Housing

[amateur51]

Was it William Blake (I always forget!) who said words to the effect that the fool who persists in his folly will become wise?

Something of the kind started to happen, I believe, in the 1960s, with the coming together of the developing edge of ecological science and influences from Buddhism and Taoism: not just on the Beatles, who were influenced as much as influencing, but from a percipient foresight among some of the best-read of that generation in the "free West" that happiness did not reside in consumerism, and consumerism was the new version of capitalism that would win the working class from enacting damaging, anti-competitive behaviour through industrial action. The rich & powerful couldn't have that happening, for goodness' sakes: where would it all end? with everyone dropping out, turning on and getting unproductively creative?



Not as I see it. The "ownership" could be in the hands of a bank as a sort of collective Trust, guarded under democratic control through electable officials who could be literally "brought to account". It wouldn't cost nearly as much as the duplication afforded by having numerous large banks such as the unaccountable ones still in existence that caused the 2008 crash, and no more compete on some Adam Smithian level playing field than do the multinational oligopolies in other areas that combine operations worldwide to keep prices high.

Great post S_A - made me feel quite nostalgic.

[ahinton]

Not as I see it. The "ownership" could be in the hands of a bank as a sort of collective Trust

Ah, yes - banks and Trusts - those most honourable and trustworthy organisations, as all too well we know!

guarded under democratic control through electable officials who could be literally "brought to account".

Goodwin, Diamond et al have already been "brought to account"; has that really made the situation much better?

It wouldn't cost nearly as much as the duplication afforded by having numerous large banks such as the unaccountable ones still in existence that caused the 2008 crash, and no more compete on some Adam Smithian level playing field than do the multinational oligopolies in other areas that combine operations worldwide to keep prices high.

How would you assess that cost? Clearly, were all residential property not already in local authority hands to be acquired by local authorities, the affordability burden upon them for the acquisition alone (let alone subsequent management, maintenance, insurance and admistrative costs) would surely be intolerable; where would they borrow the kinds of sums to enable them to do this, even under a compulsory purchase situation? On top of that, were such compulsory purchase facility to be put into law, can you imagine the millions of legal challenges to it and the cost of meeting them all? Who would pay for that and with what?

[Serial_Apologist]

How would you assess that cost? Clearly, were all residential property not already in local authority hands to be acquired by local authorities, the affordability burden upon them for the acquisition alone (let alone subsequent management, maintenance, insurance and admistrative costs) would surely be intolerable; where would they borrow the kinds of sums to enable them to do this, even under a compulsory purchase situation? On top of that, were such compulsory purchase facility to be put into law, can you imagine the millions of legal challenges to it and the cost of meeting them all? Who would pay for that and with what?

I gave as good an answer as I could to that question in my #54. I don't see any solutions to the housing problem for the forseeable future; if it gets much worst than it already is we will probably see a return of mass squatting.

[amateur51]

I gave as good an answer as I could to that question in my #54. I don't see any solutions to the housing problem for the forseeable future; if it gets much worst than it already is we will probably see a return of mass squatting.

I agree unless we return to the 'proper' fuunction of 'mutual' Building Societies, by offerring as good a rate of return to investors at the best that banks offer plus some other financial incentive; and the funds thus raised being used to fund public ownership and/or forms of mutual ownership. Lordy we might even re-invent local Housing Associations (did y'hear me Eric?!) instead of the arms of the funders that they have become.

[ahinton]

I gave as good an answer as I could to that question in my #54. I don't see any solutions to the housing problem for the forseeable future; if it gets much worst than it already is we will probably see a return of mass squatting.

At least we agree that the current situation is untenable, with fewer and fewer people being able to afford either to borrow to buy their homes or to rent them because their values give rise to unaffordable rents. I don't know what can be done unless and until there is a balance between the value of housing and people's incomes, which is certainly far from the case right now.

[amateur51]

At least we agree that the current situation is untenable, with fewer and fewer people being able to afford either to borrow to buy their homes or to rent them because their values mane unaffordable rents. I don;t know what can be done unless and until there is a balance between the value of housing and people's incomes, which is certainly far from the case right now.

The answer surely lies, in part at least, in increasing supply through local non-traditional methods as I have outlined.

[ahinton]

The answer surely lies, in part at least, in increasing supply through local non-traditional methods as I have outlined.

The answer to another equally important question lies, in part at least, in increasing supply, as you say, partly by new builds and partly by renovations - namely that of making more housing available - but, laudable and necessary thought that is, unless it's done very rapidly on an absuloutely massive scale (which simply isn't possible with the best will in the world), it won't answer the question of creating a sudden reduction in property prices to the point at which their purchase and rental becomes more widely affordable. Even local authorites cannot control the values of the properties that they own and let to tenants; those are driven by a market in which they, as property purchasers, are as much a part as any other property purchasers.

[amateur51]

A national working party on social housing creation is what's needed, looking at need, what's available, what needs renovating, what needs building, examples of local initiatives/ good practice, financial models, self-build, land provision, design etc etc.

