The Conservative Party

My son bought a newbuild in York a couple of months ago - ex-renter - cost - £230k for an end of terrace 2 bedroom. I read earlier that the proposed changes to stamp duty is just 1.6% of the cost of the average UK house sale. Less than £5k.

I bought the house where I live nearly 30 years ago - at that time it was about 2.5 times my annual salary. Houses on my street are now going for nearly 7 times the salary I was on when I retired 4 years ago. All the stamp duty change does is reward those already owning property particularly at the higher end. The biggest barrier to buying and selling is the disparity between incomes and prices - which is only getting wider. The answer is reduce prices or massively increase wages both of which are electoral and economic suicide
I agree with most of what you say, apart from the answer.
The. Answer is a large-scale one and two bedroom house building programme on ideally brownfield sites, publicly funded and publicly owned, with the requirement for builder's to employ apprentices in each trade initially and then either apprentices or in three or four years, those that have came through the apprenticeship programme.
This will give young people a sense of worth, lowering youth unemployment and subsequent mental health issues which are a drain on our NHS, it will reduce demand on rental properties, thus lowering the price landlords can charge, lowering the cost of housing benefit and meaning the value of housing will drop (not as lucrative for the buy to let market), meaning three bedroom houses are more affordable as first time HOMES for young families.
The initial cost would be high, but the money saved through the lower housing benefit costs, and mental health issues amongst our next generation would fairly quickly turn to be at worst cost neutral.
 
I agree with most of what you say, apart from the answer.
The. Answer is a large-scale one and two bedroom house building programme on ideally brownfield sites, publicly funded and publicly owned, with the requirement for builder's to employ apprentices in each trade initially and then either apprentices or in three or four years, those that have came through the apprenticeship programme.
This will give young people a sense of worth, lowering youth unemployment and subsequent mental health issues which are a drain on our NHS, it will reduce demand on rental properties, thus lowering the price landlords can charge, lowering the cost of housing benefit and meaning the value of housing will drop (not as lucrative for the buy to let market), meaning three bedroom houses are more affordable as first time HOMES for young families.
The initial cost would be high, but the money saved through the lower housing benefit costs, and mental health issues amongst our next generation would fairly quickly turn to be at worst cost neutral.
To be opposed by NIMBYs - aka homeowners who complain about lack of new infrastructure but quite like the value of their house to be kept high by scarcity.
 
To be opposed by NIMBYs - aka homeowners who complain about lack of new infrastructure but quite like the value of their house to be kept high by scarcity.
Sadly too many of our current elected representatives are involved in buying to let's which is why I can't see this happening.
An FOI as to how many in the Commons and Lords gain from rental properties would be very interesting
 
To be opposed by NIMBYs - aka homeowners who complain about lack of new infrastructure but quite like the value of their house to be kept high by scarcity.
Having to deal with these horrible cunts locally.


Selfish, churlish cunts who like living somewhere nice but don’t want other people to benefit from it. Only interested in themselves. If new houses are going to be built, why shouldn’t they be built where people will want to live? And is a nice place to live.

Fucking selfish lowlife.
 
I agree with most of what you say, apart from the answer.
The. Answer is a large-scale one and two bedroom house building programme on ideally brownfield sites, publicly funded and publicly owned, with the requirement for builder's to employ apprentices in each trade initially and then either apprentices or in three or four years, those that have came through the apprenticeship programme.
This will give young people a sense of worth, lowering youth unemployment and subsequent mental health issues which are a drain on our NHS, it will reduce demand on rental properties, thus lowering the price landlords can charge, lowering the cost of housing benefit and meaning the value of housing will drop (not as lucrative for the buy to let market), meaning three bedroom houses are more affordable as first time HOMES for young families.
The initial cost would be high, but the money saved through the lower housing benefit costs, and mental health issues amongst our next generation would fairly quickly turn to be at worst cost neutral.


Using the same apprentices to modernise and refurbish empty and derelict properties (where possible) both residential and commercial
 
Having to deal with these horrible cunts locally.


Selfish, churlish cunts who like living somewhere nice but don’t want other people to benefit from it. Only interested in themselves. If new houses are going to be built, why shouldn’t they be built where people will want to live? And is a nice place to live.

Fucking selfish lowlife.
There is an issue with the lack of infrastructure planning when it comes to population increase and building new homes in this country.

There is a lack of thought and planning around the impact on road networks and traffic congestion, access to parking in any existing infrastructure and no new parking infrastructure, lack of new and widening public transport links, as well as pressure on the access to hospitals, doctors, dentists, Police, fire service, schools, child care etc., pressures on refuse collection and processing, water demand from existing reservoirs that are only suitable in size for the population of a few decades ago, electricity demand when we’re not drilling our own fossil fuels at a rate to compensate not buying from Russia and not keeping up with Green energy sources at the rate the population is increasing who need it… and on and on and on…

Everything seems to just be a case of ‘well, the population is increasing so build more homes’ (and even then we aren’t building at a rate the population is increasing at), instead of ‘let’s stop the population increasing’.

People move to quiet villages because they don’t want to live in towns. They like tranquility and living in green open areas, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People move to towns because they don’t like the hustle and bustle of cities, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People with with genuine concerns are seen as a nuisance rather than their issues being valid.
 
There is an issue with the lack of infrastructure planning when it comes to population increase and building new homes in this country.

