Less of a housing issue, more of a cost of living issue.
England worst place in developed world to find housing, says report
Submitted 1 year ago by thehatfox@lemmy.world to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
Comments
florge@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Oneeightnine@feddit.uk 1 year ago
We’ve had a housing issue in the UK since long before the ‘cost of living’ crisis started to affect the middle-classes.
BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 1 year ago
Housing is the single largest cost of living that most people ever face, so yes, it is a housing issue.
zebs@lemmy.world 1 year ago
A world beating housing crisis you say?
DeathWearsANecktie@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Now that’s levelling up!
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Something tells me the English people who said that haven’t been to Canada.
GiveOver@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Canada was included in the report. The article seems to be focussing on the amount of vacant properties, which is 8.2% for Canada and 2.7% for UK
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yeah, I figure Canada probably has more houses (more space) but the prices to buy or let are much worse over there. We’re not far behind, though.
tal@lemmy.today 1 year ago
But renters on Wednesday night issued their own warning that “lots of expensive market-rate housing won’t bring housing costs down to affordable levels for the millions of people trapped in poverty by sky-high rents”.
Sure it will. Housing price is a function of supply and demand, like everything else. If you don’t have enough supply of housing in London for people who want to live in London, then what happens is that housing prices rise until sufficient people are priced out.
If a developer builds new housing, then someone is going to live in it. If that person is living in that housing, then they aren’t living in some other housing in London, which will make that housing more-affordable.
But what if a developer only builds luxury housing and nobody wants to live in it?
A developer has a pretty strong incentive not to build something that nobody actually wants, so that’s unlikely to be a serious problem – their incentive is not to do this. But, sure, assume that happens. Then that developer is going to need to recoup what they can by selling the property for what they can, even at a loss. The parties who invested in that development will wind up covering some of the cost of buying housing for people in London.
Magiccupcake@startrek.website 1 year ago
While the free market should be able to correct the problem, it can’t.
I cant talk specifically about the uk, but in the US many locales have strict zoning regualtions that hamper building medium density cheap housing, perfect for all these people that can’t afford to live where there’s work.
Examples are things like minimum parking requiements, driveway setbacks, and limitations on multifamily homes.
Aux@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You’re contradicting yourself. There’s no free market when you have zoning regulations. That’s the issue in Britain as well - too much red tape everywhere and too many fees to get any permissions. Builders are not allowed to build as much as they want or as much as people need. The housing crisis is created artificially by the government.
BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Yes people prices go up and people get priced out that is the bloody problem!
Biohazard@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Canada?
Kezza596@feddit.uk 1 year ago
My rent is 60% of my income. That along with the cost of living crisis, I’m stuck in a debt spiral.
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 1 year ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
About a quarter of private renters in the UK are also “overburdened” by housing costs – spending more than 40% of income, compared with just 9% in France and 5% in Germany, according to OECD data.
Labour has said it might release greenbelt for building when it is “dilapidated, neglected scrubland” and will “put social and genuinely affordable housing at the very heart of our plans to jump-start the housebuilding industry”.
Stewart Baseley, the executive chair of the HBF said the figures are “a wake-up call, demonstrating the urgent need to act now to prevent us falling even further behind”.
The study found the UK has the lowest number of homes built since 1980 of any of Spain, France, Portugal, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary.
The construction industry has been frustrated by the government’s stop-start approach to planning reforms, as it has weighed the need for more building against opposition from voters in Tory constituencies concerned about over-development.
By contrast the share of the population living with leaking roofs, damp or rot in Poland was 6% and 12% in Germany, figures from Eurostat show.
The original article contains 686 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 73%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
buzziebee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
10% of Tory donations come from housebuilders. They are probably happy keeping demand artificially high and are paying to keep it that way.
twinnie@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Nobody should be talking about building on the greenbelt, that’s the point of the greenbelt. Where I used to live in London the council was constantly trying to get permission to build on the greenbelt when 500m away there was a huge plot of dilapidated concrete, I guess where there used to be a factory or something. But they were constantly talking about the greenbelt.
Darkard@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Housing developers love greenbelt because they don’t have to pay for the rubble and land clearing of brown belt land.
_TheNardDog_@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Okay, hear me out here. Maybe we should stop treating housing as a commodity and allowing companies and individuals to accumulate large property “portfolios”?
Because this is the fucking problem; homes are not commodities to hold in a portfolio, they’re homes for people to live in.
The UK seems to have this as a recurring problem, we are the only modern economy that has a fully privatised water supply, something which is essential for human existence. Housing is a basic right, yet we allow massive profit to take priority over that.
Aux@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That’s not the issue though.
wildeaboutoskar@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Arguably it is. The root cause is the same - treating basic necessities as investment vehicles
peter@feddit.uk 1 year ago
This is a good idea but I have no idea how they would implement that in law
buzziebee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Could be done fairly easily via the tax system. Each additional property you own increases the income tax on any rent and the capital gains tax when selling it. Bump up council tax for empty properties massively too and the market should correct itself with minimal direct intervention.
Set it up so having a second home means paying more for it, having 3 or 4 or 10 means it’s not profitable to keep it at all.
irmoz@reddthat.com 1 year ago
Abolish landlording completely
florge@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Put a cap on the maximum value a house can be based on bedrooms / floorspace? It’ll never happen since those in power won’t want their million pound houses suddenly being worthless.