Will Building More Houses Solve the UK’s Housing Crisis?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 พ.ค. 2023
- NordVPN: nordvpn.com/tldr
Britain is in the middle of a housing crisis. The solution? Well, it seems simple... more houses. So in this video we explain exactly why the UK needs to build more houses and why the government doesn't seem willing to do so
💬 Twitter: / tldrnewsuk
📸 Instagram: / tldrnewsuk
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
🗣 Discord: tldrnews.co.uk/discord
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
TLDR Store: www.tldrnews.co.uk/store
TLDR TeeSpring Store: teespring.com/stores/tldr-spring
Learn About Our Funding: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
TLDR is all about getting you up to date with the news of today, without bias and without filter. We aim to give you the information you need, quickly and simply so that you can make your own decision.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by just a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, following, and backing us on Patreon. Thanks!
![เกิดใหม่ทั้งทีก็เป็นสไลม์ไปซะแล้ว ซีซั่น 3 - ตอนที่ 58 [ซับไทย]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TgNEbYSTY0Y/mqdefault.jpg)
Building houses in Britain is seen as a sin by the government. Labour or the tories, it makes no difference, they dont build new houses and they dont allow people to build new houses. Planning regs have become madly bureaucratic. Local councils and county councils seem to relish in telling people no, yet they openly bemoan there's a lack of social housing.
Yet builders have vast tracts of land already with planning permission and the councils want this to happen so that they can rake in the massive fees they put on every plot of land and the ongoing council tax. Builders are drip feeding the market to keep prices artificially high.
I don't trust a word that either the Tories or Labour say. They are both as bad as each other on this issue.. For me it would be the perfect time for a new party to get in and finally solve this issue and actually think about the working class for once.
As somebody involved in planning I can say: there is a huge problem holding developers to account. They own the planning system. The appeal system makes it very difficult to stop unreasonable development. Also, I'm increasingly aware that the issue is we don't make town centres desirable and we can't control the construction type efficiently. It means, when we want a central located appartment we get a 4 bed detached on arable land. When we want a bungalow, we get a 4 bed detached on arable land. When we want a bungalow... We get a four bed detached on arable land. The answer is not "build, build, build". The answer is to deal with a financial crisis that uses housing as pension pots and income.
@@verdebritanicaso basically…buy Taylor Whimpey stock 🤔?
@@verdebritanica We'd all be better off if there were a million extra 4 bedroom houses on arable land.
Don't give me that crap and blame the developers, the rot goes all the way to the source. The government, be it town, country or National.
If the government simply allowed people with land to build on it with no restrictions, the housing issue would dissappear within 15 years.
Stop allowing people from offshore purchasing houses. The flats in Vauxhall are 80% owned by people from outside the uk. It’s just an investment for them.
Same in fulham reach. All Chinese and empty
This is silly
Woah woah, stop stop you are thinking? You're not meant to think. Shut up and listen to your propaganda
well london budget would go down if they ban foreigners from investing in british real estate
Deansgate in Manchester is like this...too much of it is owned by Chinese investors
I’ve recently had a bid accepted on a small property after being evicted from a flat in a city centre. This caused me to give up my whole life there as purchasing a property in that city was unattainable. Saved every penny for the past 9 months to be in a comfortable position after saving heavily for the past 5. The whole system is broken and I don’t trust a single word this government or civil service claims. Young people since 2008 have been betrayed at every step and we need a political reckoning over it.
The process of this failure started over 40 years ago.
Thank the Jews
House prices increased there most between 1997 -2009, not 2008 till now.
@@staedlerok lmao how are the Jews at play here? I don't think Boris or May or Cameron are Jewish.
@@prometheus7387 they control everything ?
Oh they’re Building hundreds of houses around my town (in the Ashdown Forest) but they start at about £400 K. No starter homes, they’re all 3,4 and 5 bed places going for top dollar. We’re being deceived.
Same in Redhill area
@@nadiak5890 I’m not far from you. They know they can charge top dollar in the area because the transport links to london, Brighton, Gatwick and the M25.
Who is buying these houses tho? Demand can’t be that high for them, we aren’t rich enough.
literally described a quantity issue. if there were many alternatives they wouldn't be selling them at 400k cause no one would buy. we need more houses, need more flats.
Same with a new suburb in hartlepool thats being built on fucking farmland...
And it's all DETACHED HOUSING THEMOST EXPENSIVE TYPE REEEEE
As a skilled worker I have absolutely zero reason to go to the UK. What is the point of moving to a country where you can't even buy a house/apartment to live in!
ok
So you wouldn’t live anywhere with a housing crisis?
What is the UIK?
@@maxdavis7722 People move to countries for a better life. Not much of a better life if you can't even afford to buy a roof over your head.
People come to London to accelerate their careers, only few stay for longer time or for quality living.
I feel that we need to start looking at building upwards with more flats and larger apartments, although in a more intelegent manner than what was seen after WWII. There is no reason why flats and apartments couldn't make great homes and communities if they were built with an eye towards peoples lifestyles rather than just cramming the maximum amount of living spaces into the minimum area as we have seen in the past. The NIMBY problem is a real one but there are still a fair few brown-field sites in cities and older apartment blocks that nobody lives in any more that could be used for such housing schemes.
There is also the problem of investment groups buying up a lot of the older, lower cost housing and just letting these properties sit empty. This is stopping first time buyers from taking the buy cheap and fix it up route that a lot of their parents and granparents might have taken. For example, there is a house next to mine that has been empty for more than a year. Putting a law into place to allow councils to effectively do a compulsory purchase of properties that have been sitting empty for more than a year would be a good way of freeing them up for those on a lower wage to get on the property ladder.
Why not condominiums instead? Modern ones in other parts of the world have all the luxurious amenities most people want like gyms, pools, gardens, shops etc
You make a good point about building up. Friends in the heart of New York City lived in an older apartment with large, airy rooms. It was on the 10th floor where it was sunny and quiet. There was no traffic noise or any sound from neighbors. It felt very private. I was amazed that there could be such a comfortable home in the middle of a city.
Why not just a cupboard each?
Because mega city one is not the answer.
Complete non-starter until leasehold is abolished. No owner-occupier wants to live in a flat where they pay ground rent to the freeholder like some peasant paying a feudal lord. Enfranchisement exists but it's complex, expensive and time-consuming.
But once that's done we could build more European-style mid rises with 3-4 beds and 150-200 sq m of floor space for families. Right now those kind of apartments only exist at the luxury end of the market in the UK, and only really in London.
It's time for the world's first arcology.
The issue is that they are building expensive housing not affordable housing.
Exactly, that's the issue. The types of homes they build in the UK are not affordable homes at all.
@@HShango Central belt of Scotland, there's new housing developments going up all over the place. Not a single one of those properties will go on the market for under £200k. They'll get bought up and be rentals within a few months. Where there are affordable properties coming available, they get snapped up by landlords paying way over asking price, pricing out the locals.
In the UK even shoddy, cheaply built housing is expensive housing.
It's a bit normal that developers build for the less price sensitive. But that does free up other housing.
Plus the wrong housing,almost an obsession with large family homes,build smaller homes and create supply for downsizers to move into.
I develop houses for a living, and the biggest problem I have is the complex archaic planning system and the painfully slow and incompetent councils that oversee the process.
In other countries you are treated as partners while in the UK you are treated as an adversary, a crucial difference that stalls faith, grow and investment.
Nimbys are of course a problem of course but a streamlined committed planning system will increase the UK stock as there is no shortage of lenders.
Don't forget the planning constraints, you need to check for bats, need to check for newts.
Need to ensure your build doesn't make a loud noise, can only work for 2 hours on 2 hours off. Then you get locals who want to be bought off, want a free flat and if you don't give it to them they complain all day.
As someone from a small town in the south of England, the issue we have with yet more houses is that they never come with even basic infrastructure (doctors, primary schools). My town's GP surgery wasn't functioning even before Covid because it had stayed the same size and was serving a population that had practically doubled. Also, they only build family homes with 3-5 bedrooms. Way out of most first-time buyers' price range (and lifestyle). If the Government said: "more housing but developers/councils must build a variety of homes (including decent flats) and include (or expand existing) infrastructure", we'd be more amenable to the idea.
The problem is that often we have the infrastructure, i.e. doctors and schools, but we lack the staff to allow those places to be run at the maximum capacity, for example, it's very hard to get a doctors appointment near me at the moment, but the doctors surgeries will continue to respond to consultation on planning with "we have capacity... we just need staff" - the ones local to me are running at 40-50% of what they can actually manage, Brexit didn't help this as we did have quite a lot of doctors and nurses from eastern Europe who left the country, and with the issue surrounding pay for those in all sectors (teachers, nurses, etc.), it's not a very attractive industry to enter either.
Same here in the Midlands.
3-5 bed is fine. People will move there vacating their current homes and driving down the price of the 1-2 bed homes.
In my small town people don't want them to build 1-2 bed homes as they don't want 'poor' people coming in. At least if they're 5 bedrooms people in my town believe that quality people will be buying them.
That's putting the horse before the cart. I live in a built up area, at no point did anybody wave their willy out the window complaining they might have to share their local doctors surgery, if it gets busy, then you build all the little bits around it, not before.
4:25 you forget France is about 2.3 times larger in terms of land compared to the UK. Finding land to build houses on is a lot eaiser when you have more than twice as much land to work with.
Japan would be a better example then.
Since theres less buildable land there due to the mountains.
@@davidty2006 Japan has a shrinking population so they don't need to build more houses
There's still plenty of land in the UK though, only 1.5-2% of the UK's land actually has buildings on it.
After I finish my degree, I am legitimately considering moving back in with my parents. Not just to save money, but also because I want to help take care of them- it's fairly common to do so in Asian families, both for married and unmarried children.
Most students I went to uni with went back to their parents, only ones moving to London for work had to move out
I’m hoping to move abroad once I finish university and save up enough money.
Please stop mixing your ads with your news credentials. VPNs are bullshit, we all get that. We also get that you need ad revenue. BUT if you insist claiming that VPNs are good for us and backing that up with your credibility, that means that your credibility takes a hit. It makes your news LESS TRUSTWORTHY not more. PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!
I think it's better for mental health too instead of so much loneliness now
I would live with my parents if they weren’t so toxic to live with 😂
The problem in Britain isn't lack of houses, but lack of permission for people to creatively self-build and unrestrained permission for people to own more than the property they live in. If everyone was only allowed to own one property there would be plenty of housing. It's incredibly difficult to get planning permission to build the type of house you want to live in on land you own. Modular, genuinely affordable housing has been designed and developed in Britain, but people can't get planning permission to buy and build these homes because construction companies that sell expensive housing have their claws into government and local authorities. I live in the South Lakes, and the terraced row behind where I live is a whole row of empty houses that are all second homes and investment properties. They are empty for most of the year, except for an odd weekend when someone might turn up, have a barbecue and leave. Mostly, no-one comes. Meanwhile, people who work in the area and keep our towns and villages vibrant can't get a home that is affordable on local wages. It's criminal.
"creatively self build" meaning tree houses, mud huts and primitive dwellings? Sure, you're paying their NHS anyways.
Any attempt to prevent individuals from purchasing second homes would lead to companies (small and large ones) purchasing even more than they already do
@@Conflict410 The point would be to ban companies as well as individuals from purchasing multiple residential properties
my brother in Christ you literally described in more words that it's a lack of homes. If supply was abundant you me and your granny owning 3 houses would be irrelevant, it's only so painful BECAUSE we have a housing crunch. Same for housing as an investment, it's the scarcity that makes the housing investment so lucrative. The solution to popping bubbles is to bomb them with supply, there's a reason why no one invests in automobiles
@@jackscott4772 so kill the residential rental market completely? Moving for a job would be unrealistic if you have to sell then buy to do so, especially if there's no demand for your house. or if it's your first job in a new county straight out of university, or a foreign worker. Essentially I am in agreement that a lot needs to be done however, I don't think this particular solution would be practical.
Incorrect analysis, in UK the Tories deliberately built less houses, to push up prices and make homeowners solid Tory voters.
Why do we need more houses, we have a declining population?
@@adet2797your right, it started under the Tony Blair government
Do you really think the Tories are that smart?
If they are maybe I should vote for them.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
@Gary to be fair, working on building sites sucks, and the pay doesn't seem very applying when you look around at white collar workers driving bmws.
@@uzi_Justice Britain's infrastructure was largely built in the 70s. 50 years ago. All those prefab tower blocks need replacing. As for the declining population you argue, there are over 67 million people in this country. They all need homes.
People want to blame empty houses but filling empty homes will do nothing to address the housing crisis.
There are 3.52m dwellings in London, meaning the 25,000 vacant properties only represents a vacancy rate of 0.7%. A vacancy rate under 5% is considered by economists as evidence of a severe housing crisis.
£12.2bn over 25,000 homes = £488,000 per property which is under the median house price for London. It's impossible that these 25,000 vacant homes are exclusively empty luxury developments built for overseas investors who deliberately leave them empty.
The real villains in the London housing crisis are NIMBY owner-occupiers desperate to pull the ladder up behind them in the ultimate "fuck you, got mine" move. Oh, and local councillors (in fairness, often on both sides of the aisle) who enable them - like the South Hampstead Tories who are are more concerned about "shadows" affecting some railway lines so they block new housing
Anything to distract from actually fixing bad government policy. Sheep will be sheep.
Housing prices went up at their fastest rate between 1997 -2009, and since then have still gone up, but not nearly as much.
It's not just the Tories to blame.
@@llanieliowe794 You know, he never actually said that only the Tories are to blame.
The UK is a country where people accepted monarchy. So no revolution will happen. So that mindset enhances the selfish attitude. It's all about me first good luck to the others. As you put it. "fuck you, got mine". In the country compared in the video, France actually people do not have that mindset. They try to build more to avoid social trouble. In the UK people prefer to suffer in silence. That's a very bad move. For the poor and the country in general. I predict that the working force will become less and less productive because they will have no incentives ( no family no house nothing protection) and the whole UK will slowly go down. Everything is connected. The politic in the UK does not seem to understand that.
The best people also will stop going to the UK and work there. It will not improve the salaries. :) At all that will be less global money in the country and also less foreign investment the whole attractivity will decrease. I am not optimistic for the future of the UK.
I think the first domino that needs to fall for a big growth in the UK is building 4 to 8 million homes. ( minimum )
I can guarantee we wont build enough. I been hearing people talk about needing more houses built for at least the past 50 years...and nowt gets done. I have no faith anything dramatic will change.
maybe we wouldn't be having rolling blackouts and sky high energy prices either if they'd built a single nuclear plant since the 80s
@@NGRevenant I didn't know we were having rolling blackouts...but can't say I'm surprised. I fully agree we should of built more nuclear power plants, good call.
They've built a lot of new housing estates where I live and it's caused absolute chaos because the roads are so busy, no one can get to work on time and the schools cant handle it.
Same where I live. Need to see a doctor or dentist, forget it. Nearest accident and emergency, 45-60 minutes drive. Parks and green spaces, not really. Too many people and more pouring in.
All brought to us by the very same people who have restricted housing supply, restricted NHS facilities and schools etc.
Net migration to the UK is projected to be 1 million people in 2023, I wonder if this affects house demand?
Just asking...
I mean if they can afford it why wouldn't they? Clearly British people cannot
Thank god someone else is mentioning this , the enormous elephant on the room
I can't believe this channel missed that in this video. The demand for houses from migration alone is enormous.
We need to stop second homes and homes for short term rentals. Building more homes away from rural and tourist communities, where large numbers of houses have been bought to rent on Airbnb, will still push young people out of those communities and destroy them. You can only live in one house at a time, so limit home ownership to one house.
Please stop mixing your ads with your news credentials. VPNs are bullshit, we all get that. We also get that you need ad revenue. BUT if you insist claiming that VPNs are good for us and backing that up with your credibility, that means that your credibility takes a hit. It makes your news LESS TRUSTWORTHY not more. PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!
Some people want a second rural home for weekends and holidays, and they rent it out to rourists when they don't use it. If anything, it's people who don't use houses, like e.g. international investors, who are at fault
@@davidcooks2379 Some people want to smoke in pubs and drive at 90 on the motorway. Individual interests aren't always aligned with greater social interests.
I will say though that we need to ensure that this doesn't hurt temporary, seasonal and supply workers who do a vital jobs for the economy and society. It's very hard to get affordable housing for 1 -
@@davidcooks2379 No. Second home owners are equally at fault and they destroy rural communities.
Second homes have been an issue for decades and they aren't a new revelation in causing issues with housing supply. It's a selfish attitude thinking anyone is entitled to a second home, and it has forced young people out of the countryside for decades.
In the 10ish years I lived in the Uk, it became obvious that people are obsessed with houses not homes. And the result sprawling housing with ridiculous tiny gardens mixed with older poor quality and difficult to heat etc housing.
In cities there is a need for quality apartments but not tower blocks to stick the poor. In villages and small towns it’s different.
British people need to wake up to the realities that the rest of Europe discovered 100 years ago and you see in cities in much of the rest of the world.
But it’s been a good political football in the UK keeping the haves happy and who really cares about anyone else
I agree and would happily sell my 3 bed house and garden to live in a suitable apartment in the right city. However the problem in England and Wales in particular is the leasehold system, ie you never own your flat and pay massive uncontrolled, open-ended service fees to an appointed management company to live in an apartment, we also have to pay ground rent to some other parasite entity. These service fees start at around £1500 per year but rise exponentially every time they fix something or do works on the building, eg painting the hallways every 3 years could cost you an extra £2000 per apartment, or as our friend found out, replacing a perfectly functioning security entrance with a brand new one cost each apartment £12,000. And this is what these people do in order to maximise revenue from the leaseholders. There is no government department that gives a toss about any of these issues.
Putting a stop to this airbnb plague would be a good start. All the small affordable properties in my area are being snapped up as holiday lets, inflating the prices and completely pricing out the young locals!
Holiday homes should be illegal.
End of.
young locals are not the priority.
Air b n bs need way more attention
**Missing a key issue here** Building more ‘houses’ shouldn’t be the main focus.
Building more houses and expanding cities with more suburbs is not a productive way of supporting urbanisation. Houses and sprawl in general needs way more resources than well considered high rise apartment blocks that are at the heart of the city with more walkable access to every day amenities.
In the UK nearly all of our major cities apart from London are pretty much low rise in nature, with the exception of Manchester that has had an immense push at high rise apartments in the last few years. We need to build up! We need our cities to scale up and we have many of them!
I believe most young people, if given the opportunity to buy an affordable apartment with the correct planning would choose living in cities that are far more accessible to work and entertainment. Of course this needs to go hand in hand with the developers and park/recreational factors must be incorporated in a similar way to the planning laws of Vancouver.
Less cars on the road, services centralised to the block rather than across large housing estates RE electrics, water, waste. More walking encouraged and public transport. Boost to local businesses as people are more likely to maximise local entertainment when it’s on the doorstep. So many advantages. Sure not everyone wants to live in an apartment block. But the idea of the apartment block and the way they are planned out needs to be improved and focused on being more liveable. Building on more green belt and the countryside that already needs to be more focused on protecting wildlife and nature is not the answer. We have very little land compared to most countries yet our cities don’t reflect that.
We need more increases in density.
Heck we should build housing how we were like just over 100 years ago.
Terraced blocks with shops on the corners near transit and services.
And alleyways to just dump shit.
The sad thing is that in Glasgow they are demolishing many high rise residential buildings and making either detached houses in their place (which home a fraction of what the high rises would), or they are just leaving the buildings as a pile of ruble after demolition (as seen with the Red Road flats in Glasgow), it's such a waste😭
Something needs to be done about un necessary demolition. 50,000 home are demolished each year in this country.
What’s the point of building more houses if more schools or nhs services are not being built to keep up with the house building?
Hmmm issue with all newbuild estates is lack of services.
theres no small shops being built within them.
In other countries they can build both things. Why not in Britain?
We still have needs of the population. ie we are desperate for a proper NHS and functioning schools, we also have a desperate need for housing. These things are not mutually exclusive.
Britain has some of the most under occupied properties in the world.
We need more than just new houses, we need:
- more small flats for first time buyers.
- to encourage downsizing for older adults.
- more house shares and lodgers
- earlier coupling of young people.
- More industry in rural areas to encourage young people to move outside of metropolitan hubs
- less empty properties used primarily as investments
- More social housing to enable people to remain local in appropriate properties
- public sector involvement to ensure new builds are delivered and safe
I'm sure there's more but the whole industry and culture is a mess. Just building new houses sadly won't solve this problem anytime soon
There are lots of flats for sale and we would like to sell our house and move to a more convenient area. However all the flats are leasehold and are subject to insane management fees via management companies that have open ended contracts as per what they can charge you. 2 friends of my wife have been ripped off to the tune of over £40K since buying their new flats about 15 years ago. New buildings needing new roofs, new security entrances, new carpets in the hallways every 3 years, new paint in the hallways every couple of year and so on. All that on top of their £2000 a year service fee plus maybe £1700 per year council tax. That is why people don't want flat. And when these management companies demand £10000+++ for a major trumped up repair or new roof, you better have the money ready or they will take your flat from you.
@@stephanguitar9778 True. Michael Gove was talking about getting rid of leaseholds at one point... Suddenly everyone went quiet. Makes you wonder what happened that they aren't even talking about finding a solution to the problems associated with leaseholds anymore. Especially after the cladding/Grenfell scandal which made the issues so apparent
I'm sick to death of house shares I don't want to see more. I'm in Chester and the only 'affordable' places to live in the city are house shares. Finding even a one bedroom flat for under £800pm is nigh-impossible. If you're an adult working professional the only option is a house share, and living like you're a student at 30 is sad as hell.
The reality is nobody wants prices to go down. People say they do but nobody wants their property prices to go down.
We do, it's just alot of people couldn't handle it but if we had equity clauses to not force sell and happy where you are then it wouldn't affect you.
I'm a new homeowner who bought at market peak and I welcome a market crash
@@Goady1000 could you explain what you mean by "equity clauses to not force sell"?
@@lectorj so the reason house prices going down causes an issue is when we come to remortgage, if the government bought a negative equity policy in place it would mean home owners would still be able to get a mortgage on negative equity. The only other current example is sort of the flood reinsure scheme.
@Goady1000 I'll have to read up and think about that. My reasoning was simple. Home owners would want their property values to go up, home flippers, home renters, apartment/condo owners, any type of land owner, developers, real estate investors, even banks and some governments with high property taxes may benefit from higher prices. Prices go up due to scarcity so people simply dont make more housing even if they can. It's not a conspiracy or anything I just think in many many developed economies wealthier people and even people of normal income want prices to go up and slowly over time especialy the past few decades its led to prices being what they are now. Like a stock selling for 150 dollars when it's actual value is 100. Only poorer and younger people looking to buy actually want prices to go down but once they buy a home they want prices to go up.
Reading that rent in one of your suburbs just reached $1000ish for the first time brought a tear to my eye. I haven't seen rent that cheap in the States for at least a decade.
GDP per capita in USA is $70k in Britain it’s $46k you’re in a much richer country not to mention many areas of USA have vastly more affordable housing than the major cities whereas in the uk even the rural areas have ridiculous prices relative to income.
@@sirsurnamethefirstofhisnam7986 I understand the vast gap in our nation's GDPs. But no one can afford the rents here either 😭 I believe there's no city in this country where a single person making minimum wage can afford the average rent anymore. I don't remember the actual stat, but it's something like that.
Where I live in a small midlands town, rents are now around £1000 per month, plus council tax of £2000 per year. Local wages are around £22,000 per year averaged out.
With an exchange rate of £1 = $1.25, it's actually $1,250 now. Reached $1,000 when it was £800. A few years ago at £1= $1.50, just £700 would've equalled $1,000. So rents in UK aren't that cheap.
@@hussain-x average rent in the US for an apartment is currently $1700. I'd happily pay $1250. But again, I understand that the difference in what the US pays vs what the UK pays makes both feel equally painful
The housing issue is a disaster for the economy. It means we have to pay wages that make the country uncompetitive in a global market just in order for people to put a roof over their head. House prices HAVE to come down drastically. If you were relying on your house's increased value as your nest egg, tough. You've done nothing to earn that drastic increase in your wealth. But people earning an average wage DO deserve to have a place to live.
Actually, no. 257,000 long-term empty homes in the UK. 100,000 properties purchased through offshore vehicles. 14,000 empty second homes in Cornwall alone. Need I go on?
3:40 SOMETHING happened in the 1990s and it just drove up the price of houses
It's tough making money now and especially in stocks when institutional investors are the driving force behind the selling. I'm trying to avoid making any new buys at this point in order not to get sucked into a bear trap, tho I read an article of people that grossed profits over $150k this 2nd quarter, wondering what could be the best stocks to put on a watchlist for capital gains, both in a bull and bear market
Yes, tech, transportation, e-commerce, among other sectors, are expected to experience growth.
However, considering the recent surprises in the market, it's advisable to consult a financial advisor.
Their expertise is invaluable in navigating this storm and ensuring you make informed investment decisions.
I've not really considered financial advisors/portfolio managers but who would you recommend?
@@aydin6219OK. His name is Joffrey Adam-Smith. He has greatly influenced my financial journey.
@@aydin6219a search with the keywords "JOFFREY ADAM SMITH" should get you what you need
@@dilara4130He appears to be a true authority in his profession. I looked him up online and found his website, which I browsed and went through to learn more about his credentials, academic background, and career.
He owes me a fiduciary duty to act in my best interests. I set up an appointment to use his services.
Reading the comments, seeing 2 variants: 1. Tax all empty second properties; 2. Forbid foreigners who don't reside in the country permanently purchase a property.
I'd be on board for both of them, I also think that work visa holders should be included on the second one.
There should be a third one. No more low interest rates.
Let’s see how that works for Portugal. They are implementing similar measures. However that is a small impact on a bigger problem.
Majority of high end expensive housing is purchased by foreign buyers. They are not buying houses under a million.
Wouldn’t be opposed to this, but on their own these measures won’t be enough to make a dent.
In addition, we’d have to:
Reform the planning permission system.
Abolish lease hold.
Encourage the building of more high-density housing.
Compromise on some of the greenbelt protections.
A lot of people aren’t going to like it, but this is how it has to be if we want to continue accommodating a growing population. The solutions have never been hard to figure out, they are just painful to accept.
I understand that we do need more houses, but the more important factor is we need people to be willing to move.
Plenty of houses in and around the north of England (Bradford in particular as mine was less than 60,000 for a two bed semi) and in Scotland, Wales, etc.
Why do people feel the need to live right in the centre of London, a city that obviously doesnt care about you?
The easier solution would be to build better infrastructure in the north to make it a viable prospect for people to move there.
People won't move where there aren't many substantial employment opportunities. The housing prices in the North and West reflect these mediocre employment opportunities. Of course building infrastructure would help with this but this will be a multiple decade process of government support and policy to undertake; and seeing the vitriolic opposition to even no-brainer projects such as HS2 (which resulted in the eastern leg eventually being scrapped) I don't feel very optimistic.
@@root_314 completely agree, but with businesses, they won't move to where they don't have a significant workforce to employ
To that end, good infrastructure and public transport is vital, as it can potentially 5-10x the size of the workforce in any given area
As an example, my workplace just moved office and a key factor in where they decided to go was how easily people can get to that place of work, as they were struggling to employ people due to the lacklustre transport links in the area, which was only 5 minutes outside of a major northern city
To any politicians reading, I will vote for you if you can deliver good transport links with frequent service
there also needs a be a law banning corporations from buying up housing to hold as investments to get around tax stuff. its cheaper for them to hoard properties than keep cash
Somehow it is assumed that NIMBYs are generation Baby Boomers rich old people or those who inherited the wealth from parents and are enjoying the troubleless life in their beautiful countyside. What's about younger professionals who have to pay high tax, get no help whatsoever from government, rented many years before in a very competitive SE market and finally purchase their dream home in a quiet street close to a town green belt. They paid top-£ for that location, and it is their most important asset for the future. Mass-building nearby will definitely drop the value of the property, overwhelm the roads, schools and local NHS which is already struggling. Is it fair? Why do these people get no consideration?
Do you really need it explained to you about how its hard to feel sorry for the "winners" of our generation who in most cases are ignorant of the privileges and advantages they enjoyed that resulted in them being able to own a house that "they worked for all by themselves"(hah!) or should I just skip to the part where I get the smallest ever violin playing the saddest ever song out? 🎻 🎶
We need new towns, not just new houses. Just building new houses will overwhelm the existing infrastructure
@@janbananberg357 wrong comment area my guy
Don’t you think the UK is crowded enough?
@@hughjohns9110 less than 10 percent of uk land is built on
@@bt3743 so what? You want fewer farms, more imported food, more food miles, more lorries on our roads and more emissions?
Tbh we have houses its just that they lack jobs around them.
this is a main reason why Im still with my parents whilst doing an apprenticeship. did look into renting a place but it's way too expensive
We in Ireland have the exact same problem. Politicians have a whole load of ideas, but never suggest just building council houses again like we did until the late 90s. It's pretty obvious the housing stock has been kept artificially low so developers keep their huge markups. Builders should not be rich, literally anybody can do their job. Government hiring their own crews again will stop this. Every country seems to be going through this, yet no government is actually trying to properly dilute the housing stock.
Well, the US has had less of an issues because interest rates have been higher, making it less profitable to buy housing speculatively. Housing is also declining in price a bit because of an AirBnB/Vrbo bubble collapsing.
I went to Ireland recently and didn't realise that the natives were all black! I don't know where the image of white gingers came from
I'm Australian and this story could just be voiced by an Australian and change the names and NOBODY would spot the difference.
I'm an engineer who started informally studying economics a couple of years ago because I got so tired of interference in projects from clowns waving economics degrees. One of the things I have found is that the teaching of Economics is now so tightly focused on a very narrow set of ideas that there's no other voices or options.
Go to almost any University in the world and the majority of economics text books are written by Harvard, Yale, Oxford, Cambridge,... professors or by people who went to Harvard, Yale, Oxford, Cambridge,... or are books actually published by Harvard Press, Yale Press, Oxford Press, Cambridge Press,...
SO - Every elected politician has an economic advisor or gets advice from a selected group of economists or central bankers *AND THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME EDUCATION.* No matter what a politician is advised on its always based on the same concepts and assumptions. No matter who lobbies them or want to do as part of their platform its scrutinised under the same set of economic ideas. This is why it feels that it doesn't matter who wins any election nothing changes. Its why they can't seem to fix basic things like health care, education, housing, infrastructure or energy issues.
@@tonywilson4713 I don't know if this economists fault. The majority voter base all own homes they bought for dirt cheap from the 60s to the 90s and don't want to see Their assets go down to reasonable values again.
It's hard to piss off the weathy donors. Just like you can't fuck with pensions.
Ireland needs Georgist reforms tbh alongside the UK and all Anglosphere countries really.
Well, immigrants have to live somewhere :)
As a Londoner... WE HAVE TO STOP HOARDING EVERYTHING HERE.
Allow the creation of new towns/cities that are made for the 21st century.
Not really a need to create new towns.
Since in like 60's and 70's new ones did pop up into existance notably Stevenage and Peterlee.
Idealy better plan would be just create good transit networks and slap a station in the middle of nowhere or at an existing village and they will grow.
or London can just.... build more housing? If people want to live in a city they should be able, it's a matter of supply and demand
Let this be a lesson...
After world war II, London wanted all the investment and resources that they could get... More people, more jobs, more prosperity...
Now that London is an overcrowded sh*thole for many, and even rich people can't easily drive where they want to go, or breathe clean air... Now they want Others to get the "benefit" of investment in more people, jobs and housing...
If we don't stop now, the whole UK will be a sh*thole... and gdp growth will be fantastic! 😱
@@mohammedsarker5756they can they just need to pay city prices.
@SKAM you don't with the skyrocketing crime and mass immigration, John cleese was right London isn't an English city and it hasn't been for a while.
For me, I see our policies on landlordism and empty buildings as a bigger factor than the need for more houses but extra homes, built for first time buyers, to live in not to rent out, is also a positive move forwards.
True... so many empty building are around everywhere I keep wondering why arent they using those instead building new ones?
Once a council member told me the reason is some landlords just don't care. They are on FIRE (early retirement) and not bothered with the paperwork to find renters and its not in their interest to get money anymore.
I was wondering, why arent they putting extra tax on empty buildings?
I made some casual calculations once too and the scary result was that thanks to government first home buyer schemes that can even be stacked pushing prices. But only for new builts!
So it is easier to get a loan and money for a new built home, than a preowned property on half price. But the new built price is inflated, because many others can get the same loan, so the "bidwar" starts...
@@tiborsipos1174 Theres like tons of empty buildings in my town.
can easily tell by the fact theres no windows left on them.
There are certain towns in North Wales which are literally entirely owned by rich London landlords who will never live there, and you’ll only ever see an influx of people into those properties in the summer when local English cities/towns (Liverpool, Manchester, Stoke-On-Trent, etc) are looking for somewhere to go on holiday.
The vacancy rate is extremely low which proves the problem isn't empty houses. The problem is the shortage. We need to BUILD MORE HOUSES
@@amusician1771 I can confirm this is true as I live in one of those exact areas you describe. The place is dead for 6 months and then filled to the brim with mancs and scousers for the other 6 months.
Suspiciosly. Immigration is 500K per annum, new homes needed 250K per annum. The answer is obvious
uh oh! Someone mentioned the obvious, downvotes incoming! 🥺
It was all planned, the same as jobs it favours house builders and employers
As a home owner with an extremely secure job I welcome mass migration.
Yes and its the very same government handing out these visas that are restricting supply. Actually immigration is 1 million per year with 500K Brits and EU people leaving. We are now swapping them for Indians and Africans (as was predicted pre Brexit referendum)
@@dww6 As a selfish p**k you want your house price to keep going up. Hopefully one of these immigrants can undermine your job.
Even if you increase supply though, what stops already wealthy investors from buying them up anyway? After all, houses are a fairly low risk-high reward asset in a liberalised market.
I remember that was the key point made in the UK Housing Evidence report you discussed a while back.
Lol
Houses are a terrible investment. Most investors stay away from
Buying property unless a good opportunity reveals itself like every 5 years or so.
Massive supply would mean they would have to compete for once.
I feel like rather than just being low density suburbs and causing urban sprawl we should be building medium density housing districts. Large apartments which are 5-8 floors high where families could legitimately live.
Cool but why would anyone *want* to?
Folks want gardens, drives, privacy, etc. Maybe the solution to limited space isn’t *more houses* but *fewer people*?
@@Bushflare that’s the most selfish comment I’ve ever seen we already have one of the lowest birth rates in the world with so much lack of workers especially since brexit how do you want even less people when we’re already in a terrible situation
@@funnyvalantine
If the birth rate is so low and the rate of building houses is generally increasing… wherever might all of these people who need new houses be coming from?
And moreover, it’s not selfishness just because your personal values would rather it not be a good idea. It’s your ideology which should conform to the circumstances of reality, not the other way around.
@@Bushflare my personal values ,ideology? Mate look at the example of china or japan or even worse sk a really introverted countries with the lowest birth rates in the world to look how bad it is there are vacant houses that no one lives in or own in their capitals which is a demonstration of how bad the situation is these countries are set to loose half of their population by 2070 and the rest will be old and plus they’re so anti migration even if everything turned automated technology won’t solve this
From Canada. I've learned more in 8 minutes viewing your great show, than searching the web for a whole week. Merci pour tout.
We have a similar issue in Spain (but maybe even more exacerbated), and while the government has vowed to have a 20% of public housing in 20 years, that would mean that if we just build new houses, we'd need to have, just in public housing, the same average of houses built that during the construction bubble.
