Jump to content

The economic impact of Covid-19


Genie

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Davkaus said:

It's the sign of a broken system that a scare resource is able to be hoarded by the wealthy, and loaned back to people, with shit terms, to profit to the very people who they've helped ensure are priced out of the market. It's grotesque to have people working full time jobs but unable to afford a home. It's not so bad in all areas of the country, but it's a fantasy in some areas, and landlords are definitely a factor.

I don't necessarily blame individual landlords, it's a very selfish thing to do, but hey, that's human. It is parasitic, though, and if anyone is going to suffer the costs of an economic correction, I don't really mind it being people with property portfolios.

I'd certainly not ban owning additional properties, but I'd happily see extremely aggressive exponential additional taxation per residential property owned. How it would be enforced is another matter, but I think it'd be good for society for it to not be a profitable enterprise to rent out houses.

 

If you’ve made the money is entirely up to you what you do with it. I have three rental properties which are let out to Eastern European people who have no intention of buying in this country and charge them a fair rate as the properties are all unencumbered so no making on top of a mortgage to be taken into consideration. I fully declare the income made and pay my tax on it and I am fully responsible for the upkeep of the properties which I ensure are redecorating every three years at no cost and all repairs carried out immediately when necessary

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Remember though there are people who actually like renting though. Rather not have  a massive mortgage on their heads 

In the current market

15 minutes ago, Follyfoot said:

I have three rental properties which are let out to Eastern European people who have no intention of buying in this country

In the current market

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Follyfoot said:

If you’ve made the money is entirely up to you what you do with it. I have three rental properties which are let out to Eastern European people who have no intention of buying in this country and charge them a fair rate as the properties are all unencumbered so no making on top of a mortgage to be taken into consideration. I fully declare the income made and pay my tax on it and I am fully responsible for the upkeep of the properties which I ensure are redecorating every three years at no cost and all repairs carried out immediately when necessary

 

Ok. Do you feel that this in any way is a counter argument to the post you're replying to? I have never suggested it isn't up to people what they do with their money. In fact, I even went as far as to say "I'd certainly not ban"...

 

 

Edited by Davkaus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Remember though there are people who actually like renting though. Rather not have  a massive mortgage on their heads 

I think there are always going to be a number of people who whom renting is preferable. Not everyone is ready to put down roots, and even if prices were lower, the administrative nightmare of buying a house means it doesn't make sense to do so if you're not staying put for a few years.

These are the people being only slightly **** over, rather than completely, paying "market rates" of rent covering the mortgage, upkeep, and some nice profit for the landlord on top. Then there are the people who'd quite like to buy property, suffering from BTL landlords hoovering up an extra house for their portfolio and turning it into an HMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dem's point is absolutely right, there are lots of people who want to rent and for whom renting is the best and preferred solution. If these were all the people renting, it would be great, but they aren't. On the contrary, lots of people want to buy but cannot afford to do so until later and later into life. There are really only two ways you could change this situation: you can either make it easier and cheaper to buy properties, or you can reduce the incentive to buy and relatively increase the incentive to rent. The former would require rule changes that made buying to let massively more expensive, complicated and much less lucrative. The latter would require creating conditions (higher wages, socialised old age care) that got rid of the (true) impression people have that owning a house is the only way you will have enough money to pay for care and still have something for your kids to inherit. It may be necessary to do some of both, of course.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Ok. Do you feel that this in any way is a counter argument to the post you're replying to? I have never suggested it isn't up to people what they do with their money. In fact, I even went as far as to say "I'd certainly not ban"...

 

 

Sorry I thought you posted that you’d make it unprofitable for people to own other properties by taxing them, My point being that the money is used to purchase the property would’ve been taxed already at 40% or more from money earned and also the wealthy should not be able to own multiple properties

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, bickster said:

In the current market

In the current market

And if that changes they would be more than welcome to make an offer on the property including a discount for the rent paid to me if they so wished 

Edited by Follyfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Follyfoot said:

Sorry I thought you posted that you’d make it unprofitable for people to own other properties by taxing them, My point being that the money is used to purchase the property would’ve been taxed already at 40% or more from money earned and also the wealthy should not be able to own multiple properties

