How do you see property panning out under a Labour government?

[KievLoverTwo]

I wasn't focused on politics or house buying or green initiatives when they were last in power.

What does seem clear is the party has to be more right leaning to appease the Tory voter base and overseas investors, I guess because we have precisely diddly squat economic growth and barely a pot to piss in. I don't know what growth was like under Labour, but it's somewhat irrelevant, because we have to think about what they might inherit.

Educate me with your memories of the past, and any thoughts you have on how things might have go in the future.

I'll start off with an example thought: HMRC are cracking down on holiday lets, insisting air b and b and their counterparts produce six years of income data to chase tax evaders. I think this is the sort of thing Labour are likely to go after with a vengeance - at least if they are to appease their more left leaning supporters. But perhaps they also won't want to upset the apple cart too much and alienate the probably majority of second home owners who usually vote Conservative.

It used to be so much more clear cut. Now they all sort of merge into one.

Not everyone does plan for care costs @KievLoverTwo

I think by the time you end up in care your life is almost over and lots of people who end up in expensive care homes (as opposed to having carers at home) have got dementia anyway.

I would far rather give away my wealth to my children and end up in a state run care home or (if I still have my wits about me) a member of Dignitas. I hear a lot of people my age (50s) and husband (60s) say similar.

We've had a Tory Government for well over 13 years, has housing improved?
neither can we get them out, they decide the timings.

imho housing will remain expensive, no government can force the private sector to build housing if it is not profitable to do so.

Rents might drop if Lab build more council housing but that will cost and take many years before there is a single extra council house.

So rest easy, property will remain in demand.

I think that's a fair point. I think the OH and I are only a bit too paranoid about it because we have become so risk adverse after a dreadful three years. Also, he saw his mum on the poverty line as a near retiree as a kid and it had a profound impact.

I do try to talk him round to being a bit less risk adverse, but it's hard work with life experiences + ADHD + autism.

Appreciate the reminder of your wise point, which I occasionally forget.

The problem stems from capitalism and putting the control of the number of houses built per year in the hands of developers.

I will lick the boots of anyone who has the balls to undo this.

@Express0 you're wrong. I for one would happily see my house devalued if it means my dc could get a foot on the housing ladder. Or even get somewhere decent to rent. DS1 is 27 and renting a very overpriced room in a shared house. Whereas we are living in a house that is worth three times what we've paid for it.

Just going to add my own political point to the discussion....

It's not a real-term fall in house prices if you work in any of the public sector services that have had a 30% real terms pay-cut over the last 17 years....

I tend to agree it's cyclical and governments won't have a huge effect on house prices. I kind of wish they'd stop going up TBH. Easy for me to say, as we're in a 'forever home' (well, until we want to downsize) but I can't see how my kids will be able to continue to live in London if we insist that house prices go up forever in a way that is totally disproportionate to earnings and the cost of everything else - DH are not going to be able to magic up 6-figure deposits they'll likely each need to buy as I don't see either of them getting a City job or being millionnaire entrepeneurs.

I'm hoping build-to-let will continue to happen but they'll find ways to get more affordable built-to-let built as it's a good idea but at the moment all of it is premium-priced.

Care costs are tied to this in a less talked about way

Keeping asset value higher as a way to fund the extortionate bill our aging population is bringing surely must be a consideration

Even if not everyone uses this way to pay care fees how else would the state deal with it, it’s a huge amount and rising

@KievLoverTwo If you think it's clear that the Labour Party has to be more right leaning to appease the Tory voter base and overseas investor, then I have no idea what you're talking about, either. I think many members of the LP would agree with me. You're making it up as you go along.

Financial Times is probably better for these questions, Op, not mumsnet.

That would be alright if I was looking for one newspaper's biased opinion. I could just pick up a newspaper.

Okay. Educate me?

Well then they’re going after the lower-middle classes. The pinched middle - as per usual.

Truly rich people are not letting their houses out to the riff raff.

It's either the value or the house or the value of the currency. Which would you prefer? CPI inflation tends to have a more uniform effect across the population...HPI is one to slip into urbane and banal dinner discourse.

