Current Affairs The Labour Party

[dannyboy]

no, because I’m purchasing something of great value. I wanted something, I knew how much it cost and I made that choice.

it’s called being a grown up. The same way if you decide to have children you need to sacrifice certain things because your outgoings will sky rocket

it’s really not hard to understand, living within your means

There's living within your means and not going out for three years. I just find it sad people are making that choice but you seem happy enough so good luck to ya.

It does make me wonder how many years a teacher in London wouldn't have to go out for to get property there. Probably more than their lifetime.

 

[dead_soft]

Because property is a long term investment which helps people better their lives when they get older. The cost of living increases, property value increases, constant paying down the initial loan gives you equity and allows more freedom later on in life

Saving requires sacrifice

Why should it though? By property prices increasing outside of the standard cost of living society it stops people getting a house

 

[nsno-chris]

Why should it though? By property prices increasing outside of the standard cost of living society it stops people getting a house

it really doesn’t, it stops people getting on the housing ladder when they want to live in areas with a high demand such as city centres or affluent areas. Take Liverpool for example, plenty of houses in Walton, Dingle, Anfield that you can pickup for £50-75k which is far less repayment than private rented gaff.

 

[tsubaki]

Because property is a long term investment which helps people better their lives when they get older. The cost of living increases, property value increases, constant paying down the initial loan gives you equity and allows more freedom later on in life

Saving requires sacrifice

The problem with this analysis is that we are at the point where any positive reform of the housing sector (whether that is compulsory purchase of empty homes, tenants having RTB private homes or even just a serious social housing building programme) will stop that gravy train, and put tens / hundreds of thousands of people in financial trouble, especially those turned themselves into small-scale landlords but also those in places like London who paid current prices for properties after believing that prices would never stop rising.

If Labour win the next election, to do the right thing (and it is undoubtedly the right thing) will wipe some of those people out.

 

[nsno-chris]

The problem with this analysis is that we are at the point where any positive reform of the housing sector (whether that is compulsory purchase of empty homes, tenants having RTB private homes or even just a serious social housing building programme) will stop that gravy train, and put tens / hundreds of thousands of people in financial trouble, especially those turned themselves into small-scale landlords but also those in places like London who paid current prices for properties after believing that prices would never stop rising.

If Labour win the next election, to do the right thing (and it is undoubtedly the right thing) will wipe some of those people out.

listen, I agree that brownfield sites, empty homes more social housing should be utilised. But property value will always increase overtime, it’s the one constant investment that will guarantee a return, and rightly so.

the problem with labours policy is that whilst they look like they are trying to clamp down on the landlords who take massive advantage of the situation, it’ll also affect hardworking people who have invested in property to give their children a better life in the future

London is like any other capitals city in the world and the house prices will never be affordable for the average first time buyer,

my point still stands, if you want to buy a property it takes sacrifice to save

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Why shouldn’t people want to be able to socialise and own the roof over their head? What you’ve described is a pretty grim situation that capitalists and people of the previous generation have created. It’s nothing to do with entitlement, it’s about having a decent standard of life.

28 days of Annual leave next, how dare us plebs have time to ourselves just as well our job securities are safe with the likes of Johnson and Swinson...

 

[The binman chronicles]

Take Liverpool for example, plenty of houses in Walton, Dingle, Anfield that you can pickup for £50-75k which is far less repayment than private rented gaff.

It's not nicest thing in the world but this is the kind of reasonable sacrifice. You live in an area you might not want to but instead of wasting money in rent you are building up a deposit for a house you want. Tart up the house in the process and you may make a fair bit on top.

You get to go out and build up a pot this way.

 

[tsubaki]

listen, I agree that brownfield sites, empty homes more social housing should be utilised. But property value will always increase overtime, it’s the one constant investment that will guarantee a return, and rightly so.

the problem with labours policy is that whilst they look like they are trying to clamp down on the landlords who take massive advantage of the situation, it’ll also affect hardworking people who have invested in property to give their children a better life in the future

London is like any other capitals city in the world and the house prices will never be affordable for the average first time buyer,

my point still stands, if you want to buy a property it takes sacrifice to save

This is just not true. House prices in London were affordable for the majority of people (including first time buyers) until relatively recently.

As for "the problem with Labours' policy", that is the point I was making - if Labour (or anyone) takes any meaningful steps to fix what is wrong with the housing market, it will ruin some people. The question is whether it is better to allow the current state of affairs to continue or get worse, or actually do something about it before reality intervenes.

 

[nsno-chris]

This is just not true. House prices in London were affordable for the majority of people (including first time buyers) until relatively recently.

As for "the problem with Labours' policy", that is the point I was making - if Labour (or anyone) takes any meaningful steps to fix what is wrong with the housing market, it will ruin some people. The question is whether it is better to allow the current state of affairs to continue or get worse, or actually do something about it before reality intervenes.

all capital cities around the world have a greater value than the majority of the rest of their country. The sharp increase, which has been witnessed over the past 15/20 years or so, is due to demand. But that increase has given a lot of working class people a nice lump for retirement. Has I’ve stated they would have needed to save up for deposit (in the 70’s or 80’s) probably made sacrifices and are now seeing the rewards of that

 

[tsubaki]

all capital cities around the world have a greater value than the majority of the rest of their country. The sharp increase, which has been witnessed over the past 15/20 years or so, is due to demand. But that increase has given a lot of working class people a nice lump for retirement. Has I’ve stated they would have needed to save up for deposit (in the 70’s or 80’s) probably made sacrifices and are now seeing the rewards of that

It is due to demand caused by the states' failure to provide enough affordable homes, and if this is allowed to continue, eventually it will get to the point where the city is no longer viable because noone can afford to live there.

 

[dead_soft]

it really doesn’t, it stops people getting on the housing ladder when they want to live in areas with a high demand such as city centres or affluent areas. Take Liverpool for example, plenty of houses in Walton, Dingle, Anfield that you can pickup for £50-75k which is far less repayment than private rented gaff.

People want to live where they want to live. People shouldn't be priced out of living in the capital, or be shunted to poorer areas. This is how ghettoisation happens - we force people to live in less affluent areas where the schools are worse, hospitals are worse, less access to arts, culture, all things that aid social mobility. I have no idea why someone would promote this incredibly regressive view and say, essentially, put up or shut up.

 

[nsno-chris]

It is due to demand caused by the states' failure to provide enough affordable homes, and if this is allowed to continue, eventually it will get to the point where the city is no longer viable because noone can afford to live there.

It’s a problem, and something that does need to be addressed, but it will not stop the price increase. It’s where the wealth is and centre of businesses are, as such it’ll attract people. The same as any other major city around the world

 

[nsno-chris]

People want to live where they want to live. People shouldn't be priced out of living in the capital, or be shunted to poorer areas. This is how ghettoisation happens - we force people to live in less affluent areas where the schools are worse, hospitals are worse, less access to arts, culture, all things that aid social mobility. I have no idea why someone would promote this incredibly regressive view and say, essentially, put up or shut up.

utter rubbish. I want to live in a 5 bedroom detached house in calderstones so I should be able to because I want to?? Give over.

 

[dead_soft]

I imagine there is a bit of an overlap on the Venn

utter rubbish. I want to live in a 5 bedroom detached house in calderstones so I should be able to because I want to?? Give over.

Literally didn't say that.

 

[nsno-chris]

I imagine there is a bit of an overlap on the Venn


Literally didn't say that.

“people shouldn’t be punted to the poorer areas”

so I want to live in a 5 bedroom detached house in calderstones; how do I sort that out?