Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Britain doesn’t build

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 520 posts

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#431

Post by anthonypasq »

Auracle wrote: post #276
P_I_Staker wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can have just as much fun at the TGI Friday's at your local strip mall as you can at the hippest restaurant no one else has ever heard of in Brooklyn. It's just a matter of who you spend that time with, and how you perceive that time, in the Stoic tradition. It's not just about restaurants. I'm not going to be able to go to concerts or events. There will be no specialized stores. Even in the example you gave, m…

How often do people actually go to concerts or events? Why do I need specialized stores if I have the internet? Eating out is expensive and generally not good for you, calorie-wise. Cities are fun, but people fail to realize that rural places are also pretty great. You just need to make your own fun, but you actually have the room (and money) to do so. I can go out in my yard and do archery, target shooting, etc. I l…

classic hackernews shut-in that doesnt understand that people enjoy culture, i go to a concert/show at least once a month and they are the best things i spend my money on.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#432

Post by spaceman_2020 »

Chyzwar wrote: post #148
spaceman_2020 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Politicians and the bureaucratic class have deep investments in real estate 2. Foreign money keeps flooding into western economies to find a safe haven and lack of capital controls. A bulk of it goes into real estate. 3. Elections are largely monopolized by older people who mostly tend to be homeowners. The entire system is rigged against anything that would impact home prices - such as an increase in supply or ch…

Migration to bigger tier one cities is partly to blame. Many young people want to live in NY and rent a shoebox flat for life. They think that they can become Friends protagonists when in fact they become broke and blame government.

At least where I live, the difference in wages between big cities and even tier-2 cities is night and day.

And forget wages, sticking around in small cities is often career suicide. As a young person, you can’t be blamed for wanting McKinsey in NYC on your resume instead of Acme Hardware Store in random town, Idaho.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#433

Post by okeuro49 »

Marazan wrote: post #391
DeathArrow wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It’s even worse because there’s an adult social care crisis, a pension crisis, and in some areas a rundown NHS and school system. So all the incentives are towards not just home ownership but also additional buy-to-let ownership so that those with the means can afford private health care, dentistry, school fees for their kids/grandkids, inheritance for the kids who are priced out of the market, and retirement. It's…

Hi, the Cradle to Grave Welfare state has existed since the 1940s. Were people not willing to work in the 1940s?

There is a problem that the age demographic has changed.

There is the ever increasing problem of more people drawing down state pensions, using the NHS and social care, than there are young tax payers to support them.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#434

Post by P_I_Staker »

Auracle wrote: post #276
P_I_Staker wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can have just as much fun at the TGI Friday's at your local strip mall as you can at the hippest restaurant no one else has ever heard of in Brooklyn. It's just a matter of who you spend that time with, and how you perceive that time, in the Stoic tradition. It's not just about restaurants. I'm not going to be able to go to concerts or events. There will be no specialized stores. Even in the example you gave, m…

How often do people actually go to concerts or events? Why do I need specialized stores if I have the internet? Eating out is expensive and generally not good for you, calorie-wise. Cities are fun, but people fail to realize that rural places are also pretty great. You just need to make your own fun, but you actually have the room (and money) to do so. I can go out in my yard and do archery, target shooting, etc. I l…

Some people have little interest in those things. You've also really only listed solitary activities. Sure you can do some of these things "with people", but it's a far cry from more social activities.

To answer your first question: a lot. There's people that are very different from you, that really don't do well without these interactions. They expect to go out 1-3 times a week or at least monthly. Small area community events can be awkward if you aren't from town, don't know everyone, who all grew up together.

Yeah, you're buddy might come over now and then for target practice. However this is very different from social events city dwellers rely on.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#435

Post by okeuro49 »

brigandish wrote: post #274
lucideer wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The state shouldn't need to build houses (in fact it doesn't; it just uses your tax money to pay private companies to build houses). It should just make the building and zoning rules simple enough that it's possible to make money from building houses and selling them, and let people get on with it. This is the modern wisdom in the west - it's the approach taken by many governments since the Reagan era (not just in…

> Migration is not a new phenomenon; citing it as an excuse for the utter failure of modern housing policy is disingenuous. You say it's a failure but for those who own land or have tenants - including the average homeowner, it's a success. It's also a success for house builders, of course. From [1]: > In total 115 MPs across all parties are landlords, accounting for 18 per cent of the House of Commons. This compares…

> It's in their interests.

More complicated than that. You should try reading Isabel Hardman's book "Why we get the politicians we deserve".

Running for MP can bankrupt you if you haven't got a passive source of income.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#436

Post by imtringued »

DeathArrow wrote: post #372
vogon_laureate wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s even worse because there’s an adult social care crisis, a pension crisis, and in some areas a rundown NHS and school system. So all the incentives are towards not just home ownership but also additional buy-to-let ownership so that those with the means can afford private health care, dentistry, school fees for their kids/grandkids, inheritance for the kids who are priced out of the market, and retirement. It’s a…

>It’s even worse because there’s an adult social care crisis, a pension crisis, and in some areas a rundown NHS and school system. So all the incentives are towards not just home ownership but also additional buy-to-let ownership so that those with the means can afford private health care, dentistry, school fees for their kids/grandkids, inheritance for the kids who are priced out of the market, and retirement. It's…

Working hard doesn't influence housing supply vs demand in real terms at all. In fact it makes it worse because all those hardworking people will demand higher quality housing in exchange for their sacrifice. So end up with more people being unhappy with their current housing, not less.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#437

Post by imtringued »

Lastodon wrote: post #365
bradleyjg wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greed is exactly the right word. There is a flat unwillingness to acknowledge or reason from the fact by so many homeowners that they are sitting on giant, completely unearned windfalls. There’s a huge sense of entitlement around these inflated prices.

It is an unearned windfall, but people deserve to keep their homes. It bears noting that the issue is caused by property investors, not homeowners. How about we go for the individuals that own more than 3 properties and let grandma keep what she earned?

This isn't true. Homeowners vote in favour of policies that benefit landlords as well. It will look like the landlord is conspiring against tenants but landlords hardly have any political representation compared to tenants.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#438

Post by imtringued »

chongli wrote: post #421
CaptainMarvel wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She may have earned the house to some degree (the article outlines a number of government subsidies which make this doubtful), but she definitely didn’t earn the land value increase. I’m reminded of this quote: > Landlords grow rich in their sleep without working, risking or economizing. The increase in the value of land, arising as it does from the efforts of an entire community, should belong to the community and n…

Grandma, living in the same house she’s lived in since 1972, collecting a fixed income pension cheque once a month, is not what I’d describe as a “rich person.” Look instead to the people who own golf courses, sports stadiums, super yachts, private jets and the like.

Everyone knows all property is owned by grandma.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#439

Post by P_I_Staker »

anthonypasq wrote: post #431
Auracle wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How often do people actually go to concerts or events? Why do I need specialized stores if I have the internet? Eating out is expensive and generally not good for you, calorie-wise. Cities are fun, but people fail to realize that rural places are also pretty great. You just need to make your own fun, but you actually have the room (and money) to do so. I can go out in my yard and do archery, target shooting, etc. I l…

classic hackernews shut-in that doesnt understand that people enjoy culture, i go to a concert/show at least once a month and they are the best things i spend my money on.

Yeah, OP is hilariously myopic. Lots of people would jump off a cliff during one of those walks if they had to live like that.

Re: Why Britain doesn’t build

#440

Post by dontlaugh »

klyrs wrote: post #429
WalterBright wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington state just decided that capital gains were not income, and imposed a 7% tax on them. Besides, I don't see how the age demographics in Wa state would be materially different from Britain's.

If you're so fixated on Washington state, you should really learn its history. And also British history. They're very different places with very different politics. You're comparing a flyover state (speaking as somebody born there) to the center of a colonial power. And a 7% flat tax is a trifle .

Exactly. 20% is also very low. Maybe consider complaining when it’s progressive up to 90%.
Post reply on HN