[ahinton]

A national working party on social housing creation is what's needed, looking at need, what's available, what needs renovating, what needs building, examples of local initiatives/ good practice, financial models, self-build, land provision, design etc etc.

If such an entity could reasonably be trusted to investigate and report honsetly and constructively, then yes, this could indeed be a good start; recognising that there really is a problem would be the only thrust for such a move, I think.

[amateur51]

If such an entity could reasonably be trusted to investigate and report honsetly and constructively, then yes, this could indeed be a good start; recognising that there really is a problem would be the only thrust for such a move, I think.

It's how the Housing Association movement started in the 1960s in response to Cathy Come Home, Rachmanism and the race riots.

Sadly they were eventually persuaded by the lure of lucre to throw in their lot directly with Government and so we must start again.

[ahinton]

It's how the Housing Association movement started in the 1960s in response to Cathy Come Home, Rachmanism and the race riots.

Sadly they were eventually persuaded by the lure of lucre to throw in their lot directly with Government and so we must start again.

OK - but where would you envisage the money coming from to acquire every piece - or at the very least the majority - of residential property not already in the hands of local authorities or housing associations? - or are you only advocating a smallish increase in the number of instances of non-owner-occupied housing rather than replaing most or all of it with local authority and housing association ownership?

[amateur51]

OK - but where would you envisage the money coming from to acquire every piece - or at the very least the majority - of residential property not already in the hands of local authorities or housing associations? - or are you only advocating a smallish increased in the number of istanes of non-owner-occupied housing rather than replaing most or all of it with local authority and housing association ownership?

Believing as I do that housing its people is a government's responsibility, I say the money should come from government through taxation plus contributions from mutual Building Societies. We might even be truly imaginative & establish a new form of Savings Bond purely for housing develoment.

[ahinton]

Believing as I do that housing its people is a government's responsibility, I say the money should come from government through taxation plus contributions from mutual Building Societies. We might even be truly imaginative & establish a new form of Savings Bond purely for housing develoment.

But unless my assumption that only a very tiny proportion of UK residential property is currently owned by local authorities and housing associations, how on earth could increased taxation hope to fund the many squillions of pounds required to acquire all the rest that isn't? If mutual Building Societies (there aren't so many of them left and they're mostly not all that large, are they?) were to "contribute", they'd have to attract sufficient investors' funds in order to enable them to do so; likewise, the kind of Savings Bond that you suggest would have include either the possibility of attracting growth (if a pure investment) or interest (if a deposit fund) to encourage investors to invest in it - and all this money would likeise have tgo come from somewhere.

I don't believe that, with the best will in the world, a government could possibly afford to house all its citizens, especially if is to continue to provide healthcare, education and the rest for them; I share your belief to the extent that a government should take reasonable responsibility to try to house those citizens that cannot afford to house themselves, but it's not clear how easily that can be done either.

[amateur51]

But unless my assumption that only a very tiny proportion of UK residential property is currently owned by local authorities and housing associations, how on earth could increased taxation hope to fund the many squillions of pounds required to acquire all the rest that isn't? If mutual Building Societies (there aren't so many of them left and they're mostly not all that large, are they?) were to "contribute", they'd have to attract sufficient investors' funds in order to enable them to do so; likewise, the kind of Savings Bond that you suggest would have include either the possibility of attracting growth (if a pure investment) or interest (if a deposit fund) to encourage investors to invest in it - and all this money would likeise have tgo come from somewhere.

I don't believe that, with the best will in the world, a government could possibly afford to house all its citizens, especially if is to continue to provide healthcare, education and the rest for them; I share your belief to the extent that a government should take reasonable responsibility to try to house those citizens that cannot afford to house themselves, but it's not clear how easily that can be done either.

Well we'll never get anything done if you persist with this Eeyore-ish attitude ahinton - to the bottom of the garden with you and eat some worms!

We need to set up a Housing Commission urgently and test some of the these ideas out and generate some new ones.

And yes there will be a seat for you from which you can suck your teeth, shake your head and wail ".. we'rrrre doomed ah tell ye, arrrll doomed!"

[ahinton]

Well we'll never get anything done if you persist with this Eeyore-ish attitude ahinton - to the bottom of the garden with you and eat some worms!

That's not my attitude at all, which is instead a realistic (I think) one based on the affordability question to the extent that government and housing associations alone could not hope to be able to attract sufficient funds from the publc to finance a project whose principal thrust would be the acquisition of most or all residential property not already in local authority and housing association ownership - no more, no less!

We need to set up a Housing Commission urgently and test some of the these ideas out and generate some new ones.

Nothing wrong with that; a very good idea, indeed, which would demonstrate that government is at least prepaed to try to take the situation seriously.

And yes there will be a seat for you from which you can suck your teeth, shake your head and wail ".. we'rrrre doomed ah tell ye, arrrll doomed!"

Since I am saying nothing of the kind and do not expect or intend to start doing so, the taxpayer and the housing association investor could at least be spared the additional cost of that piece of furniture as it will be surplus to requirements!