There is a lack of thought and planning around the impact on road networks and traffic congestion, access to parking in any existing infrastructure and no new parking infrastructure, lack of new and widening public transport links, as well as pressure on the access to hospitals, doctors, dentists, Police, fire service, schools, child care etc., pressures on refuse collection and processing, water demand from existing reservoirs that are only suitable in size for the population of a few decades ago, electricity demand when we’re not drilling our own fossil fuels at a rate to compensate not buying from Russia and not keeping up with Green energy sources at the rate the population is increasing who need it… and on and on and on…

Everything seems to just be a case of ‘well, the population is increasing so build more homes’ (and even then we aren’t building at a rate the population is increasing at), instead of ‘let’s stop the population increasing’.

People move to quiet villages because they don’t want to live in towns. They like tranquility and living in green open areas, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People move to towns because they don’t like the hustle and bustle of cities, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People with with genuine concerns are seen as a nuisance rather than their issues being valid.

As of 2024, there are approximately 265,061 long-term empty homes in the UK. Additionally, there are over 998,000 empty homes in England alone, a figure that has been steadily rising over the last five years.


This does not take into account the number of empty commercial properties that could be converted.
 
Having to deal with these horrible cunts locally.


Selfish, churlish cunts who like living somewhere nice but don’t want other people to benefit from it. Only interested in themselves. If new houses are going to be built, why shouldn’t they be built where people will want to live? And is a nice place to live.

Fucking selfish lowlife.

they are appalled that their kids have to move away because there is no affordable housing in the area. But when you say ok we'll build some its "no...no not there. It will affect my view and the value of my house"
 
There is an issue with the lack of infrastructure planning when it comes to population increase and building new homes in this country.

There is a lack of thought and planning around the impact on road networks and traffic congestion, access to parking in any existing infrastructure and no new parking infrastructure, lack of new and widening public transport links, as well as pressure on the access to hospitals, doctors, dentists, Police, fire service, schools, child care etc., pressures on refuse collection and processing, water demand from existing reservoirs that are only suitable in size for the population of a few decades ago, electricity demand when we’re not drilling our own fossil fuels at a rate to compensate not buying from Russia and not keeping up with Green energy sources at the rate the population is increasing who need it… and on and on and on…

Everything seems to just be a case of ‘well, the population is increasing so build more homes’ (and even then we aren’t building at a rate the population is increasing at), instead of ‘let’s stop the population increasing’.

People move to quiet villages because they don’t want to live in towns. They like tranquility and living in green open areas, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People move to towns because they don’t like the hustle and bustle of cities, they don’t want their areas filling with houses and more people. People with with genuine concerns are seen as a nuisance rather than their issues being valid.
The reason everything falls behind is because the councils aren't resourced properly and changes in council tax don't cover even the bare minimum of what's needed.

Let's say they build 500 homes on a new estate. The council tax will bring in what £100,000-£300,000 per year extra income to the council? Millions are needed to build just one school so where does the shortfall come from? Multiply this by numerous new estates and you need even more schools and even more money that you haven't got.

The council tax system desperately needs reform. National government is struggling but national government just borrows to keep the country going. Councils don't have this luxury, they get what they raise and they get what they're given and if that's not enough to fulfil their basic obligations then they just don't fulfil those obligations.
 
Sadly too many of our current elected representatives are involved in buying to let's which is why I can't see this happening.
An FOI as to how many in the Commons and Lords gain from rental properties would be very interesting
I think someone already compiles declarations of MPs who are landlords. But that wouldn't show specifically HMOs. Not that HMOs are intrinsically a bad idea.

Still:

 
Having to deal with these horrible cunts locally.


Selfish, churlish cunts who like living somewhere nice but don’t want other people to benefit from it. Only interested in themselves. If new houses are going to be built, why shouldn’t they be built where people will want to live? And is a nice place to live.

Fucking selfish lowlife.
To a certain degree i agree but if you turn a hamlet into village or a village into a town it may no longer be such a nice place. Im not sure the countries housing stock problem will be solved by property developers earning a wad from building on Wilmcote.

Anyhow less people less concrete more countryside.
 
I think someone already compiles declarations of MPs who are landlords. But that wouldn't show specifically HMOs. Not that HMOs are intrinsically a bad idea.

Still:


In the post war era ( a place so many people want to go back to because they think times were golden ) you lived at home, got married young and if you were lucky rather than live with one set of parents you rented a room in a house so we have a long tradition of HMO's.

If you were dead lucky you were able to move into one of the millions of council homes that were being built for rent ( something some people have been conditioned to think is a bad idea )
 
In the post war era ( a place so many people want to go back to because they think times were golden ) you lived at home, got married young and if you were lucky rather than live with one set of parents you rented a room in a house so we have a long tradition of HMO's.

If you were dead lucky you were able to move into one of the millions of council homes that were being built for rent ( something some people have been conditioned to think is a bad idea )
I'm not sure people (other than Thatcherites) thought municipal housing was a bad idea. She even persuaded people that it was a good idea to sell them cheap to tenants to boost the "home-owning democracy", without realising that the people who bought them would go on to sell them to private landlords, who are now turning them into HMOs. It was essentially theft from the councils who'd built the houses (and thus from taxpayers).

That, and abolishing the rates, making millions for wealthy landowners, mean she's responsible for much of our current housing crisis. Plus killing off state-run training for the construction industry.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top