Here you go Ashton ... now got work to do ...lol since 201o until 2022 house buyers enjoyed a bankrate of less the 1% in the main less than 0.5% circa 1985 ...A £32,00 house at 8% per annum = £225 interest plus £90 a month off price for 25 years = £331 per month 2 separate mortgages here [ to first interest only you pay endowment premiun for 25 years depending on age .. less than £96 capital sum !] 1985 wage £12000 one person 331 x 12 = 3980 = 3980 x 100 / 12000 = 34% A £300,000 house at recurring fixed rate of 5 years = 3 renewals in force since 2009 = [ averaged at 2% MR ] = £500 per m Capital over 30 years £830 = mortgage of £1330! [ note no deposit ] 2010 wage 26,000 one person 1330 x 12 = 13560 = 13560 x100 / 26000 = 52% Although if working out my maths are correct it indicates the difference against main earner income 18% However back in 1985 there was only family allowance and second person additional income, since 2010 a lot more money to make up wages etc and second income is about 32% higher [ femaale wage! ]
The law of supply and demand has its part to play. Net migration currently is running at 600k annually. That's Bristol and Bath together. They've got to live somewhere.
I’m sure it’s more complicated than that, naturally I’d have thought our population as a whole will shrink, both due to Brexit (an end to free movement ) and falling birth rates. Plus of course the baby boomers will die off.
I agree, it's more complicated that net migration. But nevertheless 600k is a lot of folk who'll need housing. You cite falling birth rates, you may be right, but it seems to me most who turn up are below 40years old and of child bearing age. I'd also have hoped like you, with Brexit, that net migration would diminish - however the opposite is true. As for people dying off, we all seem to me with medical advances to be living longer. Sorry Ashton I have to disagree, the population is going one way......Up. And the law of supply and demand will unfortunately mean the cost of housing will carry on getting more costly every year. Starmer will be in charge next year, perhaps he'll have the panacea........
And the fact that greenfield sites are, or are being earmarked to build on makes me sick The British way of life is just being eroded every year I went into town a couple of weeks ago on a Friday afternoon to get a bus to Southville from just outside what was John Lewis by the Bearpit. I rarely go into town these days as ive no need or desire to do so, but it shocked me as to how I stood out as virtually the only white person at that bus stop and it was the same walking through Broadmead on my way from the Horsefair Seems to me I’m now in the minority
Angelic, you won't believe how many houses are being built on green fields around Midsomer Norton. They're about to start on another 300 houses on green fields and already plans passed for another 200 the other side of the Fosse. It took over 65 minutes to do a mile 3weeks ago because of a minor 'shunt' in Radstock. The roads/infrastructure can't take any more yet another 500 houses will be built in the next 2 or 3 years. 600k net migration is unsustainable and beyond logic.
Spent the day back at my old school / college in Cannington yesterday .. to build Hinckley they put in a new road from the by pass, cuts through the drive and farm fields all were green belt! then when returning home tool more time to look at the village [ no real jobs in Cannington! ] and there is at least 3 new housing estates on green field sites that were!. I suppose building the by pass [ road goes to Minehead ] they then had cut off a swathe of land to the old village and now fuilling with houses.
[QUOTE="realred1952, post: 167 in that time ]. It is harder, but then in 1965 is was harder for people then as opposed to generation before them.... it is only much harder now because for the past few years inflation has been so low which allows interest rates to be like so .. it is always looking at the bigger picture.. but not going there![/QUOTE] I’m not sure it was harder in 1965 than in the previous generations, it’s before my time (I was only 4}, but I’m sure there was a massive house building push after the Second World War, loads of council houses were built with affordable rents, Southmead and Hartclffe are examples at that. My parents moved into Hartcliffe when it was first built with a young family. They told me when they first moved in it was really nice, lots of young families of a similar age with their first houses. It was a really nice area. Then the area was subject to an experiment, whereby They moved troublesome families in to try to integrate them with nice ones in the hope they would change, unfortunately it didn’t work, and instead many of the nice families moved out, my parents included. Anyway the point being after the Second World War (obviously they population had been reduced by the war), and for the ones that survived the war a massive council house building project got underway. Wasn’t it called homes for heroes or something, in an attempt to ensure there were houses for everyone. Many were then sold by Maggie, but the revenue wasn’t used to build more, hence why we are in the position we’re in now.
