Page 6 | IMAGINE a mortgage free Britain

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:18

carly2803 · 02/08/2023 19:38

this happens now, its called council housing

They allocate your house, they pay for it etc

Yes it does, just that now, quasi private companies called Housing Associations cannot take advantage of scale.

What I am suggesting is a National Housing Service. Once you have scale beyond certain numbers, the costs come down, drastically. UNLESS, the people who work for such an agency demand salaries higher than the rest.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:22

Needmorelego · 02/08/2023 19:47

@carly2803 yes but the OP wants everyone to have that. No mortgages so now private ownership.
Very dystopia novel if you ask me!

I wouldn't say dystopian, if nurses and cleaners who work at St. Mary's in Paddington, live near Paddington, where flats are currently £1m+, is this such a bad thing? Happy nurses, happy patients, Happy cleaners, hopefully less outbreak of hygiene related issues in Hospitals.

I get that those people on this thread who would not live near a "certain social element" may not like to live next to a nurse or a hospital cleaner. But then do they expect happy nurses and a disease free hospital when they themselves need treatment.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:25

Catchasingmewithspiders · 02/08/2023 19:48

And yet you would like those exact people to be in charge of everybody's housing?

I'm disabled, I'm used to being fucked over enough by this government thank you

I might be more enthused about the idea with a different government but as it stands I prefer to rely on a bank for my ability to remain housed than a government who has at times seen me as a waste to society when I couldn't work and barely worthy of a pittance and have encouraged a media to demonise and abuse people like me.

Show quote history

I have no idea of your current housing situation "bank for my ability to remain housed", I am not sure I quite follow.

I agree, the current Govt. is useless, so was Thatcher, so was Blair (who I think has a large property portfolio). And so will the next one who will come in.

Imagine that you were rest assured about a roof over your head, would that cause less stress than your current predicament?

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:28

greenspaces4peace · 02/08/2023 20:57

In owning my own home, I’m looking to live without a certain social element.
I believe historically the social housing was controlled for cleanliness and upkeep, windows washed regularly, no laundry hung out front. And the residents had a certain commonality, be it civil servant or mill worker.
However, social housing has somewhat changed from this idealized view (not sure how much of that is historically accurate) to include a segment of society which many don’t want to associate with.
It’s not density that’s my issue.
Plus taxes, to create this dystopia taxes would be very high, unlikely to be much headway with spending.

The certain social element, I assume you refer to the people who live in council housing now.

If everyone was living in Government Housing, then would this "social element" not be spread about.

Also, following your thought process, when one buys a house, how does one know that Tony next door is not a so and so and could make your life miserable. Once you have purchased the house, I believe it is not that easy in Britain to up sticks and move.

OP posts:

boobot1 · 03/08/2023 06:30

Needmorelego · 02/08/2023 13:17

Hmmmm…..isn’t that what places like North Korea are like?

Yes, this is how how shitty totalitarian ideas take hold. For the greater good always🙄

boobot1 · 03/08/2023 06:34

ginghamstarfish · 02/08/2023 14:16

So communism? That hasn't worked well elsewhere.

Agree

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:39

BorgQueen · 02/08/2023 22:02

Everyone who contributes to a pension or a Stocks and shares ISA invests in property indirectly ( unless you specifically choose your own investments to exclude it).
Everyone paying a mortgage allows savers to earn interest on savings.
SDLT, conveyancing,
Estate agency and legal fees for buying and selling property contribute billions to the economy and employ many thousands of people.
What will replace that?

If pension companies and ISA managers invest in property, then we have "weaponised property".

Thinking our loud, what if the water company was allowed to be "free market product", will the prices stay the same?

The SDLT, which is a tax, which you pay, which you will save.

