Construction output down 11.6% y-o-y August
Discussion
crankedup said:
Derek Chevalier said:
crankedup said:
Its our problem as the construction industry is so deeply in-twinned with a huge variety of consumer goods. + if the Government had not 'interfered' in the banking malaise we would all be bankrupt now, sometimes Governments have to take a hands on lead to help keep the Country afloat. We need a freed-up housing market for all the obvious reasons, if developers sit on land because they paid too much money for it I suggest they are in for a long wait to recoup that outlay. IMHO the Government needs to inject some pace into the social house building, house people and get builders back into work. Letting the economy adjust without Government guidance is not an option this time around. The Country is in far too much financial difficulty to take this option.
crankedup said:
sometimes Governments have to take a hands on lead to help keep the Country afloat
But all we are doing is shifting debt from one group of people to another??crankedup said:
We need a freed-up housing market for all the obvious reasons
The only way to do this is to let the housing market adjust, cease forebearance, make banks realise their bad debt and raise interest rates. What method did you have in mind?crankedup said:
if developers sit on land because they paid too much money for it I suggest they are in for a long wait to recoup that outlay.
So why is that the Government's problem?crankedup said:
IMHO the Government needs to inject some pace into the social house building, house people and get builders back into work
Who is going to pay for this?crankedup said:
The Country is in far too much financial difficulty to take this option.
And taking on more debt is the only option?1. Shifting debt from one group to another is the corner post of commercial democracy and capitalism.
2. I completely disagree with allowing the housing market to adjust to its market level. Although I am in favour of a controlled unwinding during the next decade or two. My reasons for this is simply allowing the market to freefall will cause untold bankrupt families and businesses holding debt against property.
3.Manipulation of the housing market could be achieved by several interferences, increase social house build, improve home ownership financial incentives to first time buyers, free up planning reg's, more use of high tech building methods and materials.
4. Taking on more debt is not the answer of course but imaginative thinking behind spending budgets currently available is. More in work less on dole and more taxes.
All I see as a reward for our austerity is ever growing unemployment, after the temps and part time jobs are taken out of the stats, dropping of tax revenues, less consumer spending, and the spiral going down in ever quickening circles. Lets not forget that the banks have about 30/40% accountability to the situation we find ourselves in, more taxation in that direction in the shorter term.
Nowhere does it mention Governments bailing out a particular industry because it overpaid for materials (land in this case) - it does say "competitive markets", which to me would imply the companies that cannot survive fold, and competitors scooping up their land for a viable price.
2. "I completely disagree with allowing the housing market to adjust to its market level. Although I am in favour of a controlled unwinding during the next decade or two"
These two sentences appear to contradict each other. Surely allowing it to unwind over the next two decades it the least worst option?
3. This manipulation (re FTB and financial incentives) isn't solving anything, it is a hair of the dog solution. What in particular is the current issue with planning regs? I don't have an issue with hi tech building/materials as long as their is a plausible payback.
4. Agreed on getting more people in work, but the Government shouldn't be favouring certain industries - they should strive to ensure that all business thrive in this country.
I don't see any austerity - but I hear a lot of talk about it. Any examples?
Derek Chevalier said:
I don't see any austerity - but I hear a lot of talk about it. Any examples?
Does this term 'austerity' not refer to pensionpot town hall shinypants on six figures making binmen redundant? Or overpaid braid getting rid of front line coppers after polishing their buttons?turbobloke said:
Does this term 'austerity' not refer to pensionpot town hall shinypants on six figures making binmen redundant? Or overpaid braid getting rid of front line coppers after polishing their buttons?
No it refers to, for example, funding cuts at the EA in their front line positions leading to longer delays on (very necessary) approvals, thus delaying the start of schemes.Deva Link said:
going South sat nav was telling me the M6 through Brum was queuing and I could see it was (this was maybe 11AM) so I had to use the Toll and coming home around 1PM the M6 North of Birmingham up to where I turned off at J16 was moving but very busy both ways.
Where the hell is everyone going in the middle of the day?
The M6 north of Brum queues every day, at junction 8, and there are permanent signs about it further north. It is not something new, been like it for years. Where the hell is everyone going in the middle of the day?
vonuber said:
turbobloke said:
Does this term 'austerity' not refer to pensionpot town hall shinypants on six figures making binmen redundant? Or overpaid braid getting rid of front line coppers after polishing their buttons?
No it refers to, for example, funding cuts at the EA in their front line positions leading to longer delays on (very necessary) approvals, thus delaying the start of schemes.It may be as per your post, it's also along the lines of my comment. Here are two pipeline examples.
Trafford Council moves to fortnightly bin collections
Jennifer Williams
October 24, 2012
Trafford has become the last town hall in the region to move towards fortnightly bin collections.
Council bosses are consulting on the proposal as part of a £34m cuts package. The move – which would save £800,000 a year – would see grey general waste bins collected every two weeks instead of weekly. Green bins, which hold kitchen and food waste, would be collected as usual. The plan, which forms part of a two-year proposed budget, would make Trafford the last council in Greater Manchester to cut its general refuse collections.
The change is part of a savings package revealed by the council last week. It includes axeing meals on wheels, closing ten children’s centres and making around 200 staff redundant.
This Is Staffordshire
09 August 2012
Police in Staffordshire are opposing new plans which will allow officers to be made redundant. Chief constables will be given the powers to remove frontline officers to help balance the books under controversial Government reforms.
turbobloke said:
No? Yes actually.
It may be as per your post, it's also along the lines of my comment. Here are two pipeline examples.
I don't disagree with that - I would say the cuts have been exceedingly cack handed. Cutting funding for Councils (from a construction view this is btw) has been exceedingly short sighted.It may be as per your post, it's also along the lines of my comment. Here are two pipeline examples.
There are two ways this can go - abandon all regulation as per assessing the building regs above, which will be disastrous - or watch as schemes take even longer for approvals, as the technical staff who knew what they were doing have all been fired or moved on. I am already getting direct experience of this as outlined above.
What will happen is probably a lot more corruption to enable things to progress quicker, along with corner cutting etc.
Derek Chevalier said:
crankedup said:
Derek Chevalier said:
crankedup said:
Its our problem as the construction industry is so deeply in-twinned with a huge variety of consumer goods. + if the Government had not 'interfered' in the banking malaise we would all be bankrupt now, sometimes Governments have to take a hands on lead to help keep the Country afloat. We need a freed-up housing market for all the obvious reasons, if developers sit on land because they paid too much money for it I suggest they are in for a long wait to recoup that outlay. IMHO the Government needs to inject some pace into the social house building, house people and get builders back into work. Letting the economy adjust without Government guidance is not an option this time around. The Country is in far too much financial difficulty to take this option.
crankedup said:
sometimes Governments have to take a hands on lead to help keep the Country afloat
But all we are doing is shifting debt from one group of people to another??crankedup said:
We need a freed-up housing market for all the obvious reasons
The only way to do this is to let the housing market adjust, cease forebearance, make banks realise their bad debt and raise interest rates. What method did you have in mind?crankedup said:
if developers sit on land because they paid too much money for it I suggest they are in for a long wait to recoup that outlay.
So why is that the Government's problem?crankedup said:
IMHO the Government needs to inject some pace into the social house building, house people and get builders back into work
Who is going to pay for this?crankedup said:
The Country is in far too much financial difficulty to take this option.
And taking on more debt is the only option?1. Shifting debt from one group to another is the corner post of commercial democracy and capitalism.
2. I completely disagree with allowing the housing market to adjust to its market level. Although I am in favour of a controlled unwinding during the next decade or two. My reasons for this is simply allowing the market to freefall will cause untold bankrupt families and businesses holding debt against property.
3.Manipulation of the housing market could be achieved by several interferences, increase social house build, improve home ownership financial incentives to first time buyers, free up planning reg's, more use of high tech building methods and materials.
4. Taking on more debt is not the answer of course but imaginative thinking behind spending budgets currently available is. More in work less on dole and more taxes.
All I see as a reward for our austerity is ever growing unemployment, after the temps and part time jobs are taken out of the stats, dropping of tax revenues, less consumer spending, and the spiral going down in ever quickening circles. Lets not forget that the banks have about 30/40% accountability to the situation we find ourselves in, more taxation in that direction in the shorter term.
Nowhere does it mention Governments bailing out a particular industry because it overpaid for materials (land in this case) - it does say "competitive markets", which to me would imply the companies that cannot survive fold, and competitors scooping up their land for a viable price.
2. "I completely disagree with allowing the housing market to adjust to its market level. Although I am in favour of a controlled unwinding during the next decade or two"
These two sentences appear to contradict each other. Surely allowing it to unwind over the next two decades it the least worst option?
3. This manipulation (re FTB and financial incentives) isn't solving anything, it is a hair of the dog solution. What in particular is the current issue with planning regs? I don't have an issue with hi tech building/materials as long as their is a plausible payback.
4. Agreed on getting more people in work, but the Government shouldn't be favouring certain industries - they should strive to ensure that all business thrive in this country.
I don't see any austerity - but I hear a lot of talk about it. Any examples?
2. I am not suggesting that Government should bail out the housing sector, this is you overstating my POV. I have said the Government should further promote and assist growth within the housing sector or words to that affect. Either way those house-builders sitting on expensive assets will be in danger of having to merge perhaps in order to keep afloat, or worse go bust perhaps. I see no problem with a long term policy of unwinding used in conjunction with a short term stimulus. If the industry is allowed a continual slow drift downwards that is not advantageous to any one or business. I have said that I am not in the industry but see it as no different to any other businesses holding too much stock they cannot unload.
3. I also dislike artificial stimulus within private businesses from Government, in fact its very close to the wind within E.U. regulation I think. However, exceptional circumstances call for exceptional actions. Those industries favoured are those most likely to lead us all out of this mess and likely to offer employment as they recover.
4. I note austerity by looking/reading/ at the High Street, one of the best barometers of National wealth. Also the expensive luxury brands of goods,sales are slipping,all signs of austerity. Its true though that the real austerity will not affect people until April 2013. Also the bookings of holidays, it can be seen the trend is for cheaper holidays within U.K. and less abroad.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff