Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Tamas]

Without having read the above, a libertarian approach to things related to house building would go a LONG way to reduce property prices
Whether an extreme laise fair approach is overall desirable is a different topic but property prices in the UK are not high because of a lack of regulation or state intervention, quite the opposite.

[Tonitrus]

How is a tax on property regressive? 

A would contend that a tax that doesn't care if you're a little old grannie with a meagre/limited social security income and will force you out of the home that you've lived in (and own outright) for 50 years...just because property values have assessed starkly upward...is regressive.

Or, at least, one way that it can be so.

[crazy canuck]

1: Blairite ginger?
2: So this Canadian guy is a nutty libertarian yet he goes on about house prices and the economy being unjust?
Those things don't seem to connect.

I can understand your confusion. But when you realize that his policy is nothing more than remove government from the process and let the market do its thing, then you can easily understand why it is a good issue for him in the next election and completely consistent with the belief of the party's base.

[Sheilbh]

Without having read the above, a libertarian approach to things related to house building would go a LONG way to reduce property prices
Whether an extreme laise fair approach is overall desirable is a different topic but property prices in the UK are not high because of a lack of regulation or state intervention, quite the opposite.

Yeah - I mean when you've even got Angela Rayner out there making the case that the main issue in the UK is the lack of supply (and she's right), you know something's shifted.

[Tamas]

Without having read the above, a libertarian approach to things related to house building would go a LONG way to reduce property prices
Whether an extreme laise fair approach is overall desirable is a different topic but property prices in the UK are not high because of a lack of regulation or state intervention, quite the opposite.

Yeah - I mean when you've even got Angela Rayner out there making the case that the main issue in the UK is the lack of supply (and she's right), you know something's shifted.

Let's hope. I mean, last year I have got mortgaged to the hilt so a big building program would quite hurt me in the medium term, but shall result in a more future-proofed island, so let's get on with it.

[Josquius]

Why would rayner be saying something other than there's not enough houses being built?

This is something that people from the furthest left to right agree on (well.bar far right. They'd say its too much demand of the wrong sort).

The difference being of course the need for councils and central government to do what the system was originally designed for and actually build vs. Complete chaos. Freely build anything anywhere.


Japan has informed my views on this: that the libertarian approach may be good for house prices but otherwise spells sprawling donut doom.
I do think the solution lies more in empowering government to bash heads and guide development in sensible places. New towns done right.
Though I do think on a very limited level in unspectacular neighbourhoods of London et al having local virtual free for all laws could be good.
And make it easier to build within 2 stories of existing buildings elsewhere.

1: Blairite ginger?
2: So this Canadian guy is a nutty libertarian yet he goes on about house prices and the economy being unjust?
Those things don't seem to connect.

I can understand your confusion. But when you realize that his policy is nothing more than remove government from the process and let the market do its thing, then you can easily understand why it is a good issue for him in the next election and completely consistent with the belief of the party's base.

So when he speaks of an unjust economy he means let's make it more, not less, unjust.

[Sheilbh]

Why would rayner be saying something other than there's not enough houses being built?

This is something that people from the furthest left to right agree on (well.bar far right. They'd say its too much demand of the wrong sort).

The difference being of course the need for councils and central government to do what the system was originally designed for actually build vs. Complete chaos. Freely build anything anywhere.

Right but that's sort of the problem from the left. The argument has always been that actually the problem isn't supply, it's that it's the wrong type of supply (luxury flats etc). This ignores the fact that the UK has an unusually high share of social housing and spends an unusual amount on social housing in comparison with the rest of the OECD.

But also ignores the point that the Centre for Cities made that actually the UK has been under-building basically since 1948 and the Town and Country Planning Act.

More broadly I think it's another example of the UK's goldilocks obsession of wanting exactly the right perfect level of things, which I think leads into the problem of us developing very complicated, expensive, bespoke systems that deliver worse results at higher costs but cannot be changed because that's the way things are done. So we've had a very, very long time of stopping cities from growing and promising well designed new towns, we have algorithms that work out how many houses are likely to be needed in an area - and it's not worked. I think we actually just need to let things happen.

I'm reminded again of the absolutely wild deliberate decisions by governments in the 50s and 60s to hobble the economy of Birmingham because it was the wrong type of economic boom (services, more than manufacturing) and it was in the wrong place (an early attempt at levelling up). The result wasn't that that investment was displaced into Britain's goldilocks plan (more manufacturing, in the north) but that it went to other countries, to London and investors built to exactly the limit of what they were allowed before they had to engage with the government.

Or, for example, this chart on solar farms in the UK:

Because above 50MW you have to go through the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Planning process (which I believe was intended to simplify things for important projects but actually requires vast amonts of assessments etc).

Maybe we should stop trying to get the exact perfect result and just simplify the system, make it easier and let () markets decide what gets built - because that is better than too little getting built whether its homes, businesses in the West Midlands or renewables.

It's why I think it's really significant to have someone from the left of the party like Rayner talking about increasing supply rather than the usual stuff about the wrong type of supply. It suggests Labour are starting to grasp the problem (and reaching a similar conclusion to Poilievre - albeit in very different systems).

I think it's a bit like that project management trilemma of cost, quality, speed and you have to pick two - but British decision makers, and the British public respond "yes" I think I mentioned before but I think Gove's idea of allowing significant development around Cambridge is a really good idea - which is facing a lot of local opposition. But one real problem is that there is a potential lack of water. This is seen as a fait accompli by campaigners against development, as opposed to a state failure given that there have been private sector attempts to build reservoirs but none have been approved since 1992 (especially given that the population has grown by about 10 million in the same time period) and it is, frankly, just embarrassing that an island as damp as this one should really potentially be facing water shortages or having to restrict building because we don't have enough water

Edit: Oh and what he meant by ginger group:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_group

[HVC]

So when he speaks of an unjust economy he means let's make it more, not less, unjust.

Lack of red tape is not what's making housing unaffordable and economically unjust.

[HVC]

When did extreme British NIMBYism become a thing?

[Sheilbh]

I don't know - I think in terms of what's the system that allowed them to exercise power (and maybe emphasised it) and I think in terms of impact, though, there's a strong case for the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947.

It didn't make people NIMBYs, obviously - and the other part is true everywhere that a small but motivated campaign can have an outsize impact in low turnout elections (and our local government elections tend to have low turnout):
https://www.centreforcities.org/press/four-million-uk-homes-missing-due-to-outdated-planning-laws/

[Tamas]

In regards to UK and property, how widespread is the whole leasehold thing in the world? Coming from an ex-communist state its existence blindsided me but maybe it's not so rare out there.

[Sheilbh]

In regards to UK and property, how widespread is the whole leasehold thing in the world? Coming from an ex-communist state its existence blindsided me but maybe it's not so rare out there.

I think it's fairly unique (and only England and Wales within the UK). I don't think it really has any impact on planning or number of houses built though.

I've spoken with Irish and Aussie and Scottish lawyers who've cross-qualified into English law and the one area that was just a million miles from their experience was land law. The rest was much of a muchness.

[Gups]

Without having read the above, a libertarian approach to things related to house building would go a LONG way to reduce property prices
Whether an extreme laise fair approach is overall desirable is a different topic but property prices in the UK are not high because of a lack of regulation or state intervention, quite the opposite.

Yeah - I mean when you've even got Angela Rayner out there making the case that the main issue in the UK is the lack of supply (and she's right), you know something's shifted.

Is she calling for a removal of affordable housing requirements, biodiversity net gain, two fire escapes on tall resi buildings, contributions to schools, hospitals, libraries, highways etc? I've not seen anything along those lines yet.

Housebuilders won't build at a loss

[Gups]

In regards to UK and property, how widespread is the whole leasehold thing in the world? Coming from an ex-communist state its existence blindsided me but maybe it's not so rare out there.

I think it's fairly unique (and only England and Wales within the UK). I don't think it really has any impact on planning or number of houses built though.

I've spoken with Irish and Aussie and Scottish lawyers who've cross-qualified into English law and the one area that was just a million miles from their experience was land law. The rest was much of a muchness.

Not true at all. Property law in the UK, aus and NZ is very similar. Loads of antipodean property lawyers in the UK.

[Sheilbh]

Not true at all. Property law in the UK, aus and NZ is very similar. Loads of antipodean property lawyers in the UK.

Interesting - I've definitely had that conversation where they had to do the 7 core units (contract, equity, tort, public, crime, land, EU) and said, obviously aside from EU law, they found land law the most different/alien.

Although there are loads of Antipodean lawyers in the UK in general