darreninthenet

I love the idea but how would it be paid for? Quick back of the envelope sums says if you pay every adult the government living wage in the UK, it would cost around 950bn... uk government expenditure for everything is just under 700bn a year at the moment...

So let's say the landlords don't want to do this and sell up, or at least try to... who can afford to buy now? Yes the prices will come down but that doesn't remove the need for a deposit/downpayment - yes that will be smaller but how is somebody going to save that money still? Where do they live while doing that? That is still the biggest problem... the UK does have a help to buy scheme where the government owns part of your property (acts as deposit) and you pay the mortgage on the rest, but you also pay some rent to the government for their share.

The whole system needs overhauling to make it work these changes alone won't sort it out.

I disagree, it's the details that will bite you on the ass... until those people have haggled over the details we realistically have no idea how many up or downsides there would be.

I agree it's a problem and I agree the current landlord situation is very likely contributing but removing that component by itself I believe is likely to cause all manner of problems... landlords are currently parasiting (is that a word?) off a system that's broken... my view is if you fix the system they won't be able to parasite on it.

Because people are talking on here like it would the solve the problem... it's a much more complex and nuanced issue than "landlords making (too much) profit". The knock-on effects and interconnectedness in (some) economies all need to be thought through and resolved/have a plan to resolve first otherwise you're just creating other problems.

This whole thread reminds me of Brexit (I'm from the UK) and how leavers were saying how simple it would be to leave... this is such a complex problem.

Where do these people get their deposits from for the mortgage on the cheaper houses? Where do they live whilst saving up for these cheaper deposits?

I'm not convinced, at least in the UK it's been a very very long time since mortgages were accessible to the average salary.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem but I'm not sure this would solve the problem right now. In the UK something like 70% of housing is mortgaged or owned (by the occupier)... most renters say the biggest barrier to getting a home is not the mortgage affordability it's saving for the deposit. Indeed when I bought my first home 20+ years ago I needed my parents help on that front. Where do people live between leaving education and saving up for that deposit, whatever size it is?

In the UK? I don't recall everyone suddenly having affordable mortgages

You're assuming said people would be able to obtain a mortgage at those house prices?

They would but do you believe they'll be low enough that a bank would be prepared to take the on the risk of loaning the money to basically everyone?

So let's say a landlord sells their property and somebody else buys it to live in.

Where do the original renters live now?

Or in a rental property, who is paying to maintain it if the landlord is not charging above their mortgage costs?

Or why would a landlord take on the risk of loaning an expensive asset to somebody at cost knowing they may not get paid? Or the boiler stops working and they have to spend thousands fixing it without any risk to the tenant?

The argument would be, not saying I agree or disagree as I think it's more complex and nuanced than this, is that they are taking on the risk of maintaining and loaning a very expensive asset to somebody and hoping they'll look after it and pay that cost of borrowing it.

Is the implication here that if the landlords hadn't bought the property, the people renting would be able to buy it?