Estate Agents and the conveyancing lawyers will not have existed, they may be working for the body which builds and manages the housing.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:42

QuickDraining · 02/08/2023 22:02

I still think the majority of UK housing is dreadful. It surprises me that anyone wants to buy it. I live in a house that's many years past its best. Neighbours continuously 'do up' their houses, destroying the only good fabric left in the buildings. The main problems with the housing remain. Without heating them they decline very quickly. And now that heating has become so expensive - the housing will deteriorate more and more. Many sheds make better houses. The bloke a few doors down has maxed out his terrace, bringing in the mother in law, and lives in the garden. The road would have looked nice at the turn of the century, but like many modern terraces and areas of Britain now just looks like a shit hole. That's not to say people aren't nice and don't like the area or their houses. My Dad traded up his entire life to pay for his house. Got about three years of retirement, got cancer and died. Waiting all those years to ironically do up the house that he moved into 30 years prior. It's a terrible swindle. Barn raising a house with your mates/building society for £25k, would make for a better deal. Houses can be built cheaper and better, given some innovation we could do something truly remarkable - housing that looks great and is also more healthy to live in - and is better for the environment. Heck I'd rather live in a caravan that I could move about if attitudes weren't so grim towards nomadic ways of life.

I agree with each sentence you have written. I even relate to quite a few of them, including the sad cancer story.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:47

boobot1 · 03/08/2023 06:30

Yes, this is how how shitty totalitarian ideas take hold. For the greater good always🙄

Show quote history

I know a few people here may think that Kim Jong is bribing me.

There is a simple way to take care of this.

Do you believe in "English Law", I do, my peers write their "foreign contracts" and put a clause in, which stipulates that English courts be the place where contract disputes get resolved.

If there was a National Housing Service, then the shares in that service are either given to each living person in Britain. Or if you think that will be a "shit show", then enact legislation which govern this body.

Another idea, that this agency is NOT controlled by the "ruling party", but by the Civil Service, with 6 monthly Referendum votes. Like in Switzerland.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 06:53

SueVineer · 02/08/2023 22:08

Have you ever been to or lived anywhere where people have no option other than to live in government housing? Are you aware that rent for social housing doesn’t go near to covering the costs? Are you aware that many housing associations are very poor at maintaining their stock and much of it in the uk and elsewhere is poor quality slum housing? Are you aware that perpetual rent to housing associations/ councils would likely be much more than a mortgage?

just checking.

Show quote history

"Have you ever been to or lived anywhere where people have no option other than to live in government housing? "
A- Lived in "council house" on a "council estate" in the late 80's and early 90's. Even my older family with whom I was living then, remember that time fondly.

Are you aware that rent for social housing doesn’t go near to covering the costs?
A- Yes, I do, this is because the people looking after social housing are private or Quasi-private companies, and have got the Govt. by their balls.

Are you aware that many housing associations are very poor at maintaining their stock and much of it in the uk and elsewhere is poor quality slum housing?
A- Yes, I know, this is because there are "too many" housing associations, all private/semi-private. I wish I ran ("owned")one, having looked at them, they are a near license to print money.

Are you aware that perpetual rent to housing associations/ councils would likely be much more than a mortgage?
A- No, this I do not agree with at all. Artificiality due to profits would disappear, I could at the back of an envelope do the calculations.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:21

SueVineer · 02/08/2023 22:51

Yip - me too. It’s utterly divorced from reality to think that having the government control the entire housing market is a magic fix to the lack of housing. In every country this has been done in, it has been a disaster.

Show quote history

What was the disaster if I may ask?

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:25

boobot1 · 03/08/2023 06:34

Agree

Show quote history

You will still have a job, businesses will be there, your car, your possessions.

I am simply saying that housing be a "common pool", like Water, for the people who live in the country. Every 6 months you can vote on matters relating to this common pool.

I have even divested the Govt. away from ownership.

So that cronyinsm, corruption, egoism, like Stalin etc. etc. etc. are not allowed to develop.

OP posts:

rosetintedmemories2023 · 03/08/2023 07:27

Just curious, why do all the posters on thus thread support free healthcare but not government subsidized housing. To me free at the point of access healthcare is far more radical..yes you have to pay national insurance and tax in this country but at least half of British people earn less than the £35k needed to be a net contributor in this country (given that £31k is the median salary for a full time worker and at least 25% of working age adults are economically inactive so not contributing). So the vast majority of adults are getting free healthcare for far less than they put in.

