first-time buyers to get 20%
Discussion
"Young first-time buyers in England could buy a house at 20% below the market rate if the Conservatives are re-elected, David Cameron has pledged.
The Conservative leader said the party would build 100,000 new homes, reserved for those under 40 buying their first home.
They would be exempt from some taxes and built on brownfield land already identified for development, he said"
Under the new proposals, the homes would be built on brownfield land which was no longer needed for industrial or commercial use.
Savings from constructing the dwellings on such land would be passed on to the buyers, the Conservatives said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29387866
Since when does a political party build houses?
What about people over 40 and those who have just bought similar houses and are going to see 20% wiped for the value?
how are these savings in construction costs going to be made?
If these properties are going to be 20% under the market value why won't buyers simply flog them on to pocket the 20%?
The Conservative leader said the party would build 100,000 new homes, reserved for those under 40 buying their first home.
They would be exempt from some taxes and built on brownfield land already identified for development, he said"
Under the new proposals, the homes would be built on brownfield land which was no longer needed for industrial or commercial use.
Savings from constructing the dwellings on such land would be passed on to the buyers, the Conservatives said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29387866
Since when does a political party build houses?
What about people over 40 and those who have just bought similar houses and are going to see 20% wiped for the value?
how are these savings in construction costs going to be made?
If these properties are going to be 20% under the market value why won't buyers simply flog them on to pocket the 20%?
Fittster said:
"Young first-time buyers in England could buy a house at 20% below the market rate if the Conservatives are re-elected, David Cameron has pledged.
The Conservative leader said the party would build 100,000 new homes, reserved for those under 40 buying their first home.
They would be exempt from some taxes and built on brownfield land already identified for development, he said"
Under the new proposals, the homes would be built on brownfield land which was no longer needed for industrial or commercial use.
Savings from constructing the dwellings on such land would be passed on to the buyers, the Conservatives said.
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29387866[url]
Since when does a political party build houses?
What about people over 40 and those who have just bought similar houses and are going to see 20% wiped for the value?
how are these savings in construction costs going to be made?
If they were serious amount building enough housing they would have a proper revision to the planning laws in their manifesto. Building on brownfield sites is already encouraged, and there isn't enough of it (if you are not counting gardens as brownfield land!) in the areas people want to live.The Conservative leader said the party would build 100,000 new homes, reserved for those under 40 buying their first home.
They would be exempt from some taxes and built on brownfield land already identified for development, he said"
Under the new proposals, the homes would be built on brownfield land which was no longer needed for industrial or commercial use.
Savings from constructing the dwellings on such land would be passed on to the buyers, the Conservatives said.
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29387866[url]
Since when does a political party build houses?
What about people over 40 and those who have just bought similar houses and are going to see 20% wiped for the value?
how are these savings in construction costs going to be made?
However, he may well be correct in that exempting the new developments from S106 obligations would save a considerable amount(if that is what he is referring to), not sure it would be 20% though.
Fittster said:
Since when does a political party build houses?
They don't. But they do control the environment it is done in hence the ability to help the costs.Fittster said:
What about people over 40 and those who have just bought similar houses and are going to see 20% wiped for the value?
That is not necessarily going to happen, it depends on supply and demand.Fittster said:
how are these savings in construction costs going to be made?
Tax mainly.I don't see why you are wound up about it, it's a scheme, if it happens it may help someone but 90-odd% of people will never notice.
ATG said:
Not so much wealth distribution as just utterly stupid market manipulation.
Why not make the market even more convoluted and even less efficient, eh? Genius.
Maybe, I haven't seen the full plans and I assumed the govt would build the houses and sell them at a loss/break even cost to the buyers.Why not make the market even more convoluted and even less efficient, eh? Genius.
Either way I don't approve. Just cut regulation of house building, allow people to convert offices to flats and let the individual choose how much they want to spend on what.
So we have successive Governments whose policies have vastly contributed to a low wage economy.
An open door policy letting in thousands of relatively poor E.U. peeps.
A population currently undergoing a baby boom.
Housing stock so expensive that many of the younger generation can not afford to buy.
Non existent council housing stock because it was sold off at bargain prices.
Now our Government decides to subsidise further new houses for the under 40's first time buyers.
Forward thinking and long term strategy
An open door policy letting in thousands of relatively poor E.U. peeps.
A population currently undergoing a baby boom.
Housing stock so expensive that many of the younger generation can not afford to buy.
Non existent council housing stock because it was sold off at bargain prices.
Now our Government decides to subsidise further new houses for the under 40's first time buyers.
Forward thinking and long term strategy
MajorProblem said:
Oh new build houses on brownfield sites, you could give me 50% off it wouldn't be enough.
Most new build houses are already at least 20% more expensive and 20% smaller than a 40 year old house on a development from the 60's.20% is no where near enough to get me onto a new build estate.
crankedup said:
So we have successive Governments whose policies have vastly contributed to a low wage economy.
An open door policy letting in thousands of relatively poor E.U. peeps.
A population currently undergoing a baby boom.
