypothetical couple are making more than enough, even as minimum wage skivvies, to afford the monthly payments on a £200,000 mortgage, even if we assume only a 5% deposit. The banks just won't let them do it, even though the reality for many young people is that they're already paying comparable rents.
>> No. 93833 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 11:49 am
93833 spacer
Like others have said, this will trap a lot of people. They will try to move in a few years time and realise that they are worse off than when they started.
>> No. 93834 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 12:24 pm
93834 spacer
>>93827
>If you've got a shortage of nurses how about giving them affordable rental accommodation so they can afford to live in the area rather than playing around with a stupid lottery where 50 people in your area of 500,000 can get a house to own for half the market rate while there remains a chronic shortage of housing.

Because money.

>>93832
>Our hypothetical couple are making more than enough, even as minimum wage skivvies, to afford the monthly payments on a £200,000 mortgage, even if we assume only a 5% deposit. The banks just won't let them do it, even though the reality for many young people is that they're already paying comparable rents.

I think we've had quite enough of banks lending sums to people can't afford to pay it back for one century.

Right now there's too many people getting into an overinflated property market who will be absolutely shafted by an inevitable rise in the interest rate with banks then ending up on the hook for underwater mortgages. I'm not normally one to ever bet against property but we're getting into a 10% annual rise in costs - it'll all end in tears, although for the rich it will be tears of laughter.

Why don't you two just pool your resources and buy your own block of flats to live in.
>> No. 93835 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 12:25 pm
93835 spacer
>>93832

>Our hypothetical couple are making more than enough, even as minimum wage skivvies, to afford the monthly payments on a £200,000 mortgage

At the current record low interest rate of 0.1%. The banks have to account for the risk of an increased interest rate causing an affordability crisis. The cycle of negative equity -> repossession -> falling prices -> negative equity is what initially triggered the 2008 financial crisis.
>> No. 93836 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 12:42 pm
93836 spacer
>>93834
Surely if money's a concern we shouldn't be throwing it down the drain on buying people houses they can't actually afford.
(Sure, it's not a lot of money, but even if you only spent the money allocated for this scheme on building new council houses instead you'd be better off. Well, you wouldn't get the headlines I suppose...)
>> No. 93837 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 12:44 pm
93837 spacer
>>93834

>people can't afford to pay it back

But they can afford it, see:

>the reality for many young people is that they're already paying comparable rents

Obviously it's not good that the prices are so inflated, but the inability of first time buyers to enter the market is causing an artificial scarcity which is only further exacerbating the constant inflation. The only people buying are developers, BTL wankers and ladder-climbers. The market has no bottom floor any more.

>>93835

Fuck the interest rates, the money is magicked out of nothing on a computer anyway, it's not like anybody is actually harmed if a few people miss a payment. It's all a mass delusion. We are a cargo cult worshipping the nonsensical whims of instant stock trading algorithms. None of it needed to happen.
>> No. 93838 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 5:37 pm
93838 spacer
>>93837

The problem isn't the financial system, it's the simple fact that we aren't building enough houses. In countries that do build enough houses, it doesn't really matter whether you buy or rent - house prices aren't steeply rising and landlords aren't in a position to take the piss because they're in a competitive market.
>> No. 93839 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 6:58 pm
93839 spacer
>>93838
I'd imagine those countries have also had fairly low population growth.
>> No. 93840 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:00 pm
93840 spacer
>>93838
It seems plausible to me that the financial system is one part of the reason we don't build enough houses. I'm not familiar enough with the situation to comment on whether our land use laws, NIMBYism, or what have you are a bigger contributor, but it seems sensible to assume that if the state was more willing to interfere with bank lending we would have less of an issue.
Have the state set a minimum interest rate for mortgages on existing properties above the market rate while leaving mortgages for new builds alone so that the economics of lending to builders are forcibly made superior to those of lending to buyers. Do it gently enough and you should be able to cool the housing market without crashing the real economy as would happen if you raised the base interest rate. A few people will be artificially priced out of the market, sure, but swathes of people are being priced out of the market each year the present merry-go-round is allowed to continue.

I can't help but feel central banks and governments are slightly mad for not doing something like this. Having a single base rate and then leaving the rest up to the market seems mad when the result is to trap you in a situation where you either raise rates and strangle the stagnant economy, or leave them be and watch as housing and shares go to the moon because money is cheap and those offer much better returns than more productive investments. I'm sympathetically unsympathetic to the bankers' dilemma - everything is so interconnected that you can't crash house prices without crashing everything else too. Still, you'd think they'd be making some moves to set things right rather than just trying to keep everything ticking over like a Gosplan employee c. Easter 1991.
>> No. 93841 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:09 pm
93841 spacer
>>93839

Population isn't a particularly important factor - what matters most is the ratio of homes to households. The demand for housing has been increasing in Britain at a far greater rate than the growth of our population, because more people are staying single for longer. Ageing is a critical factor in this; we have a generation of young families living in small flats, while elderly people hold on to large family homes. Older people have a financial interest in constraining the supply of housing to increase the value of their "investment" and they dramatically outnumber the young people who are living with the consequences of our dysfunctional market.

The Planning Bill announced in the Queen's Speech is a massive step forward, because it'll hugely reduce the ability of NIMBYs to block development. Critics of the bill say that it risks creating a "free for all for development", which I see as a huge improvement over the status quo - the wrong home in the wrong place is far better than no home at all.
>> No. 93842 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:14 pm
93842 spacer
>>93838

>n countries that do build enough houses

Which ones are those then?

As far as I can tell, the shite situation on housing is reflected across basically every western country.
>> No. 93843 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:24 pm
93843 spacer
>>93841
>we have a generation of young families living in small flats, while elderly people hold on to large family homes.

One of the main reasons the amount of suitable housing stock for families has reduced over the past couple of decades is because of landlords buying them up to convert into HMOs for migrants and students.
>> No. 93844 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:24 pm
93844 spacer
>>93841

I would be prepared to argue that you have the cart before the horse there, and our declining population growth and the fact people are staying single longer is entirely because of the difficulty getting your own place. Very few people want to start a family living in a flat if they can help it.

