|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 13, 2023 22:26:06 GMT
Where do you get your illegal migrants numbers from. No one knows the estimated vary from hundreds of thousands to millions, and I mean millions. Pick a number. A million, presumably living in the black economy still don't much effect the housing market. A million is 1.4% A million living where the jobs are will have a major effect and the probable number is higher than that as about a million is the official estimate. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 13, 2023 22:31:58 GMT
Pick a number. A million, presumably living in the black economy still don't much effect the housing market. A million is 1.4% A million living where the jobs are will have a major effect and the probable number is higher than that as about a million is the official estimate. 1.4% will not have a major effect. Furthermore these people wont have a NI number, so wont have a mortgage. In fact if the claims are to be believed they are working for 5 quid an hour and living 10 to a room. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Oct 13, 2023 22:51:10 GMT
A million living where the jobs are will have a major effect and the probable number is higher than that as about a million is the official estimate. 1.4% will not have a major effect. Furthermore these people wont have a NI number, so wont have a mortgage. In fact if the claims are to be believed they are working for 5 quid an hour and living 10 to a room. You seem to be saying false NIs do not exist. If you have 1,4% spread throughout the country it will have little effect but it will be concentrated in areas of housing shortage (where the jobs are) and as such will have a major impact in these areas. No doubt many are living 10 to a house but if a house is full of 10 illegals, it is 10 legal people who have no accommodation. Apparently we are down about 1 million homes. Following my proposals would go a long way to reduce that deficit. Two years of no migration at all and 200.000 homes built and the problem is solved. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 14, 2023 1:11:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 14, 2023 6:09:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 14, 2023 6:12:31 GMT
Pick a number. A million, presumably living in the black economy still don't much effect the housing market. A million is 1.4% Unless they're living in tents or outside under bridges their presence has to effect the housing market. Using the ONS metric of 2.36 as the standard household size a million illegal immigrants would require 423,000 dwellings. Somebody has to provide them. They are unlikely to be new-build so they have to be deducted from the current housing stock.
Even assuming they live ten to a room in crummy inner city HMOs that's still tens of thousands of dwellings that are not available to the settled population.
As for future demand, it's not just new immigrants that will put pressure on the housing market, it's also the natural growth of the existing immigrant-descended population. Between the last two censuses the population of England and Wales grew by 3.6 million, entirely due to the two factors just noted. As John correctly stated the indigenous population is in numerical decline and there is no foreseeable way that will change.
Again using the ONS metric, 3.6 million more people implies 1.5 million additional dwellings just to house immigrants and the increase in the immigrant-descended population. To that of course we need to add the demand for additional housing resulting from household formation in the indigenous population, due to divorce, singletons leaving the nest, newly married or cohabiting, overcrowding etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 10:03:39 GMT
1.4% will not have a major effect. Furthermore these people wont have a NI number, so wont have a mortgage. In fact if the claims are to be believed they are working for 5 quid an hour and living 10 to a room. You seem to be saying false NIs do not exist. If you have 1,4% spread throughout the country it will have little effect but it will be concentrated in areas of housing shortage (where the jobs are) and as such will have a major impact in these areas. No doubt many are living 10 to a house but if a house is full of 10 illegals, it is 10 legal people who have no accommodation. Apparently we are down about 1 million homes. Following my proposals would go a long way to reduce that deficit. Two years of no migration at all and 200.000 homes built and the problem is solved. I am saying false NI's do not exist. As an employer I can tell you its impossible. Whenever we employ someone we have to enter their details plus NI into HMRC. They don't take kindly to fakes or duplicates. Are you suggesting mortgage companies lending 100's of 1,000's of pounds don't do the same checks? Not saying its impossible, just very rare. The calculations for the number of homes needed do not include illegal immigrants. The calculation is based on legal souls trying to get on the housing market. I'm not going to waste too much more time on your favourite subject as its effects here are negligible. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 10:08:01 GMT
Unless they're living in tents or outside under bridges their presence has to effect the housing market. Using the ONS metric of 2.36 as the standard household size a million illegal immigrants would require 423,000 dwellings. Somebody has to provide them. They are unlikely to be new-build so they have to be deducted from the current housing stock.
Even assuming they live ten to a room in crummy inner city HMOs that's still tens of thousands of dwellings that are not available to the settled population.
As for future demand, it's not just new immigrants that will put pressure on the housing market, it's also the natural growth of the existing immigrant-descended population. Between the last two censuses the population of England and Wales grew by 3.6 million, entirely due to the two factors just noted. As John correctly stated the indigenous population is in numerical decline and there is no foreseeable way that will change.
Again using the ONS metric, 3.6 million more people implies 1.5 million additional dwellings just to house immigrants and the increase in the immigrant-descended population. To that of course we need to add the demand for additional housing resulting from household formation in the indigenous population, due to divorce, singletons leaving the nest, newly married or cohabiting, overcrowding etc.
So many assumptions here to get to the figure you want. The million illegals was a made up figure. The idea that these illegals share the same 2.36 ratio as the normal population. I think you might need to re-think your calcs. Can I ask you to be careful when jumping from ILLEGAL immigrants to LEGAL immigrants, there are many on here who don't seem to be able to separate the arguments. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 10:09:30 GMT
Well yes, we all know that. But so long as your government keep topping up the numbers, they need to build enough houses for both them and my children. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 14, 2023 10:11:57 GMT
I'd be very surprised to learn that the actual number of illegals was as low as a million. We know that has to be a lower bound since the government has admitted to it. It's likely to be much, much larger I'd have thought.
It's unclear why a discussion on housing demand should not include both categories. Can you explain?
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 10:23:29 GMT
I'd be very surprised to learn that the actual number of illegals was as low as a million. We know that has to be a lower bound since the government has admitted to it. It's likely to be much, much larger I'd have thought. It's unclear why a discussion on housing demand should not include both categories. Can you explain? Well if you include illegals who have been here for years/decades you might be right. But as they are an unknown and there is no sign of our government hunting them down to expel them, then they are already included in the numbers. They are a distraction of interest to those who would like to blame all our faults on someone else. The discussion on housing should include both, what I asked is that you keep them separate. Otherwise the usual subjects lump them together and talk about solving the problem by expelling 6 million people from the country. But more importantly. WE INVITED THEM TO LIVE HERE, OUR GOVERNMENT VOTED IN BY US! So here they are and we need to provide enough homes for both them and our own children. I don't see why our children should pay 5 times as much for their houses than we did just because we invited a load of foreigners to live here to keep OUR taxes lower. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 14, 2023 11:54:50 GMT
When you say 'we need to provide them with houses' who is the 'we' you are referring to? The government? The construction industry? the general public?
When I went to live in the United States I don't recall anybody fretting about having to provide a home for me and my family. That was my job.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 12:10:31 GMT
When you say 'we need to provide them with houses' who is the 'we' you are referring to? The government? The construction industry? the general public? When I went to live in the United States I don't recall anybody fretting about having to provide a home for me and my family. That was my job. We the country through our elected representatives. When we say WE need to make sure no one breathes in asbestos, who do you think we mean by WE? The government? The construction industry? the general public? This is not about providing a home at your cost, its about freeing up enough land so those who live here and pay taxes can afford somewhere to live. The reason you didn't think about that in America is that they have millions of square miles of empty land and no NIMBY repressive make the landowners rich planning laws. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 14, 2023 12:19:34 GMT
In the final analysis what you seem to be concerned about are over-restrictive planning regulations, right? But they are there for a reason and should not be cast off just so the countryside can be concreted over to accommodate immigrants and their offspring. Surely the onus is on a prospective immigrant to do due diligence before getting on a plane or in a dinghy to verify his potential income will cover his housing needs as well as everything else.
We should probably have a conversation also about your assumption that immigrants are also automatically taxpayers. Given the low SES of many if not most immigrants I'd suggest that is probably fallacious.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Oct 14, 2023 13:00:48 GMT
Yes. That being the reason building land is so expensive. Well I would have stopped population growth 20 years ago, but they forgot to ask me. That said, we currently live on 2% of the land mass of the UK. A further 12% is urbanised (Football stadiums, school fields gardens etc. A huge amount 69% is agricultural land.  My proposal is we give up some agricultural land and build towns with parkland. Yes we would have to import a bit more food, but the savings on mortgages would easily outweigh the extra food costs. Not to mention it could be grown far cheaper in Africa than in the UK. If you're concerned about Co2 costs involved in shipping, how about really thinking out of the box and stacking up our fields like blocks of flats and lighting them artificially at night using all that unwanted renewable wind energy.
Why are you so bothered about Immigrants checking, how about my children what are