UK Politics VI - Will Britain Steir to Karmer Waters?

[EnglishEdward]

The article Samson quotes contradicts itself.

How can Britain lead the world if Australia has a higher rate?

 

[Gorbles]

When describing a race, the race leaders are generally referred to as a group, not a specific individual.

 

[aelf]

But is there any study proving that building new houses would increase the number of houses, or are you just acting in bad faith to support your claim ?

You think this is funny, but if many new houses are snapped up by speculators, an increase in the number of houses does not actually result in the same increase in the number of houses for rent or purchase by normal people who just need somewhere reasonable to live.

And if the speculators are pricing normal people out in a cosmopolitan city, guess who does end up renting and buying their properties? Rich foreigners - immigrants, in other words. Or tourists staying apartments-turned-AirBnBs.

 

[Lexicus]

But is there any study proving that building new houses would increase the number of houses, or are you just acting in bad faith to support your claim ?

You're grasping toward part of the point here. If the housing stock remains static while you add more people prices will go up, all other things equal. But whose fault is it that the housing stock is remaining static in this scenario? Are you and others suggesting it is impossible to construct new housing at a rate that can accomodate current levels population growth (whether that growth is from immigration or natural increase)? If so, why do you think this is?

 

[Yeekim]

But whose fault is it that the housing stock is remaining static in this scenario? Are you and others suggesting it is impossible to construct new housing at a rate that can accomodate current levels population growth (whether that growth is from immigration or natural increase)? If so, why do you think this is?

So why does supply not increase to meet the rising demand?
I can think of:
- shortage of land (this one resource is hard-capped after all);
- zoning and construction codes being costly and hard to navigate (those codes exist for good reasons though);
- speculators artificially driving prices up?

 

[Farm Boy]

If white British people were actually having enough babies to grow the population, would you or anyone else be blaming parents for the high cost of housing?

Yes. Constantly.

It's an area people get accused of being selfish for investing in the common future of man.

 

[EnglishEdward]

So why does supply not increase to meet the rising demand?
I can think of:
- shortage of land (this one resource is hard-capped after all);
- zoning and construction codes being costly and hard to navigate (those codes exist for good reasons though);
- speculators artificially driving prices up?

Different answers apply in different places and there are other answers.

Regarding the UK

(1) Self interested financial capitalists like high house prices and control the politicians to prevent the problem being addressed.

(2) Malthusianism thinking there is no point in building all over our green and pleasant land to accommodate nearly million extra
people a year; because that'd encourage growth to increase to perhaps two million a year and the UK cannot feed them anyway.

 

[Lexicus]

So why does supply not increase to meet the rising demand?
I can think of:
- shortage of land (this one resource is hard-capped after all);
- zoning and construction codes being costly and hard to navigate (those codes exist for good reasons though);
- speculators artificially driving prices up?

In the US zoning is a big part of it, and I disagree that most actually-existing zoning in the US exists for good reasons. A large majority of residential land in the US is zoned for single-family homes only, meaning that it is illegal to construct a duplex let alone an apartment building. The main reason for this type of zoning historically was to maintain racial segregation. Today the zoning reality has led to a situation where urban politics tend to be dominated by the incumbent property owners whose economic interest is overwhelmingly in preventing any change to the status quo (thus limiting or even preventing entirely the construction of new housing).

Land is another issue, not so much a shortage per se but the fact that the amount of land in urban areas is essentially fixed, and rents can't really fall lower than what's required to turn a profit on the purchase and development of a parcel of land. Basically the problem with housing is the same general problem that Adam Smith identified in the 18th century: that the owners of capital (housing stock in this case) have every incentive to restrict the supply of it, and in the US the local authorities that control things like zoning are near-universally under the control of the owners of housing, who want to restrict the supply.

Given this background, which I've barely scratched the surface of, it begins to look very absurd indeed to say that immigration increases housing costs.

 

[Gorbles]

Shelter condemns ‘shocking’ 14% rise in homelessness across England

Charity says soaring private rents, rising evictions and lack of affordable social housing are to blame

www.theguardian.com

Shelter condemns ‘shocking’ 14% rise in homelessness across England

Charity says soaring private rents, rising evictions and lack of affordable social housing are to blame

Should probably do something about these root causes, I reckon.

