Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta

Why is the answer to the housing crisis just build, build, build? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building concrete monstrosities.
    Rent caps and restricting fees would be unnaturally suppressing rising prices which are the result of an increase in demand. When demand rises, to ease the pressure off prices you have two options. 1) Increase supply and 2) Somehow lower or put-off the demand.

    As you mention it's quite clear that the current initiative has been to increase supply. Why? because it is very difficult to lower or ease the growth in demand. Why? Because economic activity is clustered around London. Solution? In the long-term you'd have to invest in other parts of the country to attract firms and encourage further outward development. Easy? No. Possible? Yes.

    The underlying issue involves the spatial compression of economic activity.Therefore policy should seek to correct this rather than prescribing short-term relief. But this is difficult to implement both economically and politically.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    Because the Government makes more money that way through taxation, it keeps a lot of people in jobs and it gets the great unwashed out of up and coming areas. For governments, it's a win-win.

    The solution to the housing crisis is not rent caps or restricting agent fees as this will simply prolong the symptom but rather, a 10% tax on the value of the property other than the one you are currently living in.

    If I own 3 properties worth £1million, £350,000 and £500,000, I'd be looking at a tax bill of £85,000 annually.

    If the landlord is unable to meet his tax obligations, then the taxman can simply force the sale of said property, recouping any outstanding bills.


    Does this seem like a good idea?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Stop the population increasing so much in this country would be a good start.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It is basic economics. Supply and Demand.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Building more is better than stalin "rent controls". A capitalist should be free to set the price of his or her product.

    Letting agents? maybe if tenants were nicer some landlords would deal direct eh?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bill_Gates)
    Building more is better than stalin "rent controls". A capitalist should be free to set the price of his or her product.

    Letting agents? maybe if tenants were nicer some landlords would deal direct eh?
    In my experience some of the lettings agencies (bigger chains in particular) are just in it to rinse both the landlord and the tenant for everything they've got. Our landlord changed agencies because they were expensive and not meeting their contractual obligations, and the agency tried to charge her a fee for leaving them. Needless to say she told them where to go.

    I see no reason why a tenant should pay approx £100 in fees for reference checks when it costs the agency close to nothing to perform them.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    Thats what Labour are now proposing under Jeremy Corbyn: rent increases will be tightly controlled and agent fees will be scrapped.

    http://www.labour.org.uk/issues/detail/renting
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bill_Gates)
    Building more is better than stalin "rent controls". A capitalist should be free to set the price of his or her product.

    Letting agents? maybe if tenants were nicer some landlords would deal direct eh?
    or perhaps if it functioned more like a proper market and no-risk profits were less excessive, landlords would be forced to think twice about employing such pointless middlemen :unsure:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    The problem is that demand exceeds supply. We can either encourage greater supply (i.e. build more) or reduce demand. The latter is tricky because everyone needs to live somewhere, the only real way is to lower the population, or at least restrain its increase, which is a whole political mess I don't want to drag up.

    Rent caps and restricted fees do neither. They've been tried before and do not work. They restrict supply further and prevent investment in rental property, leading to shortages and dereliction. Even a socialist economist is quoted as saying “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”

    Building really is the only feasible way to tackle the problem. Generally I would characterise those who oppose it as selfish home-owners who quite enjoy the effects of restricted supply on their house-price.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by myblueheaven339)
    In my experience some of the lettings agencies (bigger chains in particular) are just in it to rinse both the landlord and the tenant for everything they've got. Our landlord changed agencies because they were expensive and not meeting their contractual obligations, and the agency tried to charge her a fee for leaving them. Needless to say she told them where to go.

    I see no reason why a tenant should pay approx £100 in fees for reference checks when it costs the agency close to nothing to perform them.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I agree with that but landlord and tenant are both free not to employ/choose those companies.

    Takes the hassle off them but most won't deal with tenants are some are rather unpleasant and child like.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bill_Gates)
    I agree with that but landlord and tenant are both free not to employ/choose those companies.

    Takes the hassle off them but most won't deal with tenants are some are rather unpleasant and child like.
    Probably easier for those with a portfolio of properties, rather than those with one rental property and a full time job of their own, but a valid point


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    London has the most jobs out of any other place in the UK. Why else would people commute from the Isle of Wight, Doncaster, Lille, York or even Newcastle to work in London? It's not because they enjoy it.

    This is the underlying issue, and so far, policy makers either sought to build houses (increase supply) in London or extend the commuter belt outwards (decrease demand). Even though both options are just short-term reliefs, they do work at least for a short time, unlike rent caps where it's likely to make the problem worse.

    The ideal solution to the housing crisis is to encourage employers to have economic activity in places that are not London.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Because left wingers haven't got the balls to reduce immigration
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    This seems to me to be tackling the symptom rather than the cause.

    Rent caps and restricting agents' fees would be a nice start, not just building more and more concrete monstrosities.
    Ummm, because it's the exact thing that's needed in the crisis? The need is for more affordable housing, however the Tories' definition of affordable housing seems to be any property worth up to £450,000. Only a mass social housing building scheme with the scrapping of the right-to-buy scheme will cure this.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Gears265)
    Because left wingers haven't got the balls to reduce immigration
    Despite the fact that the left wingers haven't been in parliament since 1974?
    It's been Conservative all the way until 1997 when the right wing New Labour took over, then the ConDem gov in 2010, and now the Tories again.

    Oh joy.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    It is supply and demand, economics the population increases and puts more demand on housing.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.