What OP is suggesting is more radical than the Singapore model (where people do get mortgages but to buy government controlled property at a big discount) but even what she is suggesting is that people do pay some rent towards it..this means that there is probably some way to adjust the rent to somewhere near market levels for richer tenants and therefore over the long run allow it to be more sustainable.

on the other hand the NHS is a black hole because medical care continues to be more advanced and increases in cost rapidly, the salaries of medical workers increase, we have an ageing population AND crucially no one wants to pay more tax for it (or can't afford to as the median salary of this country is quite low for a developed country with ambitions to provide free at the point of access healthcare). But yet the majority of the public support the precepts of the NHS despite it being a radical socialist policy. It just shows me that people are used to healthcare being free but housing being a racket. Even though free healthcare actually is a bit of a shit show.

It's actually better for the government wallet if this was reversed tbh from a fiscal point of view, buildings cost less over the long run than healthcare staff (who would strike if their pay isnt raised) and machines (new innovations mean they need to be replaced).

Yet if the country goes down this trajectory we would have neither free healthcare nor affordable housing

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:29

DragonDoor · 03/08/2023 00:41

Nothing. What I would deem to be a fair rent would probably be the same as my mortgage payment.

For families that are now effectively living below the poverty line because they have more money going out than coming in, it would be needed for food and household bills.

Wealthy families with an already healthy disposable income would be able to buy more luxuries , so I don’t think it should be available on a universal basis. Some sort of cut off should apply.

The rent would definitely not be equal to your mortgage payment. Because-
a. Mortgages, which have interest, drive a profit engine for rich people who own shares in banks and pension funds which want to make a return.

b. The rent will be equal to
( NEW BUILD COST THIS YEAR + ANNUAL MAINTENANCE THIS YEAR) Divided by TOTAL HOUSES.

And if you are given a chance to vote 6 monthly to tweak this system, then you have a say, I would go as far as saying you will have greater control than you have now, even in a private house.

OP posts:

Franticbutterfly · 03/08/2023 07:31

Needmorelego · 02/08/2023 13:17

Hmmmm…..isn’t that what places like North Korea are like?

😂

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:32

rosetintedmemories2023 · 03/08/2023 07:27

Just curious, why do all the posters on thus thread support free healthcare but not government subsidized housing. To me free at the point of access healthcare is far more radical..yes you have to pay national insurance and tax in this country but at least half of British people earn less than the £35k needed to be a net contributor in this country (given that £31k is the median salary for a full time worker and at least 25% of working age adults are economically inactive so not contributing). So the vast majority of adults are getting free healthcare for far less than they put in.

What OP is suggesting is more radical than the Singapore model (where people do get mortgages but to buy government controlled property at a big discount) but even what she is suggesting is that people do pay some rent towards it..this means that there is probably some way to adjust the rent to somewhere near market levels for richer tenants and therefore over the long run allow it to be more sustainable.

on the other hand the NHS is a black hole because medical care continues to be more advanced and increases in cost rapidly, the salaries of medical workers increase, we have an ageing population AND crucially no one wants to pay more tax for it (or can't afford to as the median salary of this country is quite low for a developed country with ambitions to provide free at the point of access healthcare). But yet the majority of the public support the precepts of the NHS despite it being a radical socialist policy. It just shows me that people are used to healthcare being free but housing being a racket. Even though free healthcare actually is a bit of a shit show.

It's actually better for the government wallet if this was reversed tbh from a fiscal point of view, buildings cost less over the long run than healthcare staff (who would strike if their pay isnt raised) and machines (new innovations mean they need to be replaced).

Yet if the country goes down this trajectory we would have neither free healthcare nor affordable housing

Yes, agreed.

Of what I see in the NHS and the black hole you refer to, in what I suggest, with a National Housing Service, with 6 monthly voting on key issues, like in Switzerland, prevent the rot setting in.

