Cameron's poster girl for help-to-buy

[View From The Top]

Help to buy is a ****ing disaster waiting to happen, its basically ploy for votes. The government has no business being in the lending game, its for building societies and banks to fund house buying. Nothing surprises me with this lot, but I still cant believe it is a Tory government proposing thus nonsense. Have they learnt nothing from the past .

 

The way to open up the housing ladder to more people is to build more ****ing houses, not lend people more money. If you inject more money into the market without increasing the supply , you just create a bubble . A bubble that will eventually burst. Any Tory with half a brain should be against this.

 

Anyone with a brain, not just a tory, should be against it.

 

This, to me, is where the ***** up of the Right To Buy comes home to roost. If they money from sales had been re-invested in building more quality affordable / social housing on an ongoing basis the housing bubble(s) could be avoided and also private rents wouldn't be so shockingly high. All, of course, IMHO.

[buctootim]

Help to buy is a ****ing disaster waiting to happen, its basically ploy for votes. The government has no business being in the lending game, its for building societies and banks to fund house buying. Nothing surprises me with this lot, but I still cant believe it is a Tory government proposing thus nonsense. Have they learnt nothing from the past .

 

The way to open up the housing ladder to more people is to build more ****ing houses, not lend people more money. If you inject more money into the market without increasing the supply , you just create a bubble . A bubble that will eventually burst. Any Tory with half a brain should be against this.

 

Exactly this. I really don't get why all parties don't put serious effort into house building. It would make housing more affordable, reduce household debt, increase disposable income / increase standard of living and reduce the housing benefit bill. Help to Buy achieves the exact opposite of all those things.

[bridge too far]

Exactly this. I really don't get why all parties don't put serious effort into house building. It would make housing more affordable, household debt, increase disposable income / increase standard of living and reduce the housing benefit bill. Help to Buy achieves the exact opposite of all those things.

 

You're absolutely right here Tim. However, I think part of the problem is that many developers land-bank, not wanting to release land they've purchased until they can achieve even greater profits from it. Grants and assistance to Housing Associations have been cut so they're not able to provide as much social housing and very few local councils build for rent these days. And VFTT is absolutely right about the nightmare that was Right to Buy.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Anyone with a brain, not just a tory, should be against it.

 

 

True but Tories are supposed to ideologically opposed to this meddling in the market.

[Whitey Grandad]

Exactly this. I really don't get why all parties don't put serious effort into house building. It would make housing more affordable, reduce household debt, increase disposable income / increase standard of living and reduce the housing benefit bill. Help to Buy achieves the exact opposite of all those things.

 

There's no room, the country's bursting at the seams already.

[pap]

There's no room, the country's bursting at the seams already.

 

No it isn't.

 

The vast bulk of the population lives in towns or cities. In 2001, 77% of the population lived on less than 6% of the land.

 

Sorry for repetition, but this old chestnut (the point, not Whitey G) keeps on coming back again and again.

 

The UK is not full.

[Whitey Grandad]

No it isn't.

 

The vast bulk of the population lives in towns or cities. In 2001, 77% of the population lived on less than 6% of the land.

 

Sorry for repetition, but this old chestnut (the point, not Whitey G) keeps on coming back again and again.

 

The UK is not full.

 

6% is a hell of a lot. Add on all the other constructions as well. Look again at the most densely populated countries list, then restrict your search to just England. We can't move and we can't breathe.

[pap]

6% is a hell of a lot. Add on all the other constructions as well. Look again at the most densely populated countries list, then restrict your search to just England. We can't move and we can't breathe.

 

Sorry, just don't buy it.

 

I accept that England is the most densely populated part of the Union, but if Conservative MPs can make the case for fracking in England by claiming that large parts of the North East are desolate, then we have the space, even more if the sparsely populated Scotland continues to throw their lot in with us post-referendum.

 

Lack of space will eventually be an issue. You can only fit so much in a pint pot, after all. Right now, we're not using that space effectively, largely due to poor infrastructure. I'm keenly aware of how "full" the place feels whenever I'm stuck in a traffic jam, but that's a failing of infrastructure and planning, not a consequence of space.

[Big Bad Bob]

Sorry, just don't buy it.

 

I accept that England is the most densely populated part of the Union, but if Conservative MPs can make the case for fracking in England by claiming that large parts of the North East are desolate, then we have the space, even more if the sparsely populated Scotland continues to throw their lot in with us post-referendum.

