4 ms·

who the hell do you think is paying Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing

by mafribe 10y ago

who the hell do you think is paying Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling. should already have property Why? What's wrong with renting? As I said in a previous post, Chancellor Merkel in Germany rents. I'm advocating giving out fewer mortgages I'm advocating building enough dwellings, not doctoring with symptoms like restriction on mortgages, rent control, draconian building codes, zoning laws and the like. I find it supremely baffling that the obvious solution seems to be deeply unpopular.

Nursie 10y ago
>> Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling This is less frequently the case in the UK, as the inflated market keeps people renting for longer. >> Why? What's wrong with renting? A lot, if that's not where you want to be, and have seen the market mutate in the space of a few years from somewhere that was inclusive for most people earning a decent wage, to something reserved for few, or those who already have property. >> I'm advocating building enough dwellings, Good luck with that. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" when easing up on certain mortgage categories has been a major cause. I haven't mentioned those other methods, I have no opinion on them.
- mafribe 10y ago
  keeps people renting for longer. That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. A lot, This has nothing to do with renting vs owning, or even with second mortgages, but is primarily because supply of dwellings did not keep up with demand. The UK, especially the greater London area, has seen a lot of immigration, and on top of that there is the ongoing reduction in family size. So more and more dwellings are needed, but supply has not kept up. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings.
  - Nursie 10y ago
    >> That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. So what? People who don't want to move a lot find they must keep paying someone else's mortgage as they can't get their own. >> Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings. If buying up housing is made, by whatever means, financially less attractive to those who already own homes then of course this tackles demand for purchases and allows more people who are forced into renting the ability to buy their own home.
    - mafribe 10y ago
      as they can't get their own. As I said, it's important that not everybody who might be able to afford monthly rates gets a mortgage, for otherwise you'd get too many defaults, leading to financial instability. And very few tenants rent for the whole duration (typically 25-30 years) of a mortgage. Finally nobody needs to own their dwelling -- renting is fine. I rented most of my life, and so did German chancellor Merkel. someone else's mortgage As I've pointed in previous posts, that's fine, for they provide a valuable service, that can be summarised as a "risk transfer". That needs compensation. Finally you seem to think that there is a difference between a first and second mortgage: the first being given by magic first-mortgage-fairies out of the goodness of the lender's heart and the second out of sheer greed to oppress people like you. Well, I recommend a quick calculation how much you overpay on the property if you get a first mortgage, vis-a-vis a cash purchase. forced into renting the ability For some bizarre reason you (like many others I have discussed this subject with) are unwilling to admit that the price of dwellings whether paid by rent or mortgage repayment, is primarily (indeed almost exclusively) determined by supply/demand; the solution to high prices is to build more. It's almost like there is some deep-seated investment in the status-quo that is needed to stabilise your world-view. I recommend to let go of your deep seated resentment and instead learn about the social function of credit.

by mafribe 10y ago

Nursie 10y ago

>> Typically a collection of ever changing tenants, few of whom are in the position to manage, or even interested in managing a long-term investment like a dwelling This is less frequently the case in the UK, as the inflated market keeps people renting for longer. >> Why? What's wrong with renting? A lot, if that's not where you want to be, and have seen the market mutate in the space of a few years from somewhere that was inclusive for most people earning a decent wage, to something reserved for few, or those who already have property. >> I'm advocating building enough dwellings, Good luck with that. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" when easing up on certain mortgage categories has been a major cause. I haven't mentioned those other methods, I have no opinion on them.

mafribe 10y ago
keeps people renting for longer. That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. A lot, This has nothing to do with renting vs owning, or even with second mortgages, but is primarily because supply of dwellings did not keep up with demand. The UK, especially the greater London area, has seen a lot of immigration, and on top of that there is the ongoing reduction in family size. So more and more dwellings are needed, but supply has not kept up. Restriction of mortgage is not "doctoring the symptoms" Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings.
- Nursie 10y ago
  >> That's perfectly compatible with moving a lot. So what? People who don't want to move a lot find they must keep paying someone else's mortgage as they can't get their own. >> Yes it is, because it neither reduces demand for, nor increases supply of dwellings. If buying up housing is made, by whatever means, financially less attractive to those who already own homes then of course this tackles demand for purchases and allows more people who are forced into renting the ability to buy their own home.
  - mafribe 10y ago
    as they can't get their own. As I said, it's important that not everybody who might be able to afford monthly rates gets a mortgage, for otherwise you'd get too many defaults, leading to financial instability. And very few tenants rent for the whole duration (typically 25-30 years) of a mortgage. Finally nobody needs to own their dwelling -- renting is fine. I rented most of my life, and so did German chancellor Merkel. someone else's mortgage As I've pointed in previous posts, that's fine, for they provide a valuable service, that can be summarised as a "risk transfer". That needs compensation. Finally you seem to think that there is a difference between a first and second mortgage: the first being given by magic first-mortgage-fairies out of the goodness of the lender's heart and the second out of sheer greed to oppress people like you. Well, I recommend a quick calculation how much you overpay on the property if you get a first mortgage, vis-a-vis a cash purchase. forced into renting the ability For some bizarre reason you (like many others I have discussed this subject with) are unwilling to admit that the price of dwellings whether paid by rent or mortgage repayment, is primarily (indeed almost exclusively) determined by supply/demand; the solution to high prices is to build more. It's almost like there is some deep-seated investment in the status-quo that is needed to stabilise your world-view. I recommend to let go of your deep seated resentment and instead learn about the social function of credit.