It just can't be our only tool. And while here the executive branch has said to give credit lines for young adults and families to mostly override the issue of own's part of the deal on a mortgage, I think we have to go further - the public sector should issue mortgages.
This can help in a range of ways:
- You can set other conditions to that mortgage, like having the house work as the living space for the mortgagee (to avoid rentism)
- You can alleviate some conditions, undercutting the banks (trying not to outright dump them, but forcing them to be more aggressive).
- You can give more flexibility to people who get delayed on their mortgages because of unintended reasons, like losing their jobs or other reasons.
- And even if they have to evict the mortgagees (which, tru, doesn't sound the best), you at least get a house out of the private sector and into the public one for housing, sale or rent.
Sounds like a slow slide into communism.
I don't think the green belt is as relevant as people make it out to be, because there is a big gap in urban density between various countries and cities with a housing crisis. I'm Dutch and we have a terrible crisis here too and not a single city has even 1mil citizens. Amsterdam's housing market is ridiculous but if you compare the overall size of the city versus density to somewhere like Barcelona Amsterdam's area is VERY underutilised. How and what developers build and municipalities greenlight has a much bigger effect than a city being hemd in by a green belt unless the city has already reached it's most efficient density.
Live in the pod eat the bugs.
There isn't a shortage of houses in the UK, just a shortage of houses where people want to live! My local city has whole streets of empty houses - the latest one on the market failed to raise a single bid at auction with a starting price of £5,000!
Where is this, if I may?
@@FightingTorque411 Doncaster
There’s also an abundance of people who want houses, which is weird when you think about it, huh?
@@Bushflare what's weird about not wanting to live in a closet?
@@SaintGerbilUK
The weird part isn’t the wanting houses, it’s the having so many people. Britons’ birth rate has been on the decline for a while now but it seems we’ve got more people to fit into our little country than we expected.
Where are they all coming from?
We are severely over populated that is the elephant in the room unlimited illegal and legal immigration the size of two cities
completely unsustainable.
Too much demand- far too many people on such a small island, our food supply is already reliant on imports. Building on the land that should be farmed is just stupid.
I don’t want anymore homes, I have seen large amounts of countryside dug up to build thousands of home and it’s totally ruined the place I grew up in.
Your alright jack. fk everyone else.
Then make your voice. Heard instead of moaning in the youtube comments section.
One point you did not mention is the obsession of british people for individual home, whereas in France, the vast majority of new housing are small scale building with 10 to 30 apartments.
we have a right to have a dream of owning our own house. while in the EU they are renting and not buying and look what has happened to the EU And the UK in the past 30 years
@@Anthony-xd1lj you can still buy your own flat
@@Anthony-xd1ljlol of course we do, but the fact you can't even see that individual in the UK are obsessed shows the ignorance from you and why no single young person in the UK will ever own a home.
But yeah keep repeating the mistakes of the British boomers while you're at it.
I agree absolutely. And we have roughly the same population with half the land area. So low/very low density housing just doesn't make sense any longer.
The problem is that to often apartments blocks built in the UK have been made to a terrible standard. Thin walls with terrible soundproofing, damp issues and awful to look at thanks to brutalism. British apartments are also tiny compared to the European equivalent. Some have even been death traps like Grenfell tower and Ronan Point.
That's resulted in them being cheap and associated with poverty and crime in the UK.
We need to build new apartment blocks in the UK to the German standard to change perceptions of apartment living in the UK.
@@Anthony-xd1lj why? An apartment provides everything you actually need, creates a safer space for everyone and creates a community. You can't just build indefinitely because some land needs to be used for farming or parks and the UK has a limited amount od land compared to places like America or Canada. This idea is an American dream
Having lived in London for these last six years, I didn’t realise how infrastructure and building projects are severely lacking in one of the worlds biggest cities until I went abroad. I went back to Sydney where I had lived before for the first time since I moved to London and boy how things have changed there. New tram network, new trains, new builds, new city reconstruction, etc. but in London, apart from the Elizabeth line, everything else is just so run down and obsolete. For an international city, London is really lacking behind on all sorts of things… the whole country had been mismanaged for a long long time now.
Landlordism is the issue here. If we “just built houses” we’d end up with suburban hell like in the USA.
Only if you enforce suburban single family houses as the only option to be built like most of the US does. There's plenty of areas where multi-story apartments would be built if they were just permitted to do so by the stolid housing authorities.
@@root_314 not here. its my job to view planning applications lol
If an area needs more housing built then the best way to do so is to strengthen laws that benefit those that want to build
you got to scrap all the planning laws in order to do so! :D
@@___Q-bot that's fine
You build more houses they’ll just get bought up by investors. Either buy to let or just left vacant and left to appreciate.
We need laws to prioritise owner occupiers over investors.
When the demand and the prices are high vaccany rates will stay low. People generally don't sit on empty houses when they could make a fortune having some use them. Those headlines you read about those evil speculators are often just clickbait.
What we need to do is build more council housing, so families that can't afford houses can finally get on that ladder.
@@zUJ7EjVD every single one of my friends unfortunate enough to be renting has attempted to buy multiple times in the last 5 years, only to be out bid by buy-to-let property investors expanding their portfolios. Often offering cash.
They have a massive weight of accumulated capital and can steamroll over first time buyers who are simply looking for a home.
Building more housing on it’s own will not solve this problem.
@@zUJ7EjVD can you explain to me how the buy to let market will run out of customers?
what would stop existing landlords buying more and expanding their portfolio?
what would stop existing home owners from using their equity advantage to become landlords and build a portfolio?
I'm not arguing we shouldn't build more houses, i'm arguing that only building without also evening the playing field will, at best, not fix the problem and at worst will make it worse, sending even more to the top of the financial ladder.
We need better houses, knock down the old houses and make modern houses. Its like the UK 🇬🇧 is still stuck in the 19's still.
We are demolishing far too many houses already... 5O,OOO a year.. we need to keep and renovate old houses not bulldoze them!
What is wrong with you?
The main culprit of rising housing the US and UK is corporate investment firms getting their hands on it. Homes should be for the people that will live in them, not the greedy to capitalize on. Should make a 5 and then 10 year or so grace period for investors to back out of or sell excess property homes. Landlords with more than 2-3 residential structures should not be protected.
I'm not sure what's going on in the USA, but In the UK this only accounts for only 15%-25% of the problem. Mass immigration is responsible for about 25%, but the break up of the family unit is 50% of the problem.
The young wanting independent living, the middle age want divorce and the elderly want care homes.
It’s almost like there’s too many people for the infrastructure in the uk to sustain… what a shock.
There are places with higher population density than the uk that still have more affordable housing like Singapore and japan
@@sirsurnamethefirstofhisnam7986they build UP with Apartment blocks but you goobers want detached houses and gardens everywhere
Just build more infrastructure too, having too many people isn't an excuse to not build houses...
This reminds me of when Nick Clegg proposed building new council housing and David Cameron replied with "Why would you want more social housing? It just creates more labour voters."
The reason why there isn't more affordable housing stock built since 2010 is 100% because it makes it easier for the tories to stay in power.
Or perhaps that Labour allowed a net migration of hundreds of thousands for almost a decade.
Housing shouldn't be a commodity.
