UK Politics VI - Will Britain Steir to Karmer Waters?

You're just repeating yourself.

So you don't see the problem based on ideology? I provided the numbers thoe people have to live somewhere.
. NHS is stressed why add more numbers to that.

Infrastructure you tak in 4 million peopke that's more stress on the electrical grid. Last I heard there's stress there as well dye to capacity.

It's not just purely about the housing.

If your quality of life starts taling a hit and infrastructure and services start getting overloaded your citizens quality of life is getting worse.

Sure you xan say we need to build more but if it isn't (higher taxes and government spending not being done) that's just shifting the blame.

Perception is also reality. Even if everything is hunky dory if the voters are saying less immigration (doesn't natter why) and you're not delivering that opens the door for the right.

Progressives make up 16% of the UK population. Not all of them support immigration either. I posted the numbers earlier.
 
immigrants drive demand which stimulates the economy
It's curious that the proponents of unfettered capitalism, a system which, by their own definition, relies on unceasing growth, would try to make the market stop growing by making it smaller i.e. breaking free trade deals and stopping the movement of, uhm, employees.
 
It's curious that the proponents of unfettered capitalism, a system which, by their own definition, relies on unceasing growth, would try to make the market stop growing by making it smaller i.e. breaking free trade deals and stopping the movement of, uhm, employees.

The elite love it for that exact reason.
 
So you don't see the problem based on ideology? I provided the numbers thoe people have to live somewhere.
. NHS is stressed why add more numbers to that.

Infrastructure you tak in 4 million peopke that's more stress on the electrical grid. Last I heard there's stress there as well dye to capacity.

It's not just purely about the housing.

If your quality of life starts taling a hit and infrastructure and services start getting overloaded your citizens quality of life is getting worse.

Sure you xan say we need to build more but if it isn't (higher taxes and government spending not being done) that's just shifting the blame.

Perception is also reality. Even if everything is hunky dory if the voters are saying less immigration (doesn't natter why) and you're not delivering that opens the door for the right.

Progressives make up 16% of the UK population. Not all of them support immigration either. I posted the numbers earlier.
You keep repeating the same things. You are, seemingly, literally incapable of a) recognising other factors in house prices and b) weighting them with evidence.

"shifting the blame" is nonsense projection. You're the one blaming immigration! How much has Labour in the UK committed to building new homes? Do you even know?

No, it's just "Zardnaar blames immigration again". Your argument, and I'm being charitable calling it one, is nothing more than that.
 
It's not an argument, just an assertion. Can we move on already? I for one support Arwon's motion.
 
You keep repeating the same things. You are, seemingly, literally incapable of a) recognising other factors in house prices and b) weighting them with evidence.

"shifting the blame" is nonsense projection. You're the one blaming immigration! How much has Labour in the UK committed to building new homes? Do you even know?

No, it's just "Zardnaar blames immigration again". Your argument, and I'm being charitable calling it one, is nothing more than that.


Happy?


You'll probably dismiss it anyway.
 
Happy?


You'll probably dismiss it anyway.
Did you, uh, read it? Some way into the article:
Firstly, this study used by the government is on the more extreme edge of the impact of migration on house prices. The Migration Observatory, point to three studies which suggest a relationship between immigration and housing is closer to 1% rise in immigration levels leading to a 1% rise in house prices and rents.

With a UK population of 67 million net migration of around 300,000 per year (0.4%) could be putting up annual prices by 0.4% per year. Not much, but it would be compounded over time.

Also, there are other things to bear in mind, in the UK average household sizes have fallen to 2.34. However, recent migrants tend to have lived in greater housing density.

Also, on a very local level, studies suggest that highly concentrated levels of immigration can actually lead to lower house prices in those local authorities because it leads to high-income homeowners moving out. On the other hand, migration has been greatest in London, but London is also one of the regions with the most inelastic supply.
And then there's this bit:
A much bigger factor than immigration in driving house prices in recent years has been ultra-low interest rates. Between 2009 and 2022, this distorted the market causing a rise in price-to-income ratios. Despite very weak real income growth in the period 2009-22, house prices soared as mortgages were historically cheap. As interest rates have risen drastically, prices have started to fall, though the modest declines, suggest both interest rates take time to have effect, and other factors are at play.

Given most of the recent migration end up in the privately rented sector, the impact of migration is bigger in private rents, rather than house prices. It is a real problem that the supply of private rented accommodation is not keeping up with demand. This has led to an increase in both rents and difficulty securing any property.
Thanks for the link I guess! :D
 
Did you, uh, read it? Some way into the article:

And then there's this bit:

Thanks for the link I guess! :D

It said there was an impact.

If you're taking on 600k a year as referenced only building 200k and there's 2.3 people per house the numbers don't stack up though.

That's blatantly obvious. 140k shortfall. You need to build approx 70k more houses or cut immigration by 140k just to stabilize things. To drive prices down the bubble needs to pop or you build more or cut immigration more.
 
It said there was an impact.
Yes, I never said otherwise.

We're going in circles, your own source doesn't agree with you, and ironically after telling me I'd dismiss it you're trying to dismiss it yourself. I'm out of the loop.

Cheers!
 
Yes, I never said otherwise.

We're going in circles, your own source doesn't agree with you, and ironically after telling me I'd dismiss it you're trying to dismiss it yourself. I'm out of the loop.

Cheers!

You cheery picked part of it. And the numbers are right there with per unit and numbers constructed were posted earlier.
 
Yes, I never said otherwise.

We're going in circles, your own source doesn't agree with you, and ironically after telling me I'd dismiss it you're trying to dismiss it yourself. I'm out of the loop.

Cheers!

I mean this is the worst argument ever to get into…but seriously? You asked @Zardnaar to provide evidence multiple times that immigration was linked to housing costs. He has now done so (as I did pages ago).

I don’t think anyone on this thread has claimed that immigration is the dominant factor in rising house prices, but that it is A factor. If we all agree on this, I suggest we leave it there!


Yes, now link immigration to housing costs. Concretely, tangibly, weighted against other known factors.

Y'know, the thing you started this entire tangent about because apparently at some point in the past your ego couldn't take me "lecturing" at you.

Evidence your argument buddy. Should be easy.

You see it's funny because we also have a rent crisis, but rent can't be driven by supply and demand via immigration because our homeless figures cap out at about 400k. That's millions of others in some form of housing. It's almost like the actual root issues are separate, and not actually "dem foreigners" like the Tories or Starmer's Labour like to point at. But Zard knows all this of course, because he's Googled it. He's blaming immigrants for some . . . other, completely unspecified reason.

The article I provided was about housing costs. Don't run away now. Evidence your claim that it's immigration that's driving it.

Not building houses isn't the fault of immigrants now, is it? Like I've said twice now, I already pointed out the lack of housing myself.

Not compared to other factors, unless you can evidence it. Having Google'd it, of course.

Just like you Google'd "do they live in tents in the local park" (bearing in mind I've already cited homeless figures).


Hi Manfred! Does this mean you are concretely claiming that house prices as per my linked article are being driven primarily by immigration?

I'm just clarifying lest I get anything wrong with any assumptions I might make from the extreme amounts of sarcasm your post seems, to my uneducated eye, be emitting.


I appreciate the link, but even with the paywall it doesn't seem to suggest that immigration is driving the costs. In fact, the opening paragraph gives a great counterpoint in that prices soared during the pandemic, when immigration basically crashed.
 
You asked @Zardnaar to provide evidence multiple times that immigration was linked to housing costs.
That isn't what I asked. I don't really have capacity to keep hashing it out, but if you're genuinely interested, shoot me a PM.
 
Basically as long as population growth outstrips supply housing will keep going up in price. I don't think it's toped out

Investors and landlords will keep investing due to that constant pressure.

Unti the bubble bursts.

Short term it's going to keep getting worse until that bubble bursts.

If it wasn't a capitalist system and the numbers were tbe same you would just gave shortages and a waiting list or cram more people into existing housing (higher than 2.3in my link).

Supply is inelastic shortage of construction workers. Industry is at capacity or close to it so "build more houses" isn't an option in the short term.
 
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?
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.
Of course there are multiple factors (one of the most obvious is simply "location" : the most significant price rise is in the cities, while it can actually be pretty low in the countryside). I was mostly, as it was pretty obvious, rolling my eyes at the blatant bad faith about trying to cast a blatant logical chain about increasing demand as some sort of arcane claim needing to be strongly supported by many serious sources.

Though I'd also like to point that land area isn't unlimited, distances don't magically reduce, and just endlessly building more houses will stop working at some point.
It's curious that the proponents of unfettered capitalism, a system which, by their own definition, relies on unceasing growth, would try to make the market stop growing by making it smaller i.e. breaking free trade deals and stopping the movement of, uhm, employees.
Wait, who are the proponents of unfeterred capitalism trying to limit migration rather than support it ?
Because I don't see a lot of them. I rather see many more of the opposite sort of curious : proclaimed anti-capitalists supporting the mass movement of low-cost manpower undercutting the existing workforce, and pro-environmental people supporting an infinite increase in population.
 
the most significant price rise is in the cities, while it can actually be pretty low in the countryside
Not in the countryside in the south of the UK they are not.
 
Close to London.

Cheap in say Brighton or Cornwall.
What? I think Brighton in a hotspot of house prices, including the surrounding countryside. Cornwall is being hit by the second homes/AirBnB thing and has terrible housing issues.
 
What? I think Brighton in a hotspot of house prices, including the surrounding countryside. Cornwall is being hit by the second homes/AirBnB thing and has terrible housing issues.

Maye it's changed recently.

I meant Blackpool not Brighton derp.
 
Top Bottom