That said population growth is bad, we've already got enough problems that aren't getting solved, so I'm not particularly interested in exploring solutions from that avenue. Eh.
>> No. 93845 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 7:25 pm
93845 spacer
>>93842

Situation is pretty similar in Asia too tbf. Can't afford property in major metropolitan area because housing costs to high, can't live in affordable area because no jobs. Luxury apartments built and lie empty in the heart of every city but affordable housing is either non-existent or shoddy af.
>> No. 93846 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 8:48 pm
93846 spacer
>>93837
I think you're missing that it's not just the mortgage your paying - banks are businesses so they're not holding away your custom for no reason. You have not only an interest rate rise to worry about but it's on you now if anything goes wrong which it can and will. That's not to say burning money on rent is good but home ownership is expensive.

>Fuck the interest rates, the money is magicked out of nothing on a computer anyway, it's not like anybody is actually harmed if a few people miss a payment.

The bank forecloses on your home. The mortgage is underwater so everyone loses. Well done and clearly the system is working if people like you can't get a mortgage.

>>93844
>Very few people want to start a family living in a flat if they can help it.

Starting a family doesn't have anything to do with it, this is about cohabitation. People live alone where previously the norm would be two people to a bedroom in their early 20s (or even multi-generational houses), it's certainly not everyone but enough singletons to seriously constrain supply. To make matters worse we're much more urbanised now which means that empty houses do exist but they're in the wrong places while everyone fights over land in the commuter belt - and being responsible by getting a flat is a poor financial decision due to the leasehold system.

Some people need to get a fucking girlfriend already. Others need to be get taxed harshly for spare rooms while the rest (pensioners) need to be told in no uncertain fashion that they can't hang on to their 4-bedroom house to pass on to the kids.
>> No. 93847 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 9:43 pm
93847 spacer

elf.jpg
938479384793847
High house prices are good for the economy. All these idiots that want prices to crash don't seem to realise that it would wipe out the wealth of many middle class families.
>> No. 93849 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 11:39 pm
93849 spacer
>>93847

Fuck, he's turning into an iPhone facemorph App result of that US Lawyer who made it his life's work to oppose the Grand Theft Auto series, and someone from Fairport Convention.
>> No. 93850 Anonymous
4th June 2021
Friday 11:48 pm
93850 spacer
>>93847
>All these idiots that want prices to crash don't seem to realise that it would wipe out the wealth of many middle class families.

Isn't that what you people want anyway. You destroy the middle class and you destroy the liberal political order with a resultant economic dislocation and polarisation between have and have-nots allowing a radical to get in.

I hear commieblocks aren't actually too bad come to think of it.
>> No. 93851 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 12:58 am
93851 spacer
>>93850
The middle class no longer owns their home, they rent. Crashing "the housing market" at this point does affect the odd retiree who was banking on owning a house or two to top up their retirement, though rent and sale price aren't an elastic relationship. But it doesn't affect people who bought to live all that much. Remember the howling and gnashing of teeth when the tax reform for landlords who fancied themselves private investors came in in regards to their mortgage payments? A crash is the same thing, people who want to buy a place to live in win, people who treat it as an investment (even if they live in it) draw the short straw.
>> No. 93852 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 1:58 am
93852 spacer
>>93846

You know, lad, I'm sorry, but I don't care all that much for your opinions. You sound like a particularly unimaginative broadsheet journalist, or that lad who insists the FT is the most impartial source of news.

I don't know how many people in their early 20s you hang about with, but I can assure you they don't bloody well live alone. You have genuinely pulled that out of their arse; when I was in my early 20s ten years ago I was sharing a three bed house with five mates. All the people I know in their early 20s today are sharing their parents house with their parents because moving out is a pipe dream they've all but given up on.
>> No. 93853 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 2:32 am
93853 spacer
>>93846
>The bank forecloses on your home.
Have they considered not foreclosing and making people homeless? Radical idea, I know.
>> No. 93855 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 3:16 am
93855 spacer
>>93852

There's a huge north/south, towns/cities divide that gives people very different perceptions of the British housing market.

In my home town, it's still perfectly normal for people in their early-to-mid twenties to be married and have a mortgage. You can buy a slightly tatty mid-terrace for about £80k or a fairly nice semi for £120k, so getting a mortgage isn't really a major issue; people are much more concerned about youth unemployment, insecure working conditions, wage stagnation and the cost of childcare.

>>93853

Banks have huge assets but relatively tight profit margins. They absolutely cannot afford to just let people off if they stop paying their mortgage. It's worth remembering that most of the money in the financial system ultimately belongs to pension funds. The people managing that money get paid either way, but if their investments go tits-up then a lot of people will find that their pension has disappeared.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932008
>> No. 93856 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 3:36 am
93856 spacer
>>93855
>Banks have huge assets but relatively tight profit margins.

Is that just for big banks, or does it scale? So they have staff, facilities, presumably a lot of insurance and a few other similar things. But then they have all that money.

I'm quite curious about bank balance sheets now, I don't think I'd be able to understand one, but how can they have such tight margins when people are literally handing them money?
>> No. 93857 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 6:34 am
93857 spacer
>>93855

I'm from the Northern half of that divide and its certainly not the promised land of free houses Southerners seem to think it is. Sure I could by a relatively nice end terrace for about 60 grand if I wanted to go and live in South Elmsall, but that means going to live in fucking South Elmsall. These cheap houses are all in shitholes, and all the jobs are still in the big cities like Leeds and Manchester.

From a Southern perspective that might not even seem like a problem because the whole south of England commutes to London, but the North doesn't have the infrastructure London does. Buses are absolute dogshit and a lot of places just don't have train stations, so moving out to where these cheap houses are means you'll be driving an hour every morning to get to work.

Beyond that there's just the fact jobs are scarcer and wages shittier. The people in your hometown getting married and having mortgages will still have had help from mum and dad, where it's at least still reasonably possible for that to happen, which would be unthinkable in the south. But in relative terms the housing market is just as fucked in the North as it is in the South.
>> No. 93858 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 7:24 am
93858 spacer
>>93857

>all the jobs are still in the big cities

For a very middle-class definition of "all the jobs". Working-class jobs overwhelmingly aren't in big cities. There's a terrible snobbery in this country about what it means to live a decent life; a blindness to the wants, needs and beliefs of the majority of people who don't commute to an office in a city centre.

A lot of the people who live in towns like South Elmsall don't think they live in a shithole and have no inclination to move. Millions of skilled, well-paid people work on industrial estates or out of their van and have absolutely no desire to spend all day behind a desk.

I don't mean to suggest that the north is a paradise, there are plenty of problems that need addressing, but I reject the notion that the only solution to those problems is to make the north more like the south and towns more like cities. A large proportion of the electorate also reject that notion, which explains why Labour are currently unelectable.
>> No. 93859 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 7:59 am
93859 spacer
>>93856

>how can they have such tight margins when people are literally handing them money?

Because people want that money back, preferably with interest. Banks manage colossal amounts of money, but they operate in a highly competitive environment that requires them to mostly act in the interests of their customers.

To give an example, Barclays manage assets totalling £1.35 trillion - it's not their money, they're just looking after it for their customers. Their gross profit was £3.2bn last year and £6.2bn in 2019.

Those are colossal numbers that are hard to get your head around, but it means that in a good year Barclays expect to pocket less than 0.5% of the money they're looking after. It doesn't take a particularly big economic shock to push a bank from profit to loss and a shock like we saw in 2008 was enough to push many into bankruptcy.

On a broader point, a lot of people like to imagine that all of the world's problems could be solved if we just took all of the money from rich people, but those people don't realise that they're rich. The total global GDP is about £61 trillion, but divided by the total global population it works out to a little under £9,000 each. That would be great news for people in sub-Saharan Africa, but you and I wouldn't be best pleased about it.
>> No. 93860 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 8:01 am
93860 spacer
>>93857
>moving out to where these cheap houses are means you'll be driving an hour every morning to get to work.

My commute from Ossett to Leeds tended to take about 15 minutes.
>> No. 93861 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 8:35 am
93861 spacer
>>93859
Assuming rents were adjusted accordingly, I'd go for the universal £9k/year world in a heartbeat. Even before any basic principle of fairness or quick mental calculation of the boon that would come from abolishing global poverty there's the simple advantage of no longer having to remember you share a planet and various communities with well to do yanks and yahs who'll squander your yearly paycheque on tat that no society worth living in would produce before the year is out.

Unsurprisingly I also think it's disingenuous to compare ordinary westerners with the sort of people who own their own fleet of private jets, but that's a boring point that anyone could argue. Much more fun to say this: I am the living straw-egalitarian. Where others balk and go "Oh no, really, I'd rather we just kept the £30k/person for but stopped using cars or something as a trade..." I say forget it: £9k, £9k, £9k. £9k in the world where it results in explosive economic growth due to the higher marginal propensity to consume of lower income people and an explosion of entrepreneurship from the developing world, £9k in the world where it turns out to be true that the only thing that motivates someone to make a moderately convenient website is the possibility of one day becoming a real life bond villain and we're left stuck with nought but £9k/year until the end of time. No amount of money in my own pockets is worth the continuation of income or wealth inequalities.
and yet I am neither a socialist nor a communist nor any sort of political radical.
>> No. 93862 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 9:05 am
93862 spacer
>>93858

>A lot of the people who live in towns like South Elmsall don't think they live in a shithole

No, they definitely do. Have you ever been? It's an ex-mining village where people still bitterly remember the Thatcher days and you still get great roving gangs of chavs because there's fuck all for the young to do. When they're too old to roam the streets drinking cheap cider they graduate into smack habits.

Why exactly do you think the houses in those places are so cheap? It's because no fucker wants to live there. No fucker wants to live there because there's no jobs locally, and you are therefore required to commute into Leeds, Wakefield, Barnsley or Sheffield. Nobody wants to have to commute to Leeds or Sheffield, but that's just the reality of the situation and you are nothing but delusional if you want to deny it. So for most people, that makes these places a complete non-starter when it's an hour's drive on a good day, nearly two on the bus, and there nearest train station is in the next village over.

Even these mythical van men you are talking about are going to be either stuck servicing the local area, which is hardly profitable because as we've previously established, the place is basically just full of smackheads; or they have to take their van man services to a place like Leeds or Sheffield, which costs them more because of the fuel expense.

Now, I don't mind that sort of place, because it is exactly the sort of environment I grew up in. I'm prepared to compromise on somewhere moderately grim but still reasonably well connected like Castleford. But this is simple supply and demand, mate, you should be able to grasp that- Those houses are affordable because they're not viable places for most people to settle down. Location, location, location.

If more was done to make those places into viable, well connected locations for people to settle down, rather than desolate relics of the country's industrial past, this might not be the case. Of course, it'd push prices up, because suddenly people might start to consider living there; but in turn, that eases the pressure on prices overall. The major problem we have is one of stark contrast between places that are desirable and places that are not, pushing prices to silly levels in high demand areas.
>> No. 93863 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 9:11 am
93863 spacer
>>93860

The average house price in Ossett is £180,000, and it's bang on the M1, so that's not relevant at all to the discussion that was being had. Wakefield and by extension Ossett, Rothwell, Stanley, Horbury etc are all very much in demand commuter hubs for Leodesian offcomed'uns.

I'm talking about middle of nowhere shitholes like Ryhill and Fitzy.
>> No. 93864 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 9:56 am
93864 spacer
>>93863
They'd have a combined population of c. 6,000 and Fitzy, along with South Elmsall, has a train station that'd get you to Wakey in about 10 minutes.
>> No. 93865 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 10:01 am
93865 spacer
>>93847

He looks like he's been smoking that Steve Bannon Meth
>> No. 93866 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 10:37 am
93866 spacer
>>93862

In terms of deprivation, South Elmsall is almost exactly on the national average. The only wards in Leeds with lower levels of deprivation are Hunslet & Riverside and some bits of Headingley. Doncaster has lower levels of poverty than Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham and half a dozen London boroughs.

The places where people choose to live are not necessarily the places that are good to live, because our intuitions about the world are profoundly flawed.

https://opendatacommunities.org/def/concept/folders/themes/societal-wellbeing
>> No. 93867 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 11:20 am
93867 spacer
>>93862
>Even these mythical van men you are talking about are going to be either stuck servicing the local area, which is hardly profitable because as we've previously established, the place is basically just full of smackheads; or they have to take their van man services to a place like Leeds or Sheffield

There is a trend of tradespeople/van men regularly travelling all over the country for work and living in places seen as less desirable for the lower costs discussed here.
The mileages seen when vans come in for servicing are are hugely increased with what was being seen say 15 ish years ago, this trend has been noticed by NGO's and GO's with rumors of compulsory tacho's in vans.
>> No. 93871 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 7:45 pm
93871 spacer
>>93866

Data like this never takes into account the realities of the situation though.