You've gotta prioritise first home buyers for new developments. And increase taxes drastically for people wanting to buy an already existing property as a second home. Treat housing as housing, not a commodity
Why do people refuse to talk about immigration? Our population has increased at the fastest pace in history in the last 20 years, over 80% of which is down solely to mass immigration.
When you consider all the issues involved with finding land, getting approval, environmental factors, economic factors, sustainability, regulations etc. needed for safe and affordable new housing do you know what would be much easier to do? Just slow the pace of immigration and let us catch up on housing stock.
But no, nobody is willing to do that or even admit it for some strange reason.
Poor by @TLDR News
Even if you get rid of immigration the population has still went up.
@@davidty2006 Which makes you wonder why we need mass immigration at all
@@aituk Yea I agree the numbers are not sustainable atm. However, the UK has a rapidly ageing population (Boomers were a large cohort), much like Japan, without migration of young workers there would essentially have been too many old people and not enough young for the last 20 yrs. Although I take your point that as of 2023, the UK can't sustain the same level.
@@salkoharper2908 I'll let you in on a little known secret about immigrants..... They get old too.
What we should be doing is fixing the problems causing our declining birth rate. One of which is lack of housing for families which is caused by mass immigration.
LAB/LIB/CON etc etc will not build more housing simply for the fact that it isnt up to them but rather its up to the large building companis sitting on large land banks and local planning offices full of NIMBYS...lets vote most of them out, and I think you should move the discussion to more smaller parties so one can force in more radical changes - which isnt going to happen
The builders have land that already has planning permission and is Nimby proof. Where we live there is a new estate with1000 building plots ready to go, ie 10 years supply however the builders are just drip feeding the market with perhaps 100 houses per year and a few small blocks of flats in between them. Every year they put up the selling prices and have openly said that they will stop building if they dont get the prices demanded.
@@stephanguitar9778 And so the government could say, if you have planning permission on land and not build, then we will tax you? or if a builder has not built a certain quota then it gets taken form them and passed on to a builder who will..perhaps smaller builders rather than the big ones? I feel this is the type of action now needed for the youger ones to get on with their lives.
Why is the green belt a problem? Houses can be made higher you know. There are called skyscrapers and such. A lot of housing in a small footprint.
There are plenty of new build estates being built in Birmingham. But its NOT "affordable" housing.
This is the number one issue in the UK in my opinion
We dont need new houses... We need new well built apartment blocks - far more affordable for new buyers and doesn't cause suburban sprawl.
Europe has a better housing situation because they have far more good quality medium density housing. The UK has a far higher proportion of housing as houses rather than flats than anywhere in Europe other than Ireland.
Brits obsession with houses is the main issue but no one wants to admit it. See how long flats linger on the market and how quickly any house goes (no matter how overpriced).
It is almost as if renting a shitty flat with a hundred neighbours, no pets , no garden, no second bathroom, no spare rooms is SOMEHOW less appealing than a semidetached house 🤔 HMM
@@leewilson3839 best solution is a terraced house. Or condos with all the amenities you wish
@@leewilson3839 So is driving Fiat compared to new Merc but functionally serve the same purpose. What's your point?
"World is bad because I can't afford a mansion".
@@leewilson3839 I'm talking about bought apartments - not rental apartments.
Flats aren't right for everyone, but they are exactly right for young workers in the city, new couples and people who want a low maintainance Property. They can also be spacious, and well made to keep noise low, with better views and well designed.
They represent the ideal stepping stone to get on the property market which can then be sold on to help buy a full house. But here in the UK we just expect people to jump straight to houses.
0:48 Perhaps it's time to get rid of the conservatives if they're fine w/letting the prices go higher and higher!
I couldn’t care less about someone’s home devaluing because an apartment was built in the same neighborhood. The price of your house will never be worth more than providing housing for others
As always a great video. I do have a horse in this race, and it does wind me up that all solutions require building more homes. Of course I'm not a moron and I do understand supply and demand. I do however see where this continuous building ends.
1# stop immigration (yes I understand why immigration is a thing, and also why it props up our economy
2# Examine our existing housing stock and force it to be brought inline with modern standards
3# Limit the ability for landlords to own multiple homes
In my opinion one of the main reasons people aren't having kids anymore
Well with Labour's promised open door immigration policy which if as when Blair let 3million in means 6hundred thousands new homes just for immigrants,plus at least another 1million homes for present population, so at with building rate of about 2hundred thousand per annum that means at least 9years to standstill. And how many if these are receiving rent ,especially those given to immigrants and benifit scroungers
Bro in my tiny town hundreds of new houses were made, a massive farming plot was sold and turned into houses and all of them are sold.
Same. Houses are being built out the wazoo. There’s just too many people.
I hate when lads refer to housing price increases as a problem of "Supply and demand".
Homes as a concept should not be commodities or luxuries that are to be owned and used to generate value. Having shelter is a basic human necessity and a huge step in participating in society.
Having a house, running water and hell, even electricity kind of increases the chance of people then going out and getting jobs, building careers and taking more care of their social life.
Merely stating something is a "basic human right" doesn't make the shortage any better. Building houses does.. Supply and demand is literally just a statement of the reality of it all; there aren't enough roofs to put over people's heads because we've been chronically underbuilding houses in the UK for decades (supply) while the population has kept growing + household sizes have shrunk (demand). The only way we're getting out of the housing crisis is by allowing more housing to be built.
Believe me it's not just economists being assholes, it's the most fundamental reality of the housing crisis.
100% agree, housing / land should NOT be a commodity! Devalue it and make it social housing for all!
I am studying property development, and we can’t just build more. As we are a small island nation that takes pride in our remaining nature and views, there isn’t the space to make hundreds of thousands of new developments constantly. Instead we need to build more flats in cities and you can that a block that may have 5/6 plots, housing around 20 people, knock it down and build flats in the same area that can house 50-60 people.
It is the only way, if you don't wanna destroy nature you can only build higher houses
like in the 60s?
We have plenty of space, check the percentage of actual urban lands compared to non..
It would be a disaster for the wealthy class if the government forced them to sell cheaply to build housing on..
The aristocracy own around 30% of britains land; Google it.. we still have nobility in this country.
@@seffffee1333 But isn't the problem in the UK the heavy focus on London ?
This is exactly why social and affordable developments in towns need to be prioritised over luxury developments that solely serve to line the developer's pockets
If you want to fix the housing crisis with building more houses you need to make all new developments have restrictive covenants like the Devon covenant where they can never be used as second homes/holiday lets and can only be bought by people who have lived/worked in the area for a certain period of time.
Houses with these covenants exist where I live and they are about £100k cheaper than their non-covenant equivalents. There’s no point just building more houses if they’re just going to be bought by people who already have houses.
“Nimbys” don’t want more houses built near them because they never come with added investment in infrastructure so they just put pressure on the schools, doctors surgeries etc. also so many new builds, especially since the 60s are absolutely hideous. There should be laws against building ugly buildings and using uPVC for doors and windows. New houses should always come with new infrastructure.
It’s also fair that people want to keep green space rather than just have endless grey concrete
Surprised this video didn’t mention the fact that pension funds have a large portion of their portfolio in housing. And the government knows if house prices fall, pensions could fail
So do the pensioners.