Perhaps an even wider question is how much the BoE will tighten to protect sterling before we wave goodbye to one of the oldest currencies in existence. 5 years? 10 years? Also, of course, depends on the path of the USD.

Why? I actually love to see the opinion for these kind of topics on MN, it provides a useful spread of opinion to garner via a demographic that is often magnificently hubristic.

IMHO they are essentially 'two cheeks of the same arse'. I hear nothing that diverges from the Keynesian groupthink in Labour's approach and indeed some noises about 'helping' the market. I perhaps think they may try to make the rental market less of a nightmare.

Ultimately it's the price of money.

They may continue to rise in a currency that continues to die. That is certainly possible.

Was always thus, you really can't have an army of public sector builders, i mean what do they do in between sites? they'd be on the public sector pay role.

What you could do is make the subsidy paid to developers to build affordable housing higher, atm it is too low, so dev's, once they have planning, try and change it and "affordable" homes are then too expensive, as they are at a % of the open market price.

Main issue though is that Brexit has cut off a ready supply of trades, we've simply not enough builders in this country and with falling birth rates and an aging population, that is only going to get worse.

If I had a magic wand, I would just like for everyone to be able to afford a decent quality of home that is not riddled with damp and mould and for the divide between rich and poor to narrow. I think people owning second homes is a disgusting privilege when there aren't enough of them to go around, and locals are often priced out of their areas.

Isn't there talk of a global currency coming into play and cross country debt being written off?

If that's true, is there a case to be made to be sentimental about the pound, or even a financially astute argument to keep it?

Hopefully this time (not sure they will even get in TBH, they come over as not very inspiring or competent) they will fumble things badly and get on the wrong side of the bond markets, it would be great to see the bubble they creating popping all around them.

The cracks are certainly starting to show in the new more normal interest rate world though...

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/signa-key-retail-property-division-133037487.html

Why can't we have an army of public sector builders who get paid well enough to stay temporarily in areas to finish sites, and travel round the country?

I dislike the idea of paying revoltingly wealthy housing developers subsidies. Is that an actual thing? Bribe money o_o

Brexit has had a terrible effect on the industry. But I also think there's far too much focus on kids getting degrees and sitting behind desks and not nearly enough incentive to make learning a trade attractive. My first desk job in 1991 was a huge salary for a 16 yo at the time, 10k. How much would I have been paid as an apprentice bricky, carpenter, plasterer? Idk what 1991 minimum wage was, but I would hazard a guess it was at least half. That needs to change. There's good money to be made in the trades once you have experience, but who's going to voluntarily do that if they are taking home a third of what their desk based mates are, and have to leave the pub at 7pm because they can't afford to buy a round? Idk at what point in history these non desk job options began to slip away (90s after the 80s boom?), but I do wish they hadn't :(

If there was really a demand for builders they would be sending the visas out faster than you could say Jackhammer, there isn`t a demand though because house sales have fallen to decade lows.

I agree on why not discuss it here. Mn is able to discuss politics, sometimes anyway as often just descends but this thread has avoided that, well done op

But why do you say what you do about disappearing sterling?

I would like to know what life was like for people who used to have secure employment and final salary pensions.

I don't remember discussions about extremely poor pensioners when I was a kid or first started work (1991).

With an ageing population, it does all seem to be getting far worse.

But - how do you fix that?

The answer would be to raise taxes, which would be hugely unpopular. Or GDP growth. And idk how a government goes about doing that without giving out unsavoury backhanders and promises to investors.

Oof, I am glad I am not a politician!

I would like to see big companies that rent out social housing ethically for good prices that people can then invest in via pension funds. But the houses have to go to hard working people who pay the rents and do essential jobs.

Constant house price rises do not help anyone in the long run. I still think it is ludicrous that house price rises are not taxes for all, including on a main residence. Most people do not pay inheritance tax or gains on their main residence and I do not understand why not. It need not be a large amount of tax. But some tax would be a good idea. I think front loading it completely as stamp duty is a bad idea.

Secure housing like health care and education is a fundamental and needs proper regulation. Not speculation. In England, there is far too much speculation etc in housing.