Jeremy Vine - people are morally obliged to downsize and free up property

[JoanThursday1972]

Currently have this on the radio. Suggestion is that people are not entitled to remain in and live in the house that they have bought and paid for. That they should downsize and free this up for more deserving occupants, ie families.

This is surely a personal choice and not an obligation? Anyone is entitled to live in a house they have bought, regardless of size.

We are the boomers. born 1956. And we are still able to fund maintenance and even improvements to our home. But no, I am not going to move into a developer rabbit ghetto for old people just because you think it's time for me to vacate.

Just to add- I live on a nice street with: one elderly woman in a 6 bedroom house, one elderly woman in a 4 bedroom house, one couple in a five bedroom house, one man in a 5 bedroom house, one couple in a 5 bedroom house, and two other families in 4-5 bedroom houses. It’s like this in all the nice parts of my city with mostly elderly couples or widows/widowers living in the larger houses. The families I know with school ages children are crammed into very modest and small homes. It makes me really angry.

And when I pop my clogs, my DC will inherit everything that hasn't been frittered away on my care home fees. Believe me when I tell you that I have thought about these issues for hundreds of hours.

people are morally obliged to downsize and free up property : I kind of agree, actually.

Me & my neighbours are ...
2 adults (retired??) + 1 teenager in 4-5 bed, 1 adult kid somewhere
2 adults + 1 dog, 3 adult kids somewhere, no grand kids, 4 bed
1 adult & 2 dogs in 4 bed, 4 grandkids who haven't visited in a long time
(#4) 2 adults & often visiting adult kids & grandkids in 4 bed
2 adults + 1 teen + sometimes older adult kids staying for short spells in 5 bed

We are all very very over-housed, only #4 has good case for needing all that space. Am very keen to downsize.

Of course they should downsize (although I have sympathy for the lack of suitable housing). They are an utterly selfish generation.

But if there is no suitable housing, where are they going to downsize to. Its easy to give 'boomers' a kicking for all societies ills but they can't move if there is nowhere for them to move to.

That must be frustrating @WarmWinterSun . But if the owners of the properties you covet won't sell them, then you need to plan alternatives.

@Sarahconnor1

There are solutions, also bearing in mind that this is the society that the boomers created and they do have a responsibility to the younger generations who are left with it. I have family members who were able to sell their big homes at a premium, then buy and adapt smaller homes that were initially unsuitable but now are appropriate, while freeing up their own equity with cash to spare.

@EffortlessDesmond I don’t covet their homes, I am very fortunate and have an appropriately sizes home for my family which I love. I plan to downsize when I’m older and no longer need a family home. It still makes me angry to see that many others in my generation are unable to get into my position and all the elderly people in my community rattling about in large houses that they do not need and which are unsuitable.

We're struggling with boomers 'downsizing' to four/five bed homes with gardens.

Driving us slightly bonkers as they tend to be cash buyers so more popular with the developer. They also keep prices high by doing it 😢

I know we will be under-occupying our house when DC eventually fledge but we don't want to live in most of the housing available in the UK. I want light and space, and frankly, I can afford to pay for what I want. I am not going to move into a pokey one bed without good social space just because that's what's available locally.

It is a peculiar quirk of life. Realistically, we were in most need of this house when the dc were smaller; we rarely see one of the kids now. But there was no way we could have afforded it then. My parents are in a 3 bed they can't manage, but there is nowhere for them to go.

Am one person in a four bedroom house. Had a good look around to downsize. Had two requirements, 1) secure space to store a bicycle'; 2) outside space to dry washing. I found neither.

I can't imagine many older people would want to embark on large scale renovation and adaptions at the same time as downsizing. Especially with the current cost of building work. What we need is good housing stock that suits the lifestyle of older people. As that doesn't exist I'm not going to critise people for not downsizing.

Is communism back

Yes. Since March 2020!

An extension of the bedroom tax Are you fucking kidding me. After all the moaning from certain middle class fuckers on here who had a go at tenants for not having the room to self isolate? Fuck me!!!!!!!!

We couldn't afford a 5 bed for our 4 kids so we extended a 3 bed. When they grow up and leave that doesn't mean the house devalues so I'm not sure this is going to help a struggling family? It's privately owned. Does JV advocate selling for less? 4+ bed houses are out of reach for lots of people but extending is much cheaper. Cheaper than moving to another 3 bed. Of course that's private but private and council are completely different of course.

If the 'boomers' have created this society than their parents before them created the society 'boomers' were born into; just as the generation born to boomers will be responsible for the social conditions their children inherit. Not sure how this negates the responsibility of central government to provide social housing and affordable homes.

Building costs are so high now that it's not necessarily cheaper to extend a 3 bed rather than buy a 4 bed, not in my city anyway.

I think the point many would make is that boomers have consistently voted in their own self interests rather than in favour of supporting their children or grandchildren. They are a large group (in terms of generation) and have a lot of wealth, so govts. act in line with those interests. Not building enough affordable housing is part of this.

In a democratic free market capitalist country you obviously can't force people to move out of houses they own.

You can however tax in a way that better incentivises downsizing. The generational wealth divide could be tackled much more effectively if we taxed income less and overall assets more. Compared to the US, the taxes we pay in the UK that relate to house size are ridiculously small! In the UK you can live in a mansion and only be paying a couple of k more in council tax than someone living in a tiny flat. People are not going to move out of their lovely big empty houses if there is no sensible financial incentive to do so.

A good social and affordable housing building splurge is what’s needed.

Two big HAs have done a shit tonne of building here the last few years. They build a load of two bed bungalows with gardens. As a result a lot of older people locally did downsize - the mix of affordable and social meant there was movement in both sectors.

it’s made a huge difference to the rental market locally as tenant movement meant tenants had choices. Rents came down (and quite a few really shit landlords ended up forced out).

But the key was that the new builds fitted in with the community - people weren’t isolated out. The new health centre was built next to them, a shop was built and the bus routes were cemented in place.

First of all the houses aren't empty. The owners live there.
Those who are asset-rich and money poor will end up being forced, sorry, incentivised out of their homes. They will be very likely obliged to move out of their social circles to their detriment.

Being taxed out of their homes does not mean families will get those homes, just as likely to be snapped up by developers.

Also where are all the smaller houses?

YetMoreNewBeginnings · Today 22:15
A good social and affordable housing building splurge is what’s needed.

Two big HAs have done a shit tonne of building here the last few years. They build a load of two bed bungalows with gardens.

Where are you. ? In the year to March 2021, only 1,800 bungalows were built in the whole of the UK (and only 70 in Greater London). The UK population explosion is not going to met by building bungalows. We need to build a city the size of Liverpool every year, just to keep abreast of the growing population; that's only going to happen by building (as is happening in every UK city) 50+ story tower blocks. Bungalows ? It ain't gonna happen.

Diddums. Also a ludicrous attempt to make it a generational issue

Surely if the house is fucked it will be cheaper?

These journalists are just hypocrites. Just like the government, royal family, celebs - forever telling us what us plebs should be doing whilst doing the opposite.
We aren't boomers but we did downsize from a big 5 bedroom house because we wanted to and eldest dc has own house, youngest is in last year at uni with no intention of moving back home. But it took us ages to find a house that fit our criteria because we didn't want a starter home or a bungalow, both are far too small for a start. Definitely wouldn't want a not a flat or retirement apartment.

How about someone create houses that people want to downsize to?
Ours has everything we had before minus the extra bedrooms we no longer needed. Two double bedrooms, two bathrooms, small utility, kitchen/diner/living room and another reception room, tiny study, plus double garage, driveway, manageable garden.