"Yet if the country goes down this trajectory we would have neither free healthcare nor affordable housing"
And hence the reason to start this thread.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:34

Franticbutterfly · 03/08/2023 07:31

😂

Show quote history

This likeness to North Korea is a bit of a drag. We have a political system of which we have far greater control than most countries. Yes, it is disfunctional, but it is the best we have.

I say it again, the housing will be controlled by the people. With 6 monthly referendums for resolving key issues.

OP posts:

User165753 · 03/08/2023 07:36

I would rather we had a pay for system for some healthcare similar to some European countries, I don't think it should all be free

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:38

User165753 · 03/08/2023 07:36

I would rather we had a pay for system for some healthcare similar to some European countries, I don't think it should all be free

Yes, like in France, where a GP visit costs you Euro 10, or some such sum. Which gets re-imbursed in some way. This stops casual visits.

If we continue the path we are on now, NHS will not be free for long.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 07:50

I expand on the economics to answer multiple posters, to come to a figure.

50 BillionGBP +25 BillionGBP to maintain the current stock

Divided by 25 million families

EQUALS

On the higher side £3000 per year per family. Which equates to £250 per month?

I urge posters, who have greater clarity on the figures to post here, and debunk my basic math.

I have used £50,000 as the new build cost, this I know a fair bit about, without land or quango costs, a house does not cost more than £50,000. For those posters who laugh at this and say a kitchen extension costs £25,000, I say that this is because of fragmented costs.

Also, we now have exited Europe, we have finally broken the shackles of European Law, hence we can have any legislation in place for the "safety aspect". (shackles of European law = sarcasm). But in all seriousness, now, in the words of Mr. Moog, we are free to do whatever we want.

OP posts:

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 08:04

Incomplete post above.

50 Billion GBP to build 1 Million new houses per year.

Correction -

Mogg, not Moog.

OP posts:

mortgagequandary · 03/08/2023 08:09

Interesting thread

The situation is far from ideal at the moment I know. But sounds a bit ... communist

I think a happy medium would be for them to build a lot more affordable public housing so people would then have a choice

In my 20s and early 30s I had a council house it was the best thing for me at that life stage. As it was what I could afford at the time and i needed a secure home for my family and not be at the whims of private landlords. As I earned more though I wanted my own home and tbh my council house was tiny and I wanted a bigger place in a nicer area

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 08:19

mortgagequandary · 03/08/2023 08:09

Interesting thread

The situation is far from ideal at the moment I know. But sounds a bit ... communist

I think a happy medium would be for them to build a lot more affordable public housing so people would then have a choice

In my 20s and early 30s I had a council house it was the best thing for me at that life stage. As it was what I could afford at the time and i needed a secure home for my family and not be at the whims of private landlords. As I earned more though I wanted my own home and tbh my council house was tiny and I wanted a bigger place in a nicer area

"I think a happy medium would be for them to build a lot more affordable public housing so people would then have a choice"
Agreed.

As per my earlier Math, this will need £50 Billion to build 1 million new houses. In fact more, as the hidden land costs per current "law" will push the figure near £100 Billion.

It is this money the Govt. (basically we, the tax payers) do not have.

OP posts:

BumpyaDaisyevna · 03/08/2023 08:32

HarrowToCroydon · 02/08/2023 13:06

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?

If this happened then everyone would have more disposable income.

Demand for goods, leisure, food would rise.

Prices would go up.

In the end standards of living would even out to where they were before the mortgage free time?

Original poster

HarrowToCroydon · 03/08/2023 08:38

BumpyaDaisyevna · 03/08/2023 08:32

If this happened then everyone would have more disposable income.

Demand for goods, leisure, food would rise.

Prices would go up.

In the end standards of living would even out to where they were before the mortgage free time?

Show quote history

I am not quite sure that higher income would necessarily lead to higher costs overall.

But let us go with the argument that this indeed happens, the people who receive this disposable income,

e.g. Goods manufacturers, Restaurant and Hotels, Supermarkets, will end up having to pay tax on higher income. Thus, we the tax payers may have our burden reduced a bit.

Would this be such a bad thing?

OP posts: