The housing crisis is universal. There's been growing inability to build in many countries, as the article readily admits. People can't afford homes across the world: USA, Canada, Australia, even China, where supply isn't a problem per se. The article should then address this global phenomenon rather than conclude it is a "political problem", suggesting it is some kind of peculiar ideology exported out of Britain.
So China has an overbuilding problem, right? To the point of demolishing apartment blocks, etc. How does this marry up? Is it the age old problem of building too much in suburbs people don't want to actually live in? Or the old problem of new build apartments being too expensive for most people, so require a bubble?
Why Britain doesn’t build
131–140 of 520 posts
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#132This is an interesting political trap for the ruling Conservatives that they have made for themselves. The traditional Conservative voter is a home-owner. So you might be a rabid socialist in your youth, but once you get a job, save up for a deposit, and buy your own home, you eventually transition to become yet another middle-aged Tory voter. That pipeline is now broken - young people are unable to save up for their…
Is this a bug or a feature? If the young (the workers) cannot afford to buy their own houses, because the old want to hold on to the value, how can we expect them to be able afford to pay for the welfare state and to take care of the old?
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#133The same basic thing prevents action on climate change.
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#134I find the economic reductionism in housing planning really irritating. It's not like other public utility functions, but it is damn close to a fundamental and is included in human rights declarations. What kind of state throws up it's hands and claims "it can't" fix housing when states can do precisely that? Thatcher's revolution in council housing is a cesspit of counterfactual outcomes. It made individual househol…
It’s the whole western world at the same time. The same policies, the same social outcomes. It makes me question whether there is any real democracy; did we all just happen to make the exact same decisions in lock step since the 70s by incredible coincidence? And it’s not as if the eventual negative outcomes of housing costs continually outstripping wage growth weren’t obvious and growing year on year. Who is actuall…
There is will, and there is will.
Pretending that this doesn't apply to whole societies and that today's secular societies are not driven mostly by a deterministic mechanism consisting of human nature combined with the environment (technology + physical world) is a fool's act, and the ubiqiotus internet commenter attitude. Man yelling at the clouds, clouds of human nature and environment.
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#135I find the economic reductionism in housing planning really irritating. It's not like other public utility functions, but it is damn close to a fundamental and is included in human rights declarations. What kind of state throws up it's hands and claims "it can't" fix housing when states can do precisely that? Thatcher's revolution in council housing is a cesspit of counterfactual outcomes. It made individual househol…
It’s the whole western world at the same time. The same policies, the same social outcomes. It makes me question whether there is any real democracy; did we all just happen to make the exact same decisions in lock step since the 70s by incredible coincidence? And it’s not as if the eventual negative outcomes of housing costs continually outstripping wage growth weren’t obvious and growing year on year. Who is actuall…
So yes, this is all something that is politically solvable in the west. We just need a unified legislative recipe, and strong advocacy. Other lobbying groups manage to get through very unpopular legislation. Why not for something that would actually help?
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Something cannot both be a good investment and accessible to all. Roads are a perfect example of a good investment that is accessible to all. It's called a "common good", and it exists.
OP means something more like "a security which appreciates on average faster than inflation", AKA an asset I can purchase and hold and sell later for more than I paid for it+improvements in real terms.
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#137There are 100 ways we could solve this. And 100 groups, one to veto each way. So nothing will be done, it's the bystander effect. The same basic thing prevents action on climate change.
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Something cannot both be a good investment and accessible to all. Roads are a perfect example of a good investment that is accessible to all. It's called a "common good", and it exists.
Who's out here speculating on roads?
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
The state does need to make houses to provide for lower paid people who do critical jobs.
Which jobs are critical? What would happen if those people decided to take higher paid but less "critical" jobs?
Re: Why Britain doesn’t build
#140So the article claims that the housing construction boom that ended at the second WW led to a massive stock of housing, which has since declined due to planning issues, leading to a shortage of housing and therefore a rise in prices. This does not hold up statistically. 1939: 11.3 million dwellings in the UK, population 47.9 million people = 4.2 people per dwelling today: 27 million dwellings in the UK, population 67…
what do you mean? it makes perfect sense given the definition of household that it'll be extremely similar to the number of houses. The ratio you're talking about is exactly a reduction in the average number of people per household.