The difference is if you live in Beeston, Harehills or Osmondthorpe you get all the benefits of living in Leeds to counterbalance the fact it's a shithole. When you live in an abandoned ex-mining village, you're just in bumfuck nowhere and have to deal with all the hurdles it comes with. It's all downside.

If you live in Ossett you can stay out on Westgate until three in the morning and it'll cost you six quid in an ABC to get home. When you live in South Kirkby it'll be more like thirty. You're stuck with the local pub and the county lines gangs.

I'm not sure what exactly we are debating here any more though. The fact of the matter is it's no use to anyone if there are affordable houses when they are in places no cunt wants to actually live.
>> No. 93872 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 10:38 pm
93872 spacer
>>93871

I've found that where it's Labour it's perpetual shitholes and they blame Conservatism. Labour can't understand the dichotomy when people realise that they are in shitholes because of Labour, not the Conservatives.
>> No. 93873 Anonymous
5th June 2021
Saturday 10:39 pm
93873 spacer
>>93872
Presumably Shetland is also rural because it votes Lib Dem: They don't understand that if they'd just vote Labour or SNP they would live within commuting distance of Glasgow or Edinburgh.
>> No. 93874 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 12:52 am
93874 spacer
You can definitely tell we're getting older because our biggest concerns are on the topics of housing costs and pensions. How long do you reckon until this place collapses into a collective mid-life crisis?
>> No. 93875 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 12:56 am
93875 spacer
>>93872

Except not, because those are all the places that flipped to Conservative last election and voted for Brexit. They blame Labour for not keeping the immigration down and not funding public services enough, and they're not entirely wrong to do so.
>> No. 93876 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 1:04 am
93876 spacer
>>93871

>The fact of the matter is it's no use to anyone if there are affordable houses when they are in places no cunt wants to actually live.

We do have places that no cunt actually wants to live - a small number of areas (mostly in inner cities) with a significant number of boarded-up houses. Liverpool City Council sold off thousands of vacant properties for a pound.

South Elmsall is less desirable than other areas, but that doesn't make it a bad place to live. The data very clearly shows that it has fairly average levels of unemployment, poverty, crime and social dysfunction.

I think your perception is skewed by the absence of wealth in small towns, which isn't the same thing as poverty. Cities have much higher levels of inequality, so they offer greater opportunities for people with above-average earning potential and aspiration, but worse opportunities for people with average or below-average earning potential. Places like South Elmsall don't have a lot of high-earners to push up house prices, but that doesn't mean that they have higher levels of poverty.

This stuff might sound pedantic, but it's the crux of why Labour are fucked. They're totally disconnected from the majority who are neither poor but rich, but chugging along quite happily in the middle.

The median full-time wage and the median household income in the UK are both about £30k. A bloke who drives a skip wagon and his wife who does a few hours at Asda when the kids are at school are actually doing alright for themselves. You might regard that as a fate worse than death, but a lot of people are perfectly happy with a bog-standard life, take pride in working hard to provide for their family and resent being patronised.
>> No. 93877 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 1:28 am
93877 spacer
>>93876

Listen, I don't know if you're just bad at reading or if you're just deliberately responding to completely different points than the ones that were made, but it's getting a bit annoying, lad.

Why the fuck are you suddenly bringing Labour into it when nobody has even mentioned political parties so far? Why are you suddenly bringing up some noble straw working-man who'd perfectly proud of his council estate and resents this commie talk about needing more houses? What the fuck are you even on about?

>Places like South Elmsall don't have a lot of high-earners to push up house prices

No, it's got nothing to do with that. They simply don't have any demand. Kids that grow up there leave at the first possible chance and rarely come back. They're great little places to live when you retire, but for the youth there's very little.

I don't know why you seem to be upder the impression you're talking to some pretentious middle class Tarquin who is revolted by the prospect of living amongst the riff raff; I live in a council flat in fucking Pontefract. Take your strawmen and fuck off, this is not just another tedious partisan political cunt off.
>> No. 93878 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 2:01 am
93878 spacer
>>93876

Labour patronising the working class is one thing, Tories idealising them is quite another.
>> No. 93879 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 2:46 am
93879 spacer
>>93876
>The median full-time wage and the median household income in the UK are both about £30k.
How is this even possible? That suggests that only one parent works in most families, which I consider to be highly unlikely. Obviously it used to be the case 60 years ago, but it feels a lot less plausible now.
>> No. 93880 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 4:13 am
93880 spacer
>>93879

Just how averages work innit. There are more people below that level than above it. Remember median means the middle of the range of values, as opposed to a modal or mean average, but I don't know precisely how they work it out for national income.

In a great many ways statistics like that are both very useful, but also entirely meaningless. The way that lad is using them, or at least the argument he's trying to prop up with them, are dodgy at best.
>> No. 93881 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 6:16 am
93881 spacer
>>93879

There are loads of single parents, single-person households, doleys, pensioners etc.

>>93877

>What the fuck are you even on about?

If you follow the thread in order from >>93852, I think it's perfectly clear what I'm on about. I'm arguing against a facile and factually inaccurate mischaracterisation of a place, the people who live there and the people and places like it.

>Kids that grow up there leave at the first possible chance and rarely come back.

South Elsmall and South Kirkby has the same median age as the UK as a whole (40) and does not have a statistically significant difference in the proportion of people in their 20s.

Are you getting it now?

https://www.ukcensusdata.com/south-elmsall-and-south-kirkby-e05001457

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/mid2019estimates
>> No. 93882 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 6:43 am
93882 spacer
>>93881

No, you're still talking shite, and I don't really understand what argument you're making against my point of view.

Fair enough if it's a factually inaccurate characterisation, but what's your explanation for these issues? Why is the housing market over-inflated despite the bounty of good, cheap houses in the working man's paradise that is South Kirkby?

If your argument is essentially "there is no housing crisis, me and tory voters like me are doing fine" please just come out and say it so I can stop scratching my head over what you're trying to say.
>> No. 93883 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 9:51 am
93883 spacer
>>93882

>what's your explanation for these issues?

We do have a shortage of housing in many areas, we should be building more houses, but there's more to it than that. The problem is not just one of supply and demand, but of allocation.

People make economically irrational decisions about housing, because it's a potent class signifier. Our shortage is not primarily of places to live, or places to live within reasonable travel distance of well-paying jobs, but housing that is palatable to our class prejudices.