Housing stock so expensive that many of the younger generation can not afford to buy.
Non existent council housing stock because it was sold off at bargain prices.
Now our Government decides to subsidise further new houses for the under 40's first time buyers.
Forward thinking and long term strategy
Indeed its all planned to support the status quo; zero forward thinking as to what create a sustainable economy. There is FAR too much wealth tied up in unproductive bricks and mortar. Its unfortunate that it takes a generation to be priced out, or at the least loaded up with debt with little chance to save for old age, but if the realisation is finally dawning on the terminally dim house ramping generation/s then perhaps its a good thing. An open door policy letting in thousands of relatively poor E.U. peeps.
A population currently undergoing a baby boom.
Housing stock so expensive that many of the younger generation can not afford to buy.
Non existent council housing stock because it was sold off at bargain prices.
Now our Government decides to subsidise further new houses for the under 40's first time buyers.
Forward thinking and long term strategy
Im not in favour of this policy because all it will do is push up prices further as developers load the price but we need to be having some serious discussions on resources, industry and population in the UK, not more PR politics.
The other thing I keep hearing that pisses me off is how any policy to help those who simply want a family home goes against the free market... Right, because all the untaxed capital gains and contingent liabilities enjoyed for a couple of generations is free market.
PurpleMoonlight said:
The 'must own' mentality just increases prices.
Is it a "must" though? I think many people would rather own their own home so that they can make changes (such as paint it or get new carpets, install double glazing) without needing to get another person's permission, or run the risk of getting kicked out with 2 months notice, or have to wait weeks for a boiler or a leaking roof to even be checked let alone fixed.The old phrase of "an Englishman's home is his castle" is still pretty apt today. We are a nation that prefers to own it's own home rather than rent. Yes there are countries that have a much higher percentage of renters over home owners, but I'd be interested to see how the laws around landlord and tenant responsibilities compare to those in the UK.
The Tories are realising that my generation is feeling very put-upon, and has been feeling so for a few years now. Massive student debt (I know, I know, people don't HAVE to go to university, but schools are still plugging that as the only option available to people), low wages, high living costs, it's all building up to create a massive political swing. Personally I try to keep an open mind about the future, I'm sure house prices will fall to a more acceptable level, so I'm disinclined to vote Labor or UKIP and I don't like the Lib Dems that much either. Yes I'm worried about my future, I worry I'll never be able to afford a house or have a family. But I simply see my generation as unlucky to finish it's education at a time when the economy fell apart like a souffle.
But listening to a lot of people my age, both in person and online, it becomes obvious that many are torn between voting Labour and voting Lib Dem, in which case you're facing a coalition between those two, with perhaps UKIP getting a bigger chunk of older middle-class voters. They feel under paid and unappreciated by the previous generation, who simply dismiss them as "lazy, ungrateful brats" while telling them that they're going to be funding said previous generation's pensions and they should be grateful for their low-paid job in the service industry.
Will all this come to a head in the approaching General Election? I'm not sure, but if something doesn't improve in the 4 years after then the Election after it is going to be a bigger problem. You're either facing a Labour majority, or as I said a Labour-Lib Dem coalition.
The Tories HAVE to offer something to the under-40's, whether or not this is too little too late remains to be seen.
What bothers me is when people say they can't afford a deposit, my wife and I saved for our deposit by cutting everything, sky tv, smart phones, eating and going out and funny enough we saved up for it...the same with our wedding which cost 14k. The problem is people today have a expectation of entitlement and it should be given to them when really they need to work for it and are unwilling to save up and just say they can't, when they can do the following;
Don't buy a car on finance/lease
Cancel sky
Don't get the latest smart phone
Cut the gym and run in a park instead
Don't go up the pub and restaurants etc
Don't buy a car on finance/lease
Cancel sky
Don't get the latest smart phone
Cut the gym and run in a park instead
Don't go up the pub and restaurants etc
TLandCruiser said:
What bothers me is when people say they can't afford a deposit, my wife and I saved for our deposit by cutting everything, sky tv, smart phones, eating and going out and funny enough we saved up for it...the same with our wedding which cost 14k. The problem is people today have a expectation of entitlement and it should be given to them when really they need to work for it and are unwilling to save up and just say they can't, when they can do the following;
Don't buy a car on finance/lease
Cancel sky
Don't get the latest smart phone
Cut the gym and run in a park instead
Don't go up the pub and restaurants etc
I understand where youre coming from but ultimately there are many factors that are causing a trend to long term renting or high debt/long term mortgages which will continue unless tackled. The affordability multiplies in current statistics dont lie. Sidelining genuinue concerns on ordinary aspirations becuase its still possible for an average couple both working in certain areas of the UK, seems to miss the point. Where is this heading? Do you want to live in a plutocracy? Whats the overall cost to soceity of so much wealth being tied up servicing debt?Don't buy a car on finance/lease
Cancel sky
Don't get the latest smart phone
Cut the gym and run in a park instead
Don't go up the pub and restaurants etc
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff