we all agree on the need for more houses but just not here !!

But as the subject says, we need houses so do need the workforce to build them too. I can relate all too well to the toll manual works leaves on our bodies.

tbh the ones i know who have got decent jobs, have been in art and music, the ones with so called "in demand" jobs, such as computing or science have not, no real world experience..... that may well be down to to the quality of the teaching though but also because employers dont take on new inexp starters, then moan about skills shortages...

Building trades? yes fine but when there is an economic downturn, what then?
and with retirement in the late 60s, is it really a great choice? working outside in a physically demand job, is a for the younger person.

A good friend of ours is a tiler, has done some very prestigious projects, premiership footballers and large dance clubs in Germany and UK... now in his mid 50s, he is fucked, shoulder and knees gone, 2 year NHS wait for the op's he needs.

The UK has the lowest number of empty properties of any country in Europe. That's why our housing market is so pressured and prices are artificially inflated - because there's no slack in the system.

We need to build more housing and we need them now. I'm so bloody sick of people complaining about planning applications - it seems like every single one gets posted on our local FB group by someone asking everyone to object to it and no matter what it is people complain. Large block of flats. Small block of flats. Single house. They'll complain.

Those properties that are 50k in Doncaster need a lot of work doing to them. I'm in the North in one of the worst cities to live in and you can't get anything for 50k.

Then there's the wages. Median icone sounds great but nobody here is earning the Median wage, everyone earns the minimum wage. Skilled jobs here pay.exactly.the same as unskilled. Competition is fierce for what jobs there are.

Asda is a high paying job here.

Doncaster 🙄

If you look on Rightmove there are properties for around the £50k mark.

There was a scheme a few years ago where they sold houses in a street in Liverpool for £1, on the basis you had sufficient cash to renovate it and turn it back into a family home. I they offered you £30k loan on a low interest rate.

https://www.chadresearch.co.uk/housing-scheme-helps-tackle-health-inequalities/

I live in a ridiculously expensive area. I've told my DH that once he retires (he's older than me) we can move back up north as I'm a teacher and will earn the same and we can then live mortgage free in the same size house!

I wonder if stamp duty was reduced for downsizers how much this would affect the housing supply/demand? In that housebuilders might build more 2 & 3 bed houses that are needed as opposed to 4-5 luxury models?

Where can you buy a 2 bed house for 50K? I live in a cheaper area & 2 bed ex council terraces are around £90-100K! 2 bed new builds are nearer £180-190K!

I don't understand why, instead of crappy new developments in areas that can't support them, no-one proposes refurbishing the many many empty old buildings in towns and cities into flats?

Buying a 3 bed property would be a second step up.

For a first property, you can get a 2 bed terrace for about £50k which is perfectly affordable on the medium "up norf" wage. The 3 bed would then be affordable when you'd worked and saved a bit more.

Salaries have certainly not been stagnant for 20 years! In October 2004, the minimum wage for an over-22 year old was £4.85/hour. In 2014 it was £6.50/hour and it's currently £11.44.

For teachers, in 2004 and M1 starting salary was £18,558. It's now £30,000.

Perhaps it's therefore time to get the government to invest in better transport networks up north? I've lived in Liverpool, Leeds, Lincoln and Durham over the last 25 years and had no issues with transport personally...

Agree with pp no thanks on the 100 stories

We should be at peak anyway as birth rates are falling

I think highrise living might not be the best thing, but that doesn't mean we can't get on well in low rise, buildings that are three or four stories high.

It doesn't not really.

There's few examples of where everyday housing works well in skyscrapers. They are so expensive to maintain and have a relatively short life cycle. The engineering involved in unreal and the second maintenance is reduced they become dystopian hell scapes.

See South Africa Tallest apartment block in Africa - a 55-storey tower in Johannesburg https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6256279/Tallest-apartment-block-Africa-55-storey-dystopian-tower-Johannesburg.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubutton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edif%C3%ADcio_S%C3%A3o_Vito

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/surfside-florida-condo-collapse-champlain-towers-south-3-years-later/

And of course, Grenfell and Ronan Point here in the UK.

I’m curious in that case why it works outside of the UK?

Tried that in the 60s. We've spent fortunes tearing them all down.
Humans aren't meant to live in the air.

I am not living 100 floors up after Grenfell thankyou very much

Yes..in the cities.

We also need to build up, not out. 100 or more storey buildings. Cities in the sky, with shops and schools, doctors and hospitals contained within them.

Why is there no political will?
Is it because politicians don't want to miss out on the backhanders/favours that they get from allowing this?

Hear hear!
There are many factors that have lead to the current mess we're in with housing, not just lack of building and population growth:

• right to buy without ability for councils to reinvest
• tax breaks and 100% mortgages that spawned the rental investment boom
• growth of second homes and air bnb
• many councils not having Local Development Plans that would set out the development strategy for an area

The fact is that training people is expensive, it's much cheaper to ship in ready trained people from abroad. Many employers have been doing this for years, including the NHS.

Yes it is cheaper for a company or the NHS to employ a skilled, ready trained immigrant as needed than to invest in training the local population. But it is hard on the country that loses their skilled labour. I feel particularly bad for resource poor countries who lose skilled staff that they really cannot afford to lose. We will be feeling the negative effects ourselves on the NHS as more UK medical staff move to Aus and the Middle East for better pay and work life balance.

The trades are a popular option for school leavers, but there is a shortage of apprenticeships, creating a bottleneck, because being a brickie or a mechanic is something you mainly learn on the job supplemented by day or block release training.

If you’re a small family firm, do you have the capacity to take on apprentices? Will you take the risk that once they are confident, they will leave and set up a rival business, which will poach your clients? I have heard these worries articulated so they are genuine. How do we address them?

I am not anti-immigration, far from it. But we have to be honest and clear about the advantages and the costs of each way of supplying our economy with skilled workers.

We can't just keep building more and more houses. We are quite a small country and need space for greenery and farmland and natural habitats. Destroying wildlife, polluting the air and water and turning pleasant towns into huge, sprawling estates with no matching infrastructure and no community, is a disaster.
There are many existing buildings which are empty or only used occasionally. Lets make them liveable in before building more. And it can't be right for people to own multiple homes when there's a housing crisis. Fine if they are rented out to tenants who need them, fine for a small percentage in each area to be used as holiday cottages, but second homes should be banned and so should turning villages and towns in a mass of AirBAndBs so that the locals have no resources close by and are forced to leave.

Nope I don't agree. 1.5 million in 5 years? Won't even cover immigration ffs

Yep. If people accept we can't just keep increasing population then I don't see why kicking the can to later is better either

Yes definitely