 

[Zardnaar]

Breakdown of UK voters.

Well off traditionalist 12%
Left Behind Patriots 15%
Apolitical Centrists 17%
Middle Britons 26%
Soft Left Liberals 14%
Urban Progressives 16%

 

[Yeekim]

Given this background, which I've barely scratched the surface of, it begins to look very absurd indeed to say that immigration increases housing costs

Choking the supply alone would not increase prices if there was no increase in demand; an increase in demand alone would not increase prices if supply was not being choked.

It is a political choice which bit of the equation one would want to address/adjust, but you can make a pro-immigration case without calling an obviously true observation "absurd".

 

[Gorbles]

Choking the supply alone would not increase prices if there was no increase in demand

Why would it not?

 

[EnglishEdward]

Choking the supply alone would not increase prices if there was no increase in demand; an increase in demand alone would not increase prices if supply was not being choked.

It is a political choice which bit of the equation one would want to address/adjust, but you can make a pro-immigration case without calling an obviously true observation "absurd".

Demand for housing and the supply of housing could remain stable.

But that would not necessarily result in price stability.

That is because banks can create money through issuing loans.

If they increase the amount of money for housing, other things being equal house prices rise.
If they decrease the amount of money for housing, other things being equal house prices drop.

But the current UK government is not planning to regulate the banks in this matter.

Instead they have invited the bankers in to regulate the government.

Bankers to scrutinise public sector spending to 'bring private sector into the heart of government'

The government is braced for difficult decisions as it said all spending must contribute to its stated aims or it won't be funded. It's the first line-by-line spending review in 17 years.

news.sky.com

 

[Lexicus]

Choking the supply alone would not increase prices if there was no increase in demand; an increase in demand alone would not increase prices if supply was not being choked.

It is a political choice which bit of the equation one would want to address/adjust, but you can make a pro-immigration case without calling an obviously true observation "absurd".

This last sentence is funny because what I would say is you can just be racist towards immigrants without making bogus economic arguments. In the US we have had many studies looking at the economic impacts of immigration and virtually all have found that immigrants drive demand which stimulates the economy and this stimulation greatly outweighs the effect of e.g. increasing the supply of labor thus creating downward pressure on wages. The only reason this is an issue with housing specifically is the supply choke, which in turn would be a problem even if the population were growing from natural increase instead of from immigration.

All this immigration increases housing prices discourse boils down to the "hey mate, that foreigner wants to take your cookie" meme. It's a distraction from the real issues and a distraction from the real people who are to blame for high costs of housing.

We may see this play out in real time over the next decade or so: if Trump restricts immigration to the extent that he has promised, housing prices will not decline as a result.

 

[Zardnaar]

This last sentence is funny because what I would say is you can just be racist towards immigrants without making bogus economic arguments. In the US we have had many studies looking at the economic impacts of immigration and virtually all have found that immigrants drive demand which stimulates the economy and this stimulation greatly outweighs the effect of e.g. increasing the supply of labor thus creating downward pressure on wages. The only reason this is an issue with housing specifically is the supply choke, which in turn would be a problem even if the population were growing from natural increase instead of from immigration.

All this immigration increases housing prices discourse boils down to the "hey mate, that foreigner wants to take your cookie" meme. It's a distraction from the real issues and a distraction from the real people who are to blame for high costs of housing.

We may see this play out in real time over the next decade or so: if Trump restricts immigration to the extent that he has promised, housing prices will not decline as a result.

And if population growth via immigration outstrips per capita growth?

Prices do go down eventually they get to a point demand drops and speculation and moon beams leads to the bubble popping.

The demand is the primary driver of prices. Made worse by various laws and speculation. No demand though pop goe's the bubble.


Happens over abd over.

 

[Senethro]

And if population growth via immigration outstrips per capita growth?

Well? What if it does? Would you like to explore this hypothetical

Edit: Yowch, quick drawn by the edit!

 

[Gorbles]

And if population growth via immigration outstrips per capita growth?

The articles I've been providing are factual, founded on actual evidence, providing citations. Hypotheticals are a whole other ball game.

"what if" the moon was made of cheese?

"what if" Wallace and Gromit were actually real? Would they visit said cheese moon? They did on television!

"what if", man?

Do you have anything else to contribute? You couldn't even prove that immigration drove house prices beyond "well people wanting houses drives supply", which, yeah, duh. So does naturalised citizens wanting houses. So does landlords restricting houses on the market. To focus on immigration requires evidence that immigration is equally important, or more important, than any other factor. To make that claims requires said evidence. You haven't provided it. All you keep doing is saying "people wanting it makes it", and other Sensible Posters have been nodding along and snarking all the while (shout out to Akka).

It's silly. It should not be tolerated, which is why I reply. This kind of "what if immigrants" shtick is nothing more than basic fearmongering, and I invite you to reflect on why it's the only thing you seem to like going on about in here. At the very least, you should be concerned about the other factors impacting house prices (and rent, as per my second article). But weirdly, you don't seem to be.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well? What if it does? Would you like to explore this hypothetical

It's happened but I'm not allowed to post about it.

UK last I heard a week or so ago the economy was effectively stagnant.

Not sure on the current rate of immigration atm.

High house prices also suck miney out of the real economy. It's being spent on mortgages and rent vs retail, hospitality etc.

 

[Zardnaar]

The articles I've been providing are factual, founded on actual evidence, providing citations. Hypotheticals are a whole other ball game.

"what if" the moon was made of cheese?

"what if" Wallace and Gromit were actually real? Would they visit said cheese moon? They did on television!

"what if", man?

Do you have anything else to contribute? You couldn't even prove that immigration drove house prices beyond "well people wanting houses drives supply", which, yeah, duh. So does naturalised citizens wanting houses. So does landlords restricting houses on the market. To focus on immigration requires evidence that immigration is equally important, or more important, than any other factor. To make that claims requires said evidence. You haven't provided it. All you keep doing is saying "people wanting it makes it", and other Sensible Posters have been nodding along and snarking all the while (shout out to Akka).

It's silly. It should not be tolerated, which is why I reply. This kind of "what if immigrants" shtick is nothing more than basic fearmongering, and I invite you to reflect on why it's the only thing you seem to like going on about in here. At the very least, you should be concerned about the other factors impacting house prices (and rent, as per my second article). But weirdly, you don't seem to be.

Population growth drives demand doesn't matter where that population growth is coming from.

But the entire "west" pretty much has a sib 2.1 replacement rate. UK is 1.75.

Population growth is purely immigration. UK had 4 million in 11 years.

House prices do go down bubbles pop.

Immigration is goid for the econo. You need sone. Every western nation needs it. Some countries need a lot of it on a massive scale (Japan, China, South Korea, Germany).

So you can keep playing the racist card it's the default counter attack based on ideology.
The high immigration countries however need to turn the tap down at least short term.

UK may be in that situation. AFAIK no one's sat down and said we need XYZ and here is the number we can absorb in housing, BHS etc. That work has not been for afaik.

Thise numbers nay also be different eg we can build 200k houses a year that's enough for 50k immigrants, NHS can handle 30k, schools can handle 80k. These numbers are all made up they're purely a example but has anyone actually done that work?

 

[Gorbles]

Population growth drives demand doesn't matter where that population growth is coming from.

But the entire "west" pretty much has a sib 2.1 replacement rate. UK is 1.75.

Population growth is purely immigration. UK had 4 million in 11 years.

House prices do go down bubbles pop.

You're just repeating yourself.

EDIT

Immigration is goid for the econo. You need sone. Every western nation needs it. Some countries need a lot of it on a massive scale (Japan, China, South Korea, Germany).

So you can keep playing the racist card it's the default counter attack based on ideology.
The high immigration countries however need to turn the tap down at least short term.

UK may be in that situation. AFAIK no one's sat down and said we need XYZ and here is the number we can absorb in housing, BHS etc. That work gas not been for afaik.

Thise numbers nay also be different eg we can build 200k houses a year that's enough for 50k immigrants, NHS can handle 30k, schools can handle 80k. These numbers are all made up they're purely a example but has anyone actually done that work?

You're still repeating yourself.

Prove that immigration is equal to or greater than other factors affecting supply. Or keep playing the "immigration" card and wonder why people make assumptions about your motivations. C'est la vie.