Ah. Well, that's a different matter entirely. It's up to you what you spend your money on, but if the government decides that behaviour is to be discouraged, tax is an excellent means of doing so. If extra tax makes speculation on residential property unprofitable, that's unfortunate for the few, but perhaps not the many. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For people to rent, there have to be rental properties owned by someone. For those owners to have some incentive to rent them out, there has to be a level of return for them. Taxing rental income too heavily would have an impact likely to reduce the number of rental properties available, which would then create greater prices through demand exceeding supply even more.

so taxation alone doesn’t seem like a fix. Regulation ought to be a greater part of sorting it out. The free market caused the problem, taxing can’t fix it, so regulation has to play a part. Longer tenures, a limit on how much can be charged, that kind of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Build more homes and see the private rental market need to adjust to something lower than a mortgage.

Tax people buying properties where they have no intention of living. Tax second homes. Tax properties bought as holiday cottages. Tax the air bnb model.

People can’t live in their own towns because someone else has seen a profit and thought, **** you, I’ll have my profit.

There is a place for the private landlord wanting his profit. It shouldn’t stop the people of ‘x’ town living in ‘x’ town.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

It is, as long as he is happy to consider "the state" and "local authorities" as valid owners.

Absolutely. I thought that was obvious!  If it’s the state or council, then the someone is “us”.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Build more homes and see the private rental market need to adjust to something lower than a mortgage.

Tax people buying properties where they have no intention of living. Tax second homes. Tax properties bought as holiday cottages. Tax the air bnb model.

People can’t live in their own towns because someone else has seen a profit and thought, **** you, I’ll have my profit.

There is a place for the private landlord wanting his profit. It shouldn’t stop the people of ‘x’ town living in ‘x’ town.

 

The difficulty with Tax is unintended consequences. If I an unscrupulous landlord type have to pay out more to buy some properties, then I’m sure as hell gonna charge more rent, cut back on maintenance costs, be more intolerant of people struggling to pay. Who exactly benefits there?

of course it may give an advantage to a non landlord competitor to buy the property, as they’d effectively have a lower buying cost, but overall there are as many pros as cons. Maybe we should look at other countries for ideas. Germany say? They seem to get a lot of things right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, blandy said:

Absolutely. I thought that was obvious!  If it’s the state or council, then the someone is “us”.

Apologies, not how it read to me. Someone implies person or persons in my mind not a publically owned entity

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, blandy said:

The difficulty with Tax is unintended consequences. If I an unscrupulous landlord type have to pay out more to buy some properties, then I’m sure as hell gonna charge more rent, cut back on maintenance costs, be more intolerant of people struggling to pay. Who exactly benefits there?

of course it may give an advantage to a non landlord competitor to buy the property, as they’d effectively have a lower buying cost, but overall there are as many pros as cons. Maybe we should look at other countries for ideas. Germany say? They seem to get a lot of things right.

The build more homes bit stops the rents going up.

If a not for profit or co-op or council build homes to be used as homes and not part of an investment portfolio first and foremost, then people who want to give their money to a private landlord still can. But very possibly at a lower rent, as they won’t be competing against the people that would prefer not to be the temporary, transitory tennant / income source.

You don’t have to move far from my house to find homes being snapped up as holiday lets when people in this town and along this coast can’t afford a home. That’s fine, this isn’t a communist state. But there should be a mechanism that ensures these places taken out of the housing stock are replaced. A decent heft of tax on income if you’re not actually living their as your own main residence feels like a good place to start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drayton Manor theme park enters administration

Quote

A family-run theme park says it has entered administration after being hit by Storm Dennis and then coronavirus.

Drayton Manor, in Tamworth, has been run by three generations of the Bryan family since opening in 1950.

It has been sold to Looping Group which runs a number of attractions in Europe and the UK, including West Midlands Safari Park and Pleasurewood Hills.

About 600 people were employed at the Staffordshire Park and their jobs have been protected, administrators said.

...more

 

  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

That’s so sad. I worked there as a student, had an incredible time. 😢

Its a pre-pack so there will be no visible change. Just a new UBO. 

Surprised it lasted as a family business for so long. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Xela said:

Its a pre-pack so there will be no visible change. Just a new UBO. 

Surprised it lasted as a family business for so long. 

I imagine the Zoo part of the operation has been sucking up all the cash whilst they’ve been closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â