House price propping up goes national

[minestrone]

As long as house prices remain stable the government is correct to help at the bottom of the market if it is dome correctly and the numbers they are quoting look to be reasonable.

With average salaries and average house prices just now coupled with no banks lending to meet the 2 we face a real possibility that in 10 years time the vast majority of 30 somethings will not be paying off a house, then that knocks into savings and pensions 20 years down the line.

The generational house buying lag that we could sleep walk into could be worse for the country that labour's house price boom. (and I do blame Labour for the potential problems we could face in the next 50 years)

I think all credit to the conservatives for looking beyond the quick fixes that labour went for.

EDIT: all credit to the coalition.

[Doggy Styles]

"The buyer would have to put up 5% of the cost, while the government and home builder would both put up 10%. "

So they buyer would still need to find 85% mortgage - not easy at present I reckon.

As I understood it from the radio this morning, this should say that the government and home builder would EACH put up 10%. That would leave the buyer to find 75% rather than 85%.

Still not easy, but easier.

But I might have been dreaming.

[PAH]

As long as house prices remain stable ...

I had a vision of Brownstuff saying "no more boom and bust" when reading that. Trying to manufacture a false stability is not viable long term.

Besides, why have stability at the top of the bubble, why not the bottom?

Housing and food should be protected from profiteering. Let the prices crash to their normal affordable level, where young first time buyers can afford starter homes on minimum wage, then have the prices fixed to inflation. Affordable housing so we can spend more on other stuff, where they can make all the profit they want.

[Sysman]

I cannot really see 10,000 first time houses making any impact on the nations house prices and these houses will not increase in value because of the funding. The nation needs a leveling house prices over the next 10 or 20 years and I do not see it as a problem to help some in the community while that goes on, after all it was Labour's fault they cannot buy a house and this Government quite explicitly sets itself out as a Government to cure the problems of the last.

No different to what Thatcher did.

From what I saw in the eighties a lot of those first time buyer places were new build flats which the buyers then couldn't get rid of if they wanted to move to a bigger place or relocate for work. Did you know that (unlike the US), you can't sell a house with negative equity unless you can stump up the cash to cover the shortfall?

If you want a mobile workforce you really shouldn't lock a load of first time buyers into their first location.

[Sysman]

As I understood it from the radio this morning, this should say that the government and home builder would EACH put up 10%. That would leave the buyer to find 75% rather than 85%.

Still not easy, but easier.

But I might have been dreaming.

But the builder is surely going to work that 10% into the asking price.

Anyone see the slight flaw here?

[PAH]

But the builder is surely going to work that 10% into the asking price.

Much like the car manufacturers bumped their prices up by a few grand when the scrappage scheme was announced.

[minestrone]

I had a vision of Brownstuff saying "no more boom and bust" when reading that. Trying to manufacture a false stability is not viable long term.

Besides, why have stability at the top of the bubble, why not the bottom?

Housing and food should be protected from profiteering. Let the prices crash to their normal affordable level, where young first time buyers can afford starter homes on minimum wage, then have the prices fixed to inflation. Affordable housing so we can spend more on other stuff, where they can make all the profit they want.

House prices are certainly not going to go up by any great amount. THe banks cannot supply the capital and the fruit loops are no longer running the country.

Cameron will certainly do everything humanly possible to stop house prices going down he wants to protect his voters from losing their unearned wealth. If it starts going bad for them he is out and he knows that.

Really the greatest hold on house prices staying the same is the vast majority of capital rich UK home owners who will rather not sell for less than what it was worth at the near high, they will take a drop but not a substantial one, they will be the glue thay keeps the house prices the same. The recession has not really hit these people.

True there will be plenty of public sector workers getting sent to the dole queue but if you believed their press they could never afford a house in England anyway so screw their moaning soggy arses.

But really if we kicked out the bobs we could get 60,000 UK/EU based IT workers back in employment and onto a housing market which would be far greater than this 'initiative'

[minestrone]

From what I saw in the eighties a lot of those first time buyer places were new build flats which the buyers then couldn't get rid of if they wanted to move to a bigger place or relocate for work. Did you know that (unlike the US), you can't sell a house with negative equity unless you can stump up the cash to cover the shortfall?

If you want a mobile workforce you really shouldn't lock a load of first time buyers into their first location.

We do not tend to get these crazy boom and bust cycles like England because our conveyancing system is, well 'fit for purpose'. Once the deal is done that it it, you cannot go in later and chuck in more money like a drunk man at a poker game. The volatility and insecurity in your system creates a volatile and insecure housing market. There has never been a sustained period of negative equity in Scotland and that is down to the agreement at offer stage being made by lawyers which they cannot back out from.

[minestrone]

Anyway as it only covers England I don't know why I am bothered.

I suppose he has kept booze and fags the same so we are happy as well.

[hyperD]

But the builder is surely going to work that 10% into the asking price.

Anyone see the slight flaw here?

Yes. Another inflated, non free market - once again due to government interference in order to appease a particular voting demographic and keep the self-serving politicos in the elitist manner that they think they are entitled to.

The unintended consequence of so called government "good intentions", particularly prevalent amongst the virulent "socialists".

Without addressing the reasons behind the spike: supply/demand/restrictive planning/injection of cheap cash flooding the market/low interest rates/speculation/higher relative rentals/currency devaluation/social encouragement and the constant government paranoia knowing that if the housing market collapses to more realistic levels of valuation, the economy will tank to 1970's levels of production.

Yet another concrete point in the argument for less government.

And less Kirsty Soapy Teet-Venk.