It's a carbon copy of our skills problem - we've got hundreds of thousands of unemployed and under-employed graduates, but crippling shortages of skilled vocational workers in a wide range of fields. Schools and parents will encourage young people to get a degree in archaeology or sociology despite the fact that statistically it'll reduce their earning potential, while overlooking or actively discouraging qualifications that are quicker, cheaper and easier to acquire and offer excellent employment options.

Our class hierarchy now has a big overlap in the middle - an upper-working-class who are financially secure but culturally disenfranchised and a middle-precariat who have cultural status but are hugely economically insecure. Those two groups have radically different concerns, with the former being reasonably well-served by the housing market.

Many "post-industrial shitholes" actually have average- or below-average levels of poverty and unemployment, while some of the poorest areas of the country are within walking distance of some of the richest. Geographic isolation and a lack of jobs in the local area might explain why Redcar and Barrow-in-Furness are blighted with poverty, but it certainly doesn't explain why Salford or Tower Hamlets are so poor.

We need to build more homes, but cramming yet more flats into a handful of already-overcrowded places isn't much of a solution to anything. The country needs to seriously re-evaluate the meaning of class and place in the 21st century and the Labour party desperately needs to examine why they stopped being the party of the working class.
>> No. 93884 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 11:53 am
93884 spacer
>>93883

Well, okay, now that you've explained a bit more deeply I am more sympathetic to your argument. But I think you are still reaching a little bit. Lots of what you say is true, but I never said anything to the contrary either. By the same token as the way you say these earnest working class sorts don't like being patronised and are happy with their lot in life- They are also capable of being extremely frank in recognising when something is undesirable in their community, they don't tend to sugar coat it.

I am a working class person, from a post industrial shithole, calling it a post industrial shithole, because it's a post industrial shithole. You can post statistics at me all you want, I still know there are places I'd rather live than where I live now. You'd be right I'm "doing alright", I'm squarely in the bracket of the median income households you mentioned earlier, and I don't hate my lot in life by any means. But you can't tell me the area I live isn't a scruffy dive full of junkies and petty criminals. In fact I was woken up earlier this morning to make that 6:00am post by the fire brigade breaking into the flat next door, presumably because the junkie who lives there was non-responding again. I can assure you this is no exaggeration or elaborate tall tale, it's just a regular occurrence round here.

You're doing the exact same patronising, out of touch thing you accuse the Labour party of doing, in telling me I'm wrong about that and pearl clutching your statistics. I've lived it for thirty odd years.

By all means we need to re-evaluate the meaning of class, I won't disagree there. But what exactly does that have to do with housing, in real terms? Actual bricks and mortar material terms? Real life?
>> No. 93885 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 12:38 pm
93885 spacer
>>93871
Your claiming all ex-pit villages or post industrial villages are basically no go zones then carry on with an example of leisure time involving (presumably) getting pissed while moaning about an entire £6 for a taxi.
You seem to want your cake and eat it, yes you might think it sucks you (again presumably) cant afford to buy in a popular area, and yes the housing market is fucked every which way BUT....
Life isnt fair and never has been. I'm originally from Nottingham and I bought a 3 bed semi in a North Notts ex pit village and commute in to Nottingham, yeah sure where I live you aren't going to get stimulating intellectual conversations or a banging night life in an ex pit village but its a million miles away from what you describe it as. Kind of repeating what someone else said Nottingham, Sheffield, Manchester and Birmingham are all within an hours drive, and using the same hour drive ratio some absolutely stunning countryside is accessible.
Don't tell me you cant afford to get yourself mobile either, sure it may involve cutting back on some things and saving but once the initial outlay of getting a license is over you have unlocked a whole swaith of the country.
TL:DR - life isn't fair, get over it and learn to compromise
>> No. 93887 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 2:24 pm
93887 spacer
>>93885

The word I am tempted to use here is "cope".

I can't be the only working class northerner who can still see what's in front of my bloody face without farcically trying to pretend my own shit smells of roses.

The other week you lot were telling me we all have to give up our cars and I'm a bastard for wanting to keep mine, so don't go bringing the lovely countryside drives into it. Make your fucking minds up.
>> No. 93888 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 2:32 pm
93888 spacer
>>93887

Well, yes, that's basically what it is. People will go to some pretty extreme lengths to avoid getting buyer's remorse over something as major as a house, and in this case it seems to have gone so far as to turn them into Telegraph readers.

I'm sure there are lovely places to live tucked away in lots of little villages all over Britain but this thread is just full of some wierd "know your place, povvos" rhetoric, only framed what is no doubt supposed to be a very clever turn-about to paint it as anti-snobbery.

Very perplexing.
>> No. 93889 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 3:35 pm
93889 spacer
>>93887
>I can't be the only working class northerner who can still see what's in front of my bloody face without farcically trying to pretend my own shit smells of roses.

Don't even have to be northern about it, I grew up in a midlands shithole and I'm still not going back to it. Plenty of shitholes down south as well if we're playing university rules, we can't all live in Portsmouth or give up on our careers to live the 30k pa humdrum of a job and life we hate with no hope of advancement for ourselves or our children.

tl;dr we need teleporters.
>> No. 93890 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 7:09 pm
93890 spacer
>>93884

You don't have to relish living in what you regard as an ex-industrial shithole, but there's a very big difference between "there's nowhere to live in this country" and "I don't like living near povvos". There's also a pretty obvious contradiction in wanting to live in a place where all the plebs have been priced out without paying a premium for it.

>>93889

>we can't all live in Portsmouth or give up on our careers to live the 30k pa humdrum of a job and life we hate with no hope of advancement for ourselves or our children

By the same token, most people are about average. A bog-standard life in Britain is still pretty good. Wanting more than that is fine, but it isn't yours by rights. If you set out in life expecting to do better than most people, basic maths says that there's a good chance you'll be disappointed.
>> No. 93891 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 7:32 pm
93891 spacer
>>93890
Surely only 1% of people are actually average?
>> No. 93892 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 7:32 pm
93892 spacer
I for one don't want to live in this country period.
>> No. 93893 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 7:35 pm
93893 spacer
>>93892
Do you currently own a house? Are you looking to sell it?
>> No. 93894 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 8:49 pm
93894 spacer
>>93890
>A bog-standard life in Britain is still pretty good

Not really no. Even on an objective level, across the OECD the cost of living in rising (fucking housing for a start) which is steadily squeezing incomes while nationally underemployment is chronic and there's an awful lot of jobs compared to careers. The travesty of the divide in HDI and productivity between affluent areas in the SE and Edinburgh is indicative that most of the country isn't realising its potential with a rising inequality and falling social mobility that locks people into their station. Something felt especially clearly in the outcomes of those living in our shitholes.

>If you set out in life expecting to do better than most people, basic maths says that there's a good chance you'll be disappointed.

Well, speaking on a personal level it's fortunate that I'm no good at maths then because you're offering a dire situation as acceptable. I mean I certainly can't do my career outside of the expensive areas so it's a total non-starter and no, keeping my income by running the Amazon warehouse or benefits office won't make up the difference because it's also about more than money.
>> No. 93895 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 9:49 pm
93895 spacer
>>93894

But lad, you don't need your career when you could afford to pay your mortgage by pushing the trolleys at Asda if you move to South Elmsall. Clearly the only reason you don't do that is because you think you're above it. Why are you such a snob?
>> No. 93896 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 10:15 pm
93896 spacer
>>93895
Don't tempt me, lad. 130k for a 3 bed:
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/107973788#/

Could easily take on a good chunk of that mortgage and get myself an absolutely bone-idle job where I can spend the rest of my life between the shed, greenhouse, garage and playing Sim City 4 on an old computer in one of the spare rooms. Wouldn't know the meaning of stress.
>> No. 93897 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 10:41 pm
93897 spacer
>>93896

A half mile walk and half an hour on the train to Leeds, Sheffield or York.

You couldn't live there though obviously, because there are no jobs.
>> No. 93898 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 10:56 pm
93898 spacer
>>93894

We have the 13th highest HDI in the world - 16th after adjusting for inequality. There is a very short list of mostly small countries that enjoy a higher standard of living than us and the difference is really quite marginal.

We're part of one of the most prosperous societies in human history. That doesn't excuse the persistence of poverty and inequality in this country, but we do need some perspective. A British person with minimal skills, qualifications and personal ambition can attain a standard of living that the vast majority of people in the world would envy.

If you want to believe that you're living in a dystopian hellscape because you can't afford the sort of house you think that you deserve then that's your prerogative.
>> No. 93899 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 11:07 pm
93899 spacer

accuratedepictionof1970sworkingclasslife.jpg
938999389993899
>>93897

Assuming the train service matches your working schedule, that is. Hope you don't do nights. Or finish after 6. Or start before 9. But what kind of peasant does those kinds of jobs anyway? We all work from home nowadays don't we.

>>93898

Bloody hell really mate? The "starving kids in Ethiopia" argument?

I suppose we should all have just kept living in the old two up two downs, three generations to a house, with outside toilets and tin baths, what right did we have to expect any better? Really the entitlement of the youth these days is shocking isn't it.

[Insert quotes from the Four Yorkshiremen here]
>> No. 93900 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 11:16 pm
93900 spacer
>>93898
Allow me to break it down for you.

1. Living standards are under pressure across the OECD. Keeping up with the Joneses isn't productive.
2. I spent about half my post talking about national divisions which in the UK are particularly skewed. We are literally talking about these divisions.
>> No. 93901 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 11:32 pm
93901 spacer
This thread is full of either some properly sheltered cunts, or otherwise just members of the property owning class arguing in bad faith for the status quo because it is in their financial interest.

Give a man the dole and he'll vote Labour for a day. Give a man a mortgage on a shit mid-terrace in Grimsby, but promise him it'll go up in value every year, and he'll vote Tory for life.
>> No. 93902 Anonymous
6th June 2021
Sunday 11:33 pm
93902 spacer
Can't you all just move within driving distance of an airport and get your company to fly you to the locations you need to be in to do your work?
>> No. 93903 Anonymous
7th June 2021
Monday 1:42 am
93903 spacer
>>93898
Going to take the opportunity to plug my pet theory again, even though I am also of the view that Britain is a dystopian shithole for other reasons:
I suspect that what matters for a sense of wellbeing is not absolute standard of living, but trend. It is all well and good to say to people "Oh chin up now, you're living much better than the average guy in China" - but look at that guy in China, in the past decade his standard of living has increased stratospherically, and year-on-year it continues to rise. Now look to the average Briton, a woman living in a nation that is still enduring the longest wage stagnation since the Napoleonic wars, where many people are still worse off in real terms than they were a decade ago and where the prospects for change seem slim indeed, and it shouldn't come as a surprise why the man in China has a much more positive outlook about the future than the woman in Britain despite the woman in Britain technically living in far superior conditions.

Now instinctively you might say "So the woman is wrong, and she should stop being wrong and learn to appreciate what she has" - but I'm not sure that's actually a practical suggestion. The woman may identify her misery with her absolute condition, but if the feelings arise from the trend then you're not going to get rid of them by appealing to the fact that she's stagnating in a pretty good place - and if you start talking about trends she might even start to envy the man in China who's never known any better, but knows full well what it's like for things to get better.
>> No. 93904 Anonymous
7th June 2021
Monday 2:03 am
93904 spacer
>>93903
In terms of economics, I have absolutely observed that if the economy is doing well, that doesn't really mean anything to me because if I get 10% richer and so does everyone else, then I am not any richer at all in real terms. If a rising tide lifts all boats by the exact same amount, there's very little reason for someone who's unhappy now to look forward to that.

Margaret Thatcher said that it's not about equality, it's about equality of opportunity. If she meant the same as I mean above, that getting richer is only good if you're getting richer than everyone around you, then Margaret Thatcher was right about that. It feels weird to say, but Margaret Thatcher was right. Shame about all the stuff she was wrong about.
>> No. 93905 Anonymous
7th June 2021
Monday 2:27 am
93905 spacer
>>93903
If the man lives in Shenzhen then he's already richer than her and will likely continue to get richer. Albeit his quality of life will suffer from a lack of 'live, laugh, love' ornaments.

>>93904
This reminds me of the problem the extremely wealthy suffer in that they underestimate their own status because the people they hang around with are now also rich. If one is to enjoy one's success therefore you must hang around car boot sales rather than the auction houses. Or just not care, a plate of turkey dinosaurs is going to make you smile no matter your bank balance - unless like me you invested your life savings in a certain island theme park.

Anyway, I think the thing is really about hope in the future and while you can get sociopathic about it you're obviously less happy knowing that things are stagnating and you'll never get that 10%. Especially if that 10% has a genuine impact rather meaning slightly more tat from Amazon.
>> No. 93906 Anonymous
7th June 2021
Monday 2:44 am
93906 spacer
>>93904

>if the economy is doing well, that doesn't really mean anything to me because if I get 10% richer and so does everyone else, then I am not any richer at all in real terms

Only for zero-sum markets like houses in desirable areas. In every other respect, getting richer just means getting richer. Western economies have seen relatively little economic growth since 2008 and countries with very low productivity (like the UK) have seen severe wage stagnation, but we experienced phenomenal growth for most of the 20th century and with it saw vast improvements in our living standards.

>>93903

I'm not sure what we can do about it though. Nearly all western countries have seen slowing economic growth, in large part because of economies like China catching up with us. Tax-and-spend can reduce inequality on a domestic level, but it can't restore our historical status as an imperial power with hugely advanced technology. British people certainly don't want to work as hard as the Chinese and I don't think they're innately cleverer, so how will we improve the productivity of our labour force to make ourselves more competitive and drive economic growth?

Unless and until there's another technological change as transformative as the industrial revolution, I think we just have to get used to the idea of relatively low growth and living within our means.
>> No. 93907 Anonymous
7th June 2021
Monday 5:45 am
93907 spacer
>>93904

I think that just means you, like a lot of people, are kind of a narcissist honestly. That may not be exactly the right word but I can't think of a better one. I have often noticed it's true that people will just as readily and happily see other people have their situation made worse, as their own situation improved, because the outcome is the same- You are better off than them, and that's what really matters.

In the most primitive monkey brain way, people just care about being higher up the pile than other people, and will push down every bit as much as they try to raise themselves.

It's one of the parts of human nature we absolutely should try to overcome but obviously nobody is interested in doing so, it's all about being able to flash a bigger car than our neighbours to give ourselves the big social status penis. Or, as the case may be, voting to uphold policies and governments that ensure the housing market remains exclusive and difficult to enter, because it means they keep their status over the rentier class.
>> No. 93942 Anonymous
14th June 2021
Monday 10:42 am
93942 spacer
I've been getting at least a couple of flyers a week from estate agents asking if I want to sell my house for several months now. I bet they're really worried they'll run out of properties to sell.
>> No. 95742 Anonymous
1st May 2022
Sunday 3:51 pm
95742 spacer
Michael Gove plans to scrap rules that force developers to build affordable homes

Housing Secretary Michael Gove has triggered a storm with plans to scrap rules that force developers to build affordable homes.

Section 106 regulations ensure that modestly priced properties and community projects are included in large building programmes. But proposals to be outlined in the Queen’s Speech are set to cut the number affordable homes by 50,000 over 10 years.

Mr Gove is planning to replace the scheme with a building levy which would be paid to local authorities. This could allow them to build more social housing. However, critics fear hard-up councils may spend the money on other schemes, such as roads.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/michael-gove-plans-scrap-rules-26841507
>> No. 95743 Anonymous
1st May 2022
Sunday 4:00 pm
95743 spacer
>>95742
Doesn't sound so bad if it could ring-fenced. But I don't think right to buy should exist anymore.
>> No. 95744 Anonymous
1st May 2022
Sunday 4:04 pm
95744 spacer
>>95742
I wonder if affordable homes are such because they use less energy efficient materials and practices to build?
>> No. 95745 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 8:33 am
95745 spacer
Boris Johnson planning to bring back Right to Buy

Boris Johnson wants to give millions of people the right to buy the homes they rent from housing associations in a major shake-up inspired by Margaret Thatcher.

The Prime Minister ordered officials to develop the plans in the last fortnight after becoming convinced the idea would help “generation rent”, The Telegraph can reveal. The proposal is intended to give the 2.5 million households in England who rent properties from housing associations the power to purchase their homes at a discounted price. It would be a new version of the famous Thatcher scheme that allowed families to buy properties from councils – one of the most well-known policies of her premiership.

A connected idea being pursued by officials is for the tens of billions of pounds paid by the Government in housing benefit to be used to help recipients secure mortgages.

Downing Street believes the new version of “Right to Buy” would help scores of poorer households in traditional Labour “Red Wall” seats in the Midlands and North East which Mr Johnson won in the 2019 election. If successful, the plans could also drive up the proportion of property ownership in the country – one of the surest indications of someone voting Conservative according to historic electoral analysis.

The Government’s plans for housing reform were left in tatters late last year after a proposed overhaul of planning rules to increase property building was ditched following a backlash from Tory MPs. But in recent weeks Mr Johnson has commissioned his policy unit to pursue one aspect of his overarching housing drive – helping more people to become property owners.

The proposal is not entirely new – it was included in the 2015 Tory election manifesto. Greg Clarke negotiated a deal with housing associations when he was the communities and local government secretary. But momentum behind the drive faded after Theresa May replaced David Cameron as prime minister following the 2016 Brexit referendum.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/05/01/boris-johnson-planning-bring-back-right-buy/
>> No. 95746 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 9:41 am
95746 spacer
>>95745

Just in time for the local elections.
>> No. 95747 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 9:55 am
95747 spacer

FRhBzlzXsAIv5eY.jpg
957479574795747
>>95746
I think I'm more susceptible to Labour's bribery at the minute.
>> No. 95756 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 4:52 pm
95756 spacer
>>95745
Well, if you think about it once all the housing associations are gone then they'll have to extend right to buy to private renters.
>> No. 95757 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 5:40 pm
95757 spacer
>>95745
I see Putin isn't the only politician recycling shit ideas from the 1980s.
>> No. 95759 Anonymous
2nd May 2022
Monday 6:06 pm
95759 spacer
>>95756

Honestly I think that would be a very strong vote winning policy. We should add it to our Housing Justice Part manifesto.

I mean genuinely, think about it, the rent most people are paying is up to double what a mortgage would be on the same place, and the burden of that extra expense is often a big part of what makes it difficult for them to get a deposit together. They can afford it, they just need to be allowed to.

Maybe we should make it a sort of Hire Purchase Agreement sort of thing.
>> No. 95863 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 12:08 am
95863 spacer
I'll be honest, I have no idea what thread is the most apt for talking about our esteemed PM, but I'm punting for this one.