 

Lack of space will eventually be an issue. You can only fit so much in a pint pot, after all. Right now, we're not using that space effectively, largely due to poor infrastructure. I'm keenly aware of how "full" the place feels whenever I'm stuck in a traffic jam, but that's a failing of infrastructure and planning, not a consequence of space.

 

Yeah but where is this land that we are going to build all these wonderful new houses on? Do we suddenly use and lose the green belt, loads of land in the New Forest or Dartmoor! Will the UK end up like Trantor covered in steel??

[View From The Top]

Yeah but where is this land that we are going to build all these wonderful new houses on? Do we suddenly use and lose the green belt, loads of land in the New Forest or Dartmoor! Will the UK end up like Trantor covered in steel??

 

There are so many brownfield sites that should be built on.

 

I except the SE is struggling but there is plenty of room in the rest of the country, we certainly aren't bursting (not that I want anymore immigration myself)

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Whether we like it or not, the high street is dead and buried. On-line purchasing will mean that shops on the high street sadly are redundant and most high streets will just be left with a Wetherspoons and a few charity shops. That is where future housing will be sourced.

[Big Bad Bob]

There are so many brownfield sites that should be built on.

 

I except the SE is struggling but there is plenty of room in the rest of the country, we certainly aren't bursting (not that I want anymore immigration myself)

 

Surely there has got to be a limit that the country itself can sustain i.e. power needs, road needs, waste disposal needs, I would have thought that we are near that now!

[View From The Top]

Surely there has got to be a limit that the country itself can sustain i.e. power needs, road needs, waste disposal needs, I would have thought that we are near that now!

 

Outside of the metropolitan areas there is, thankfully, loads of space.

[Big Bad Bob]

Outside of the metropolitan areas there is, thankfully, loads of space.

 

yes, but this is my point, brownfields aside, would you want a Poundbury (for example) and all the infrastructure that that entails built in the middle of the Yorkshire Moors??

[pap]

yes, but this is my point, brownfields aside, would you want a Poundbury (for example) and all the infrastructure that that entails built in the middle of the Yorkshire Moors??

 

Brownfields shouldn't be pushed aside, not even in the South East. According to a 2011 report by the Countryside Alliance, 25% of brownfield in the South East is not being built on, so there is plenty of scope to do more.

 

Another question is whether our architectural leanings need to be reviewed. We're still building a lot of houses with gardens, despite the fact that many of them will lie unused for six months of the year, more maybe. The tower blocks we built in the 1960s give a lot of cause for concern when it comes to building up, but it needn't be like that. I spent a month living in Valladolid, Spain. Pretty much everywhere was tenement living, and it really didn't suck as much as I thought it would. On a similar note, commercial tall buildings don't seem to have been afflicted by the same blight as the residential ones.

 

The major issue with tall buildings lies in their major benefit - the concentration of people. Whatever; they're not the only option.

 

We should perhaps be looking at some of the more innovative ideas out there. Nerd credentials ahoy, but I love this sort of thing:-

 

http://www.thevenusproject.com/technology/city-systems

Edited 7 January, 2014 by pap

[Whitey Grandad]

Brownfields shouldn't be pushed aside, not even in the South East. According to a 2011 report by the Countryside Alliance, 25% of brownfield in the South East is not being built on, so there is plenty of scope to do more.

 

Another question is whether our architectural leanings need to be reviewed. We're still building a lot of houses with gardens, despite the fact that many of them will lie unused for six months of the year, more maybe. The tower blocks we built in the 1960s give a lot of cause for concern when it comes to building up, but it needn't be like that. I spent a month living in Valladolid, Spain. Pretty much everywhere was tenement living, and it really didn't suck as much as I thought it would. On a similar note, commercial tall buildings don't seem to have been afflicted by the same blight as the residential ones.

 

The major issue with tall buildings lies in their major benefit - the concentration of people. Whatever; they're not the only option.

 

We should perhaps be looking at some of the more innovative ideas out there. Nerd credentials ahoy, but I love this sort of thing:-

 

http://www.thevenusproject.com/technology/city-systems

 

Interest, but horrifying at the same time. All right for some but not for me.

 

(Brownfields are more expensive than green ones)

[buctootim]

Interest, but horrifying at the same time. All right for some but not for me.

