IMAGINE a mortgage free Britain

[HarrowToCroydon]

For a moment, imagine if everyone in Britain lived in Government Housing. Everyone paid minimal rent, the cost to Government was 0 as the rent would cover upkeep and new buildings.

And society was secure in the knowledge that their children too will be housed.

How would you then spend your money which you have saved from paying a mortgage.

Will you be having a lot less stress?

As someone who's spent a lot of time in government supplied housing (Army) - I'm going to pass, thanks.

It’s a terrifying prospect. No mortgage, no choice. No mortgage, no sense of ownership or value. Most people would let their houses reduce to ruin. No incentive to decorate or maintain it.
Dystopian nightmare would ensue. No point to work with no mortgage, and no purpose at all in life.

I would use the money to immigrate to a normal functioning country!

No thanks I want a choice of where to live. Council houses are not the wonder people on here seem to think a great many councils run their housing very badly, lack of repairs etc. Also we know many people abuse their housing, costs ££££ in repairs.

None of this is true. Please read about Singapore.

singaporeans live in public housing (85%) and have mortgages. It is also the third richest country in the world.

Me and you @rosetintedmemories2023 trying to promote the idea that there is a better system than the utter shitshow that exists currently. It's like trying to pull people into a boat and they don't want to let go of their floatie. The UK system is unfair, promotes stagnation rather than mobility (social or otherwise), benefits the very rich and causes deaths, actual deaths.

There are other systems.

What a depressing thread. Yes, the current system works brilliantly if you are well off and can afford a spacious house in a location that you love, but that's not the reality for most people. Most people are either stressed renters, paying way over the odds for insecure housing, or mortgaged up to the hilt to live in a less-than-ideal property in a less-than-ideal area.

Plus, how many of the posters talking smugly about their lovely houses on this thread would be able to afford to buy them if they were a single person starting out now?

Singapore sounds great unless you are single, childless, gay or escaping an abusive marriage

Not that the UK exactly gets all of this right either but with more government control of housing comes greater ability to dictate how people live

God no, I don’t want to live in government housing

Why would anyone maintain care embellish their living space, express their esthetic view in forever rental? Not only mind numbing but dismal.
A massive step back in personal responsibility. As you would expect the government to take care of everything in your life.

its not perfect but you can buy as a single singaporean when you are 35 and above. The average London FTB is 34 and probably older for singles. my aunt bought as a single woman. my cousin divorced his wife and still managed to buy government housing (its jointly owned with his baby daughter). I do support more rights for gay singaporeans (who can only buy at 35 and older) and i think it will improve eventually but singapore is a much more conservative place and this reflects public sentiment as well.

Mine was bought with a 7 figure inheritance.

If you can't afford your house with 10% mortgage interest rates (and are on a 2/5 year mortgage fixed term), you are in a less secure position than someone with a lifetime tenancy and should honestly rethink sinking any money in your house as you are less likely to stay in it! Unless you have help from bank of mum and dad.

Because they live there? Just guessing.

I like being in nice surroundings?
I actually have a mortgage but my grandparents lived in a council house with a lovely secure tenancy and kept it nice. It was their home.

My parents have a detached house which is probably worth close to 7 figures, but at the same time they didn't need to spend a penny getting me and my sister on the property ladder. I mean i bought in london but i could definitely have afforded to buy a government flat in singapore. My sister is 27 (same age as me when i bought) and is now looking at government flats to buy with her fiancee (they are both doctors). I know my parents wouldn't give her any money to buy (just like they didn't give me any money to buy) and this is the way things should be. I often feel sorry for middle class british parents who feel compelled to help their children buy expensive property. Each generation should pay for themselves.

I did not know of the housing system in Singapore, as few of the posters have written about. This shows that even in rich societies, living in Government Housing is acceptable. I deliberately stayed away from using "Council Housing", because of it's negative perception in Britain.

Quite a few people have mentioned that how could this be at £0 to the Government. A back of the envelope calculation shows that an apartment costs no more than £50,000 to build. IF the land cost is nil. Either the land comes from already Govt. landbank (don't know how much). Or through compulsory purchase order (or some such mechanism).

A rent of £500 per month would take ~10 years to recoup, and thereafter becomes a free asset to the Government.

Basic rules, like those in Germany, can apply to vacating the place, where a "end of tenancy" requires that you put a certain colour back on the walls, redo the carpet etc.

My suggestions will not sit well with the land owning classes. Or in Britain, a NIMBY.

But overall, would this allow stressed families to provide their own childcare with one parent working and one parent looking after their children? Would this not result in happier children? Is this not beneficial to society as a whole?

I think we would still have dual income households as the norm even with mass government housing. It certainly is the norm in Singapore but mainly because people are not content with just existing. They want to provide their kids with extra curricular activities, they want to travel, they want nice clothes and Iphones and thats just the reality of being in a rich country. You don't want to be isolated from your peer group cos you can't afford to go out to eat or take your kids to the zoo!

What is good however about having mass government housing is that it improves productivity. people are able to do jobs that are not paid as well but are important towards society like being teachers, nurses or junior doctors. My Dh wanted to earn good money in order to stay in London where he grew up so he went into financial services where he earned enough in his first role as analyst to buy a flat. Perhaps if he was able to buy or rent a government flat he would be working as a civil servant or something that benefitted society...

I concur with what you say.

Think of this as the NHS, the National Housing Service. (I know there are many detractors of the current NHS, but it does work, in spite of it's problems).

If there was a National Housing Service, the quality of housing would be generally good to very good. One person here has commented about Army Housing, I get this, but "low quality housing" happens when the quantum of housing is less and the work is outsourced to contractors.

With the National Housing Service, it is Government run. With a simple proviso, that it's accounts are published on a quarterly basis, thus allowing the public to examine them, and it's future liabilities are clear. This truly should cost 0 to the Government, not be taken over by overpaid CEO's or consultants.

Once the quantum of houses (and apartments) exceeds a certain point, the scale itself leads to "gigantic" savings in build cost.

Precisely, in France and Germany, renters, even private renters decorate and kit out their places to their liking.

A sad state of affairs, where people are on tenterhooks that their house price increase will pay for their medical bills. When that time comes to pay such bills, I cannot imagine the stress it would create to sell the house, because you need to pay those bills.

Is the stress caused by this vicious cycle, the cause of some of the medical issues, which result in the bills, which require the house to be sold for a "good price".

Agree. Housing is a basic need, like water, electricity, public transportation. It should be effortless for each generation to have access to such basic needs.

Housing has been weaponized.

Bribes to get things actually fixed/ not be put next to the nightmare neighbours, probably.

I see your point, would you say that the council house where you lived had a sense of fear as a marginalized population lived there, like the ghettoisation of Paris suburbs?

However, if everyone lived in Government Housing, would the currently marginalized population not be spread out?