The Budget 2013

[Mr Jinx]

OK, I'm done.

Osborne's attempt to stoke up the housing market with government backed loans has lost the Tories my vote.

I'll admit I was wavering after my MP (David Burrowes) wrote that letter suggesting that Huhne & Pryce had gotten off too lightly. But trying to prop up an already inflated housing market with taxpayer money is simply madness.

So my vote is now going to UKIP. Not that they stand a chance in Southgate, and not that I'm in line with all their views. It may even see Burrowes's seat fall to Labour, but if you're going to blow your load like that you may as well do it spectacularly a la NuLabour stylee. The sooner it all blows up (and corrects) the better. Give the Mad March hares the chequebook and bunker down before we become Cyprus.

This right to buy thing can even be exploited by those who already own property. BTL is banned, but how is that even going to be policed. I just can't see how this cheap money thing won't be exploited. SImply throwing good money after bad.

 

[Alistair20000]

As with all Government "initiatives" the laws of unintended consequences will flow. Money will pass to those who don't need or deserve it.

On a wider perspective, the attempts to cut the deficit have failed. The country does not have the appetite to take the medicine so we is f*oked.

 

[elginCity]

Insane, mindless, ill-thought out, so inept it's frightening.

There has to be a correction, just as the States endured, housing has to become affordable once again and lenders have to take the hit. With interest rates at historic lows the jolly hockey Bullingdon Club are now fuelling another housing frenzy with no thought to the consequences should interest rates ever rise again. Other than the taxpayer picking up the tab rather than their bankster mates that is. Oh, lest we forget, Barclays have recently doled out £18 million in BONUSES.

Fecking crazy, and I can't even be bothered to articulate further what I feel about all this, it's just too damned depressing.

Tories have lost my vote too, happy for Jason to persuade me otherwise but he'll have his work cut out.

 

[elginCity]

Sorry, I was wrong it's actually £38.5 million in BONUSES.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/mar/20/barclays-bonuses-budget-day

 

[Jason H]

I'll give it my best shot.

1) This is about providing opportunities for those who can afford a mortgage but not a deposit to get on the housing ladder, whereas before it was about loading debt onto people. This was what prevented my move in 2008 - people wanted to buy my place, had the ability to pay the mortgage, but suddenly were being asked for £50K as a deposit when previously £10K would have sufficed.

2) What this has led to is a spurt in renting as people who could previously have bought a home but are now forced to rent. In London, something ridiculous like just 10% of renters are doing so because they want to. About 70% (I don't have the figures to hand) want to buy instead but can't. What does this do? It pushes up rents, the disparity is now enormous - for example the mortgage on our 2-bed maisonette in Haaaanslow is about £650, were we to be renting the going rate for a similar property is about £1100. Clearly these people can afford to rent, therefore they can afford to buy (with help getting onto the ladder), so the risk element is minimal in comparison with the pre-2008 days.

3) As far as I can tell this won't apply to "2nd home buyers" as Labour is trying to allege. This is only to first time buyers and to those whose equity was wiped out to the extent they can't move on (ahem, me, ahem!).

4) I don't see this pushing house prices up to an unacceptable level. As mortgage lending will still be done on an "ability to pay" basis, there won't suddenly be 20% increases in value - sure there may be something of an increase but I see this as a stimulating move rather than something that will cause any boiling over.

I accept there are risks involved, but in terms of getting people on the ladder and also cooling down the out of control rental market (which in turn will lower the welfare bill through housing benefit), this IMO is a smart move.

Incidentally Jinxy, I have a lot of time for Burrowes - I think his principled and well-argued stance on the gay marriage debate, in which he ditched hyperbole in favour of reasoned argument (and in the face of death threats too!) stood him out for me as one to be reckoned with.

 

[Jason H]

Sorry, I was wrong it's actually £38.5 million in BONUSES.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/mar/20/barclays-bonuses-budget-day

What's that got to do with the price of fish in any case? Barclays is a private company, frankly they can pay what they like.

 

[Mr Jinx]

What's that got to do with the price of fish in any case? Barclays is a private company, frankly they can pay what they like.

I'll agree that much. Private companies can do whatever their shareholders let them get away with (assuming its also lawful and compliant).

If you don't like private companies giving discretionary bonuses I suggest you go and live somewhere like Cuba.

 

[RaeUK]

... Tories have lost my vote too ...

They lost mine a while back. Interesting to see the government taking money away from the poor to force them to move to smaller homes, whilst giving money to the better off to move to larger homes.

 

[Jason H]

I'd love to be able to afford a spare room.

 

[RaeUK]

I've got one if you want it. Just cover the postage ...