On 29 Oct, 16:01, Mogga  wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:50:18 -0000, "Niteawk" 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Mogga"  wrote in message
> >news:lk99i313u9qkoah3gn1q2t4drhmiv35lj2@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:58:43 -0000, "Niteawk" 
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>Yes, the same good old nanny state that got rid of affordable housing and
> >>>sold control of our utilities to forigners, privatised everything and told
> >>>us by creating competition it would bring the cost of living down, all
> >>>lies
> >>>of course.
>
> >>>You are meeting people who would rather be on benefits because it is an
> >>>affordable way to live without the risk of being made homeless. Nobody
> >>>wants
> >>>a job that will leave them struggling to pay rent with an altrenative to
> >>>claim help with housing costs. Thats a definite no, people on the dole
> >>>cant
> >>>afford to be in debt.
>
> >> Rents are too high! The rent officer says a fair rent for my street is
> >> 85 a week. Council charges 75. Private landlords charge 135 and 150
>
> >Rents are not that high, they are in line with the cost of living,
> >considering what it costs a private landlord in mortgage payments.
>
> But if rents were fixed house prices would have to be lower (Negative
> equity might hurt some people like it did during the last housing
> crash)
> Is it right that people can make huge sums of money from basic
> provision of services like housing, water, fuel?

Yes.
Though you can always go into competition with them, or refuse to use
their particular services.
Course, the costs might be higher then.  :)

Service provision isn't a social benefit, its business. Business can
charge what they want if they can get people to pay for it.
But other businesses are in competition and if prices set too high,
lose custom.

>
> The last 7 properties sold on my street have been "snapped" up by 3
> different private landlords.

I'm sure the sellers were appreciative of that.
Nothing to stop any one landlord buying all properties. Or anything
that says people cannot purchase more than one.
They have the money (or the credit) and can buy whats being sold.

>
> >The council may well charge £75 pw, but then its property is provided free
> >courtesy of the tax payer anyway.
> >The problem is, councils are moving out of the lettings market and giving
> >away their remaining housing stock free to housing trusts which charge about
> >the same in rent as a private LL. The government must allow councils to
> >start building to provide affordable properties for rent or more and more
> >people are going to stay unemployed.
>
> But what is affordable? Until recently mortgage lenders lent 3X salary
> for a property and this was enough. Now people are having to borrow 7X
> for an average price property. Given the US credit crunch it's likely
> that the house of cards will tumble.
>

3x salary isn't enough. Prices are such that years ago not even that
was needed. My dad purchased his first house for lessthan 1.5 times
salary.
It comes down to whats affordable in the eyes of the lenders. They
make far more from you taking a 25 year mortgage and paying it for 25
years than for repossession.
When prices get too high, only investors will buy. But can't see
anything to put them off buying.
Housing crashes happen. But houses always go up in price again. Those
of us who have purchased property tend not to complain about house
prices going up until its time for us to buy again.


>
>
> >Council houses should never have been sold off in the first place, this is
> >why we have so many people on the dole, no one is going to work in a low
> >paid job an pay £135 pw rent. Its not happening, even councils charging £75
> >pw is to much for a NMW job that pays £220 pw. How much is left after tax,
> >NI, council tax, travelling costs are deducted, then knock £75 quid off that
> >lot, you aint left with much.
>
> Tax credits. Which are propping up poorly paid, short hour jobs.
> Benefiting employers greatly.
>

The jobs that tax credits props up used to be even lower paid before
NMW.
I've cleaned up shit in a nursing home for £2 an hour only 12 years
ago. Now the rate is almost 3 times as much for the same work.  :)
Saying that, my current job has a good hourly rate but because I can
only work part time the tax credits help. Though if I could work full
time I'd still get some tax credits.


>
>
> >> ...
>
> >> If rents were fixed then landlords wouldn't buy houses so overpriced
> >> and non-landlords would be able to buy a house and live in it.
>
> >There is always the private market, most landlords do not let property to
> >unemployed people so they will still buy to let.
>
> I believe some private flats in one city are being used by the LA for
> housing homeless people. This isn't social housing on the cheap by any
> means.

Oh no, not cheap.
Though the landlord does lose the right to vet the tenants, so can be
quite profitable for the landlord.
I've seen tenders for in excess of £10K a year, which is still cheaper
than most hostels by a fair chunk. Owner gets more money than would
under housing benefit, gets guaranteed money and no wait between
tenants.
But loses the right to decide occupancy and eviction for the agreed
upon term.

Martin  <><