I'd like to hear more on the role of developers and builders in why housebuilding has stalled. Saying "they're private businesses and can do what they like" is no longer sufficient. Because if we're forever waiting for them to deem it profitable to build, we'll always be falling behind.
Yes they need to be taxed on land holdings if they dont build on it in a timely fashion. Some builders have over 20 years supply already.
With the current planning system it is so difficult for developers to plan and have consistent work. You need to have some sort of land bank to allow the business to keep going. If the planning system was reformed so it was easier to get planing and it was more predicable then the land banks would not be required. Limited land supply is the issue.
because of the huge numbers of immigrants
Yes, so build more housing for them. That would be the best of both worlds but the UK for some inane reason chooses to make house building as restrictive as possible.
They need to build infrastructure not just houses. More doctors surgeries, more hospitals, more police, more sewage treatment plants, more gas and electricity plants, more telecoms more public transport more roads.
And should have done it twenty years ago. But there are political factors to consider too. The Conservative party believe in a neoliberal ideology, which frowns upon government being directly involved and looks towards the efficiencies and innovation of the private sector motivated by competition. Some people like the ideology, some despise it, but infrastructure is certainly one of the weakest points: Neoliberalism doesn't let the government build stuff. Instead it lets the government try to set up market conditions in which private industry will meet the needs. That doesn't really work for infrastructure very well, because it isn't market-driven.
The govs since 2010 have been saying 200k housing target and all have failed to build enough houses
The indigenous population is declining due to low birth rate!
At the same time, in the midst of the huge additional demand for housing created by mass non-UK arrivals (running at a net level of 300,000 per year for two decades) the country as a whole is losing more and more countryside due to the construction of roads and other facilities needed to accommodate rapid population growth.
In other words, blame the migrants. You should blaming the government and why UK priotises building houses instead of apartments you moron
It's like people can't afford a decent house to have kids in.
Ur ppl are getting replaced
Because of the 500k net migration last year?
Racist
606 thousand more like. Although that wasn't mentioned in this video for some reason.
Mass migration increasing demand in spite of government promises to reduce migration. So proper planning cannot be made to increase supply
Canada’s main greenbelts either have *loads* of buffer space left over or were too small and easily hopped over, so I don’t think those are a major contributor.
Stop the immigration legal or illegal then not so many required or is that too logical
It's almost as if we've had large population growth for the past 10 years despite falling birthrates.
But no we should definitely pave over all our green spaces to build more cities until the country looks like megacity one
The ENGLISH population of England has been pretty stable at 40 something million people for a really long time. At that level housing, wages, healthcare, schools and the cultural identity of the country is all stable and at a good level.
But we went supposed to talk about that…
My great, great grandad, my grandad and my mother and father was able to own property.
Yet me as a late 20s millennial and my fiance can't afford property.
My sister and her partner who work full time and is in a long term relationship can't afford to move out of my mums house.
It's almost as if something happened in the 90s to 00s that caused these issues with housing and has continued from then.
I can't put my finger on what though...
It'll forever be a mystery
Some of these issues exist in parts of the US, most notably California. Throughout the US 'single family zoning' is a major problem that has forced huge swaths of urban land to be just single family homes. But in California, they also have a problem with NIMBY. They are places were apartment buildings CAN be built but are often blocked by NIMBYs. Recently, the current governor of CA made it illegal to have single family zoning or made it difficult. So now you are seeing some changes but it will take time. NIMBY's still prevent apartment buildings but with few single family zoning allowed, it means it will be easier to find locations for new apartment buildings.
We don't need new developments. Areas just need sorting out. Old areas of towns and cities that are not fit for purpose need flatting and rebuilt. Where lossing too much green spaces. In my part of the UK, lots of empty properties and work units. That can be used.
Like many other people in the comments I'd like a joined up policy for housing stock. It should include (and this isn't an exhaustive list) : empty homes, empty flats above retail spaces, empty office buildings converted into residential, Airbnb limits, second home limits, limits on owning rental properties, tiny homes, etc etc.
Foreign owned property.
more houses or less immigration?
I wish they would build not only more houses, but better quality houses
lots of hot air. Even renting isn't an option for some. I've seen quite a few new housing estates popping up in North Derbyshire, but they won't be cheap as they're in desirable countryside areas. I've had them building new housing near me in Darnall (basically a terrace housing area, about 4 miles out of Sheffield) and they were wanting more due to the central location (close to city & M1) despite the fact in the same area there's similar sized flats for 2/3's the price 5 mins walk away
Please stop mixing your ads with your news credentials. VPNs are bullshit, we all get that. We also get that you need ad revenue. BUT if you insist claiming that VPNs are good for us and backing that up with your credibility, that means that your credibility takes a hit. It makes your news LESS TRUSTWORTHY not more. PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!
This administration is putting many families into difficult situations. A lot of people are financially struggling to live, put a roof over their head and put food on the table. You’ve helped me a lot Ms Lozier White, imagine investing $2,500 and receiving $18,400.
Same here, I also just started with Ms Lozier White’s with a startup capital of $4,500 I've made $23,800 after some days, her strategies are mind blowing.
Hey 👋 please can you aid me on how to connect with Ms Lozier's services???
Am also a living testimony of Ms Lozier White’s service, I engage in various Investments, So far I've attained returns of $16,500 last week, with an initial start up budget of $2,000, she gives her clients good attention.
Wow! I'm also a proud beneficiary of Ms Lozier White’s investment,I saw people talk about this woman here too sometime ago, My husband & I had no other option than to give it a try with $3,000. We got our payment of $21,000 after some days, she's trusted and reliable.
We need Georgist reforms
Less immigrants
There's loads of new houses being built in preston, lancashire, but there is no infrastructure like schools and community buildings in these areas, and these houses are also unaffordable for first time buyers also. I don't really know if the answer is just as simple as building new houses.
it's not
Excellent videos in this channel!!
the numbers of immigrants coming in equals the number of houses supposedly being built but there's still a huge backlog of homes that are needed. Something is not working...
Why is there still a lot of immigrants? They are good for the economy and all but in economic crises they aren’t great. Why do they still come?
Yeah our migration system is completely unsustainable. We've got far too many people coming here every year. It's been a city the size of newcastle for 20+ years now
@@maxdavis7722 How are they good for the economy? Since the start of the mass immigration crisis we haven't seen some boom to GDP.
You'd think after importing millions we'd see some kind of return. But no.
They're either on benefits or aren't paying tax.
@@aeriumfour6096 young immigration is a better labour market for businesses to move and invest in the UK. As I said tho, during a crises they only add to the problem. I also don’t see why they would come here during a crises.
Please stop mixing your ads with your news credentials. VPNs are bullshit, we all get that. We also get that you need ad revenue. BUT if you insist claiming that VPNs are good for us and backing that up with your credibility, that means that your credibility takes a hit. It makes your news LESS TRUSTWORTHY not more. PLEASE STOP DOING THIS!
How has no one brought up mass immigration in the comments yet? I can only think that the channel is deleting them. England's population today is 25% higher than it was in 1990, with that much extra demand of course housing prices rose too. We'd need to build triple what is being built currently just to offset immigration. Building more houses, in the hope of reducing the price of housing, is a pointless waste of time while mass immigration continues.
Just need to stop foreign buyers and companies buying properties in London to solve that problem. / property tax at 1% of value rather than council tax
I like this channel, keeps sh*t simple. I've subscribed