 

(Brownfields are more expensive than green ones)

 

 

Those planned communities leave me cold too - but some will like them, so they will be part of the solution. The problem imo with so much new build is that because there is so little of it and demand is so high developers can anything - small, poor quality homes in crappy locations. Not everbody wants only a house with a spacious garden. Vauxhall isnt the smartest place to be but Id swap my place for a large flat with sweeping views of London and the river.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tallest-apartment-block-in-europe-to-be-built-in-vauxhall-and-will-tower-above-thames-8664313.html

[Whitey Grandad]

Those planned communities leave me cold too - but some will like them, so they will be part of the solution. The problem imo with so much new build is that because there is so little of it and demand is so high developers can anything - small, poor quality homes in crappy locations. Not everbody wants only a house with a spacious garden. Vauxhall isnt the smartest place to be but Id swap my place for a large flat with sweeping views of London and the river.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tallest-apartment-block-in-europe-to-be-built-in-vauxhall-and-will-tower-above-thames-8664313.html

 

Nice, but no prices given for that development. I see they will have a communal pool/bath/toilet.

[bridge too far]

Nice, but no prices given for that development. I see they will have a communal pool/bath/toilet.

 

"Prices of the homes have not yet been set but they are likely to range from around £500,000 to more than £3 million."

[buctootim]

"Prices of the homes have not yet been set but they are likely to range from around £500,000 to more than £3 million."

 

But those high prices get back to the issue of lack of development (and admittedly excess of foreign investment buyers in London). Build more so supply is nearer to demand and prices will fall and standards will rise.

[Whitey Grandad]

But those high prices get back to the issue of lack of development (and admittedly excess of foreign investment buyers in London). Build more so supply is nearer to demand and prices will fall and standards will rise.

 

I'm afraid it won't. Supply and demand doesn't apply in many cases and this is one of them. Building costs are rising all the time. High-rising, in fact.

[Whitey Grandad]

"Prices of the homes have not yet been set but they are likely to range from around £500,000 to more than £3 million."

 

Thanks, I normally only look at the pictures and don't normally get past the third page.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Whether we like it or not, the high street is dead and buried. On-line purchasing will mean that shops on the high street sadly are redundant and most high streets will just be left with a Wetherspoons and a few charity shops. That is where future housing will be sourced.

 

Spot on.

[buctootim]

I'm afraid it won't. Supply and demand doesn't apply in many cases and this is one of them. Building costs are rising all the time. High-rising, in fact.

 

Actual building costs constitute only around 35% of the price of a new house. Check your house insurance for the costs of rebuilding and then compare that to its market value.

Edited 7 January, 2014 by buctootim

[Whitey Grandad]

Actual building costs constitute only around 35% of the price of a new house. Check your house insurance for the costs of rebuilding and then compare that to its market value.

 

Much higher than that, I'm fairly certain. The plot is already serviced, of course.

[pap]

Its all gone quiet from Benji da snob.

 

God if I was on 50k I could save for deposit on a flat in no time, and I wouldn't be whinging about losing child benefit either.

 

It has been 24 hours, Jonnyboy.

 

He's either not going to respond or is selling the family heirlooms to hire Jack Whitehall's writers. Watch this space.

[Batman]

save for deposit in no time...you mean, about 3 years right?

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Whether we like it or not, the high street is dead and buried. On-line purchasing will mean that shops on the high street sadly are redundant and most high streets will just be left with a Wetherspoons and a few charity shops. That is where future housing will be sourced.

True to some extent although not entirely. Buying clothes online is a right ball-ache.

[Jonnyboy]

save for deposit in no time...you mean, about 3 years right?

 

Depends what lifestyle one has become accustomed to old chap.

[buctootim]

Depends what lifestyle one has become accustomed to old chap.

 

He's accustomed to being in sweaty close proximity sharing bunks with over 100 lonesome men. That lifestyle will cost you a fortune in civvy street.

[Grey Crab]

Wouldn't that have made it even more of a PR stunt though? The fact that they ended up with a 'poor choice' actually suggests that they had no intention of over-engineering the PR. Surely choosing someone relatively randomly is less disingenuous than going down the Peter Mandelson-esque route: fine-tooth-combing the land for someone that fitted the 'down trodden, woe is me' stereotype that these photo-shoots usually thrive on.

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Stupidest post on SaintsWeb ever. And I've written some doozies.

[trousers]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Stupidest post on SaintsWeb ever. And I've written some doozies.

 

What a load of nonsense. You obviously weren't around in 2008 when my levels of stupidity reached epic levels.