Talk

Advanced search

To think 13'000 homes being built is not radical

(25 Posts)
DyslexicScientist Mon 04-Jan-16 09:11:54

http://www.lbc.co.uk/pms-plan-to-build-13000-new-homes-122483

Maybe if they doubled it and did it a month that would mean something. This is going to end up like another lottery. Plus saying giving 20% discount of the fair market rate in london makes it "affordable housing" is just ridiculous.

DyslexicScientist Mon 04-Jan-16 09:13:04

www.lbc.co.uk/pms-plan-to-build-13000-new-homes-122483

Zack goldsmith on LBC now saying "we wouldn't want to turn off the tap for overseas investors in London property".

Smoke and mirrors!

DoreenLethal Mon 04-Jan-16 09:13:28

I personally think they should get all the empty houses full and in good working order first. And I'm from the construction industry.

AllMyBestFriendsAreMetalheads Mon 04-Jan-16 09:18:56

The phrase 'affordable housing' is bollocks. It's not 'affordable', it's just a shoebox smaller and slightly cheaper than the other houses. For it to be truly affordable, surely most people should be able to afford it.

notquitehuman Mon 04-Jan-16 09:26:16

I would love to know how they define 'affordable'. Would two adults on a median income be able to get a mortgage for these places? I'm in the south east and would need ten times my salary to buy one of the crap starter homes they're throwing up around here.

13,000 is a drop in the ocean really.

AllMyBestFriendsAreMetalheads Mon 04-Jan-16 09:39:29

I'm in the NW, no matter what the prices of these 'affordable' London houses are, they are not affordable to me.

It's just another sound bite though isn't it? A nice little buzz word to placate the plebs.

DyslexicScientist Mon 04-Jan-16 10:23:03

20% discount counts as affordable biscuit to the gov.

If people on up to 90k get this affordable subsidies it shows how broken the system is

Anniegetyourgun Mon 04-Jan-16 10:34:37

That's because if you're not earning at least £50k you are naughty and lazy and don't deserve a house.

VertigoNun Mon 04-Jan-16 10:39:36

I am mystified why anyone living in a home worth less than a million pounds or earning less than a six figure salary think the Tory party is for them. I guess delusion and wanting to associate themselves with an affluent lifestyle mus be strong.

LivinLaVidaLoki Mon 04-Jan-16 10:41:38

I just don't understand how the focus of their getting the economy moving is housebuilding? If no one can get a mortgage then no one can buy a house surely?

wonkylegs Mon 04-Jan-16 10:56:33

The system isn't set up to build more houses, it's set up to maximise investor profits.
Loads of housebuilders are sitting on land with planning permission which they don't want to build on yet because releasing houses slowly means that the shortage keeps the inflated house prices alive and they maximise returns. Meanwhile they lobby the government to 'reduce regulation and red tape' (read as reduce costs, facilities and quality) so they can further maximise profits. So far all the government carrots incentivise this behaviour making at best no difference to the system except to spend lots of money to keep the status quo. I think more sticks should be used - removing individual planning permission for plots after a certain period of time if it's not used. The longer you sit on a plot the more facilities you have to provide (at the moment it seems to be the opposite)

BarbaraofSeville Mon 04-Jan-16 11:02:08

Affordable should mean affordable with one full time and one part time median salary and a 5 or perhaps 10% deposit because over the lifetime of a mortgage there is going to be parental leave, childcare and perhaps illness to take into account.

We have a household income well above the national average yet couldn't afford anything anywhere near London.just who are these properties affordable to?

SquinkiesRule Mon 04-Jan-16 11:05:36

I don't think anyone with a 5 or 10% down payment will get a look in, the cash buyer overseas investors will snack up anything "affordable" and let it sit empty.

BarbaraofSeville Mon 04-Jan-16 11:12:48

They should have rules stating that the properties must be lived in full time.I don't know how they enforce it but some national parks have houses that can only be lived in not used as holiday homes etc.

DoctorTwo Mon 04-Jan-16 11:37:42

They need to ban Buy To Leave. The number of apartments with no lights on in many developments in Central London astonished me last month.

Gidiots entire 'economic plan' is to have house prices rise indefinitely, as houseowners see the value of their asset rise and are more inclined to vote Tory.

DyslexicScientist Mon 04-Jan-16 11:39:52

Goldsmith deliberately said he wanted to carry on the buy to leave in london!

I'm not in london anymore, but ibreally hope he isn't the new mayer.

Not sure if sadique will be any better though.

notquitehuman Mon 04-Jan-16 12:30:45

I'm hoping these properties will be protected from buy to letters. There are a few schemes such as shared ownerships round here where you have to show a local connection and you can't own any other properties. This will give people who really need the houses a chance to buy.

wasonthelist Mon 04-Jan-16 12:34:45

Op yanbu, but people are very gullible - they must be if anyone thinks this (or any previous government back to Thatcher) cares or is doing anythkng worthwhile.

Theoretician Mon 04-Jan-16 12:42:36

Zack goldsmith on LBC now saying "we wouldn't want to turn off the tap for overseas investors in London property".

I see foreign investors as a good thing. Their money is driving a building boom creating homes that people who actually live in the UK will can live in, either as renters, or owners, if/when the foreign investors sell. (They may need to be forced incentivised to let them out, rather than leave them empty though.)

If prices are being driven to unrealistic levels, it's the foreign investors who will lose money when there is a crash. If not, then they have provided the money to increase the number of homes available to local people.

Theoretician Mon 04-Jan-16 12:48:12

I don't like "affordable" housing in any form. "Affordable" is a weasel-word that means hidden subsidy. (Admittedly not very hidden in this case.) Give open subsidies to people if you want to, but in a fair way to people who most need them, not to people who were in the right place at the right time. I doubt people who can buy a house (even with a 20% discount) are the people most in need of subsidies.

redstrawberry10 Mon 04-Jan-16 16:04:53

"Affordable" is a weasel-word that means hidden subsidy.

not necessarily. You can make a home affordable by making it undesirable (small, bad location etc). But yes if you are giving some people a 20% discount, it's subsidised.

DyslexicScientist Mon 04-Jan-16 16:13:20

Couldn't disagree more Theo! They are pushing up the prices, left empty to retain value and I'd ban speculation on something essential. Other countries ban owning property by foreigners.

DoctorTwo Mon 04-Jan-16 19:19:21

Closer to the truth. Evening Harold link, sorry/

ForalltheSaints Mon 04-Jan-16 19:43:43

Drop in the ocean is being kind.

redstrawberry10 Tue 05-Jan-16 10:26:41

if/when the foreign investors sell. (They may need to be forced incentivised to let them out, rather than leave them empty though.)

I thought I would highlight this rather important point.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now