5 ms·

I'm not sure that posting the population growth figures over four years and adding a snarky remark about babies owning houses proves anything whatsoever other t

by smcl 3y ago

I'm not sure that posting the population growth figures over four years and adding a snarky remark about babies owning houses proves anything whatsoever other than your own ignorance and disinterest on the matter in hand. You'd need to also think about not only the number of homes built, but the kind of homes built, the location they're built in, the cost at which they're built, the incomes of those who need to be housed and where they and their jobs are located compared to the houses. And to cap it all you'd probably want to look at it over a meaningful time period because I don't think anyone thinks the current situation with UK housing started in 2019. Or you can save us all the bother and say what you really mean - you either don't care or you're quite happy with the current situation.

blitzar 3y ago
I already posted the numbers from 1950 to date, both from the perspective of population growth and house building. The numbers are clear, perhaps you were not interested enough to look or were unable to understand. > Or you can save us all the bother and say what you really mean. Its pretty obvious that there is a change in the size of the household over the 73 years I cited, which everyone is comfortable ignoring. The number of homes built is clearly not the dominant issue, but the kind of homes built, the location they're built in, the cost at which they're built, the incomes of those who need to be housed and where they and their jobs are located compared to the houses is the issue. I could magic up 10million studio appartments in the geographic center of the country - it would make absolutely fuck all difference to the price of a family home in Manchester or Bristol (it would probably make them even more expensive as it would drain all the house building resources of the country). It would however, fully satisfy and surpass the targets of those that "care or are unhappy with the current situation" and their caring solutions. Actually a large number of issues did start just after 2019. Something happened and the demands and tastes changed drastically nearly overnight, suddenly the kind of homes built, the location they're built in for the prior 10 years was not what everyone wanted. Will it last? Will it flip back overnight? I dont know. Obviously I am not as knowledgeable or as interested as you are.

by smcl 3y ago

blitzar 3y ago

I already posted the numbers from 1950 to date, both from the perspective of population growth and house building. The numbers are clear, perhaps you were not interested enough to look or were unable to understand. > Or you can save us all the bother and say what you really mean. Its pretty obvious that there is a change in the size of the household over the 73 years I cited, which everyone is comfortable ignoring. The number of homes built is clearly not the dominant issue, but the kind of homes built, the location they're built in, the cost at which they're built, the incomes of those who need to be housed and where they and their jobs are located compared to the houses is the issue. I could magic up 10million studio appartments in the geographic center of the country - it would make absolutely fuck all difference to the price of a family home in Manchester or Bristol (it would probably make them even more expensive as it would drain all the house building resources of the country). It would however, fully satisfy and surpass the targets of those that "care or are unhappy with the current situation" and their caring solutions. Actually a large number of issues did start just after 2019. Something happened and the demands and tastes changed drastically nearly overnight, suddenly the kind of homes built, the location they're built in for the prior 10 years was not what everyone wanted. Will it last? Will it flip back overnight? I dont know. Obviously I am not as knowledgeable or as interested as you are.