All I wanted to say before bed was that I don't think his current tactic of calling everyone lazy wankers and instigating mass industrial action is much of a vote winner. I know the Tories are evil, but it's amazing how inept they are at the same time, still, after all this time.
>> No. 95864 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 12:20 am
95864 spacer
>>95863

Beggars belief doesn't it. If there's one reason they'll lose the next election, it's masking an enemy of the civil service.

Don't they realise that those are the people who actually run the country? Is their hubris so great that they think the decisions they make just automatically come to pass across the land by some kind of divine will?

Even if there's no strike, I suspect a lot of malicious compliance and intentional misunderstandings and so on to further cripple their government.
>> No. 95865 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 12:30 am
95865 spacer
>>95863
They've found themselves on a real tightrope, due to their unabashed populism in an extremely polarised society. They don't actually believe in anything; they just pretend to believe whatever will win votes. But they need to win votes both from their traditional voters and the Red Wall, simultaneously, while those groups have utterly conflicting demands. This results in a government that openly proclaims support for two opposing viewpoints simultaneously, and does this regularly.

Retired millionaires, key workers, and city-centre shopkeepers all hate people who work from home. We think you are lazy skivers. But there are a lot of you, logging into your work laptop in your underpants for 20 minutes each lunchtime before calling it a day and going to the cinema, so the Conservatives have to appeal to you too. But they'll do that tomorrow. Today, it is the turn of the bitter and angry to be pandered to with bullshit. The government won't actually do anything; they just want to be on the news again.

I'm pretty sure this is the housing thread, by the way, but we do have several threads about housing. I think you want either the thread with the local-elections OP, or one of the "This person is going to be Prime Minister and it's going to be awesome" threads for a story like this.
>> No. 95866 Anonymous
14th May 2022
Saturday 12:52 am
95866 spacer
>>95865

It's a lot simpler than that, the way I see it.

They're populists, or at least have been under Johnson, but populism is easy. You just pick the bigger demographic and go for them. They have all the data they need to do that.

The trouble is the populism they were elected on is totally irrelevant now, so they can't hide behind it anymore. We did the Brexit what we voted for getting done. That's passed into memory now, nobody gives a fuck about "delivering Brexit" anymore, we already Bruxit. So what do they have after that? Fuck all. Because Brexit Brexit Brexit do Brexit get Brexit done Brexit was their entire campaign.

The trouble is it's been ten years, and people are noticing more and more by the day that nothing the waffle on about actually turns up. HS2 has been cut in half and somehow cost us more, while remaining entirely hypothetical. Northern Powerhouse? Where? Can you name even one thing they did to deliver on that? Help to buy? It's fucking fictional.

There's only so long they can coast through on empty promises before people start to wake up to the fact they are empty. Brexit has been their life raft for the last half a decade, and now it's floundering like a punctured lielo you leave in the swimming pool after your fortnight in Benidorm.
>> No. 95880 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 9:58 am
95880 spacer
Second homes: Tax hikes make holiday lets in Wales unviable, owners say

Holiday-let businesses in Wales will become unviable if planned law changes go ahead, owners have said. The Welsh government plans include a 300% council tax premium on second homes and making it harder for those properties to be eligible for business rates instead of council tax.

Some holiday home owners said they face losing their livelihoods. The Welsh government said the changes would ensure properties were being let regularly as holiday accommodation.

Currently, second home owners can avoid council tax by registering their properties as a business, as long as those properties are let for 70 days per year. Following the proposed changes, this number would increase to 182 days per year to qualify for business rates. The Welsh government has been under pressure to act following protests in holiday hotspots, and it plans to introduce the new legislation in April 2023.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61525903

Won't anyone think of the poor holiday lets owners?
>> No. 95881 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 10:28 am
95881 spacer
>>95880
I guess they'll just have to sell to someone that'll actually live in there. Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
>> No. 95883 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 10:52 am
95883 spacer
>>95882
The examples in the article include a couple with a B&B and six holiday cottages that are occupied 15 weeks of the year and someone who converted outbuildings on his property to rent out to a charity for disabled children on weekends and school holidays.
>> No. 95884 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 1:03 pm
95884 spacer
>>95880
Those bloody Welsh politicians, with their laws that successfully achieve precisely what they set out to do! This is an outrage!

If the landlords hate it so much, why don't they just work more hours or get a better-paying job?
>> No. 95885 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 2:06 pm
95885 spacer
>>95884
>If the landlords hate it so much, why don't they just work more hours or get a better-paying job?
On a phone call with my letting agency, they told me that some rent arrears were negatively affecting my landlord and I asked them if the landlord had tried budgeting.
>> No. 95886 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 9:23 pm
95886 spacer
Also landlord related, Priti Patel rejected a recommendation from the Grenfell Tower inquiry that renters have what are called personal emergency evacuation plans, or PEEPs for short. They are exactly what their name suggests. As best as I can tell, translating from the governmentese, the "counterproductive" part of implementing these plans would be that landlords would have some responsibilities to their tenents. Patel also heaps blame on the fire service, without explicitly blaming them. Merely stating their need to learn lessons and so on, despite an official one-size-fits-all stay put policy dooming them to failure in the instance of another Grenfell-like event. Conservatives create unsafe housing regulation, cut fire and rescue services to the bone and then reject measures that might prevent the exact same situation from arising again in the future, before blaming the men and women who went into a pitch dark with smoke building trying to rescue people, despite the concerns of some that it could have collapsed around them such was the intensity of the incident. It's actually beyond sickening, it's disturbing. It's institutional callousness at the highest levels and I'm so frustrated that it's only freaks like me who are paying attention to any of it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/may/21/grenfell-families-enraged-by-plan-to-keep-stay-put-policy
>> No. 95887 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 9:42 pm
95887 spacer
>>95886
I try not to pay too close attention to what she's doing because it's always something disgustingly cruel. She's so far beyond the pale.
>> No. 95888 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 11:42 pm
95888 spacer
>>95887
I understand entirely. However, it's important to remember that May or Javid would have been unlikely to have taken a different decision. The only difference is Patel's perma-smirk makes the passive villainy of Conservative inaction more transparent than ever.
>> No. 95889 Anonymous
22nd May 2022
Sunday 11:45 pm
95889 spacer
>>95888
My previous statement could probably apply to the entire party.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password