local councils got the money? and they had to use it wisely cough cough cough .. the boom was in mid 80's we used to go round and encourage people to buy .. then have a contract sealed ready to double glaze them when they did it was all built into the mortgage... WHO was the council in the mid 80's?
It was throughout the country, not just Bristol, it’s not a party political thing, more importantly who were the government mid 80’’s who allowed selling council properties, and didn’t insist money receive had to be used to build more, then reduced money given to councils, thus ensuring money was used for other things. They never should have been sold in the first place and not replaced. It was money wasted by Maggie - really can’t stick the woman.
2 versions of this it seems yours ....................... and the way Bristol should [ sort of used some of it ] have used the money.. The .gov only stated it was ok to sell to present owners and the cost was based on tenure, the money raised should be used to build more housing of a "better standard" thus one way was the revamping of remaining [ some ] council properties with major refurbs ... the houses would last longer and be less in need of maintenance. Bristol had hundreds of such refurbs and built very few new ones above what they had planned. the refurb ones which were later sold attracted a higher price / valuation often as much as 30% higher this meant tenant paid more for it, but less than if they bought it and had the work themselves ..
RP I do believe you and if the new ring road from Hicks Gate to Whitchurch to join up with the A4174 at the South Bristol Hospital gets approved, it will see another 2,000 houses built on greenfield land Legal immigration should be paused for a couple of years and vastly reduced when it restarts Illegal immigration, by definition should result in immediate deportation from the UK to the previous country Ffs let’s get our own society back on track where services can cope with the current population People can’t just come here, or to Europe for that matter from the likes of Syria, Iraq etc and more recently India and Egypt just because they are poor.
I really don’t get why we don’t have proper legal routes, where they are processed quickly, then we can sort out the legitimate asylum seekers and deal with them properly , because we don’t, at present, they have no choice but not to come illegally even if the have a legitimate claim. Then we will really have proper control of our borders.
We do. This is not a recent problem, it's been like it for many moons and different governments. It doesn't give any Tom Dick or Harry the right to break the law. But hey it keeps the lefties happy.
If there are legal routes explain to me why so many of the genuine asylum seekers that come here illegally chose to pay smugglers thousands of pounds and risk their live in dodgy boats crossing one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, wouldn’t it just be easier and cheaper to use the legal routes. Bearing in mind a very large number once they are processed are granted asylum? , because nobody has explained that sufficiently to me. It’s because there aren’t any proper legal routes from many of the areas these people come from. it’s a perfectly reasonable stance, but wrong in my view , to say we don’t want asylum seekers here at all, but to try to say there are legal routes here, but people chose to use costly dangerous illegal routes just doesn’t make sense. The truth is the Tories don’t want asylum seekers here, just be honest
We do have a number of processing places world wide where people are accepted or turned away problem is most illegal's know they wont pass and take the other routes quite a lot / quite va fewof the illegals are failed from these places
The discussion has moved on from that. Answer my follow up question.,the one immediately before your answer.
Apart from Afghanistan, Hong Kong and Ukrain, all with their specific issues there are only 3 schemes 1) UK Resetlement scheme -,since 2021 2,023 successful applicants, 2) community sponsorship - since 2016, 942 successful applicants 3) Family reunion scheme, since 2008, 441 successful applicants - Source Gov.co.uk - I rest my case
no you have done some research, and come up with 3 of many ways to legally get here. [ as a point of order where are these based?? ] These are schemes set up for specific's there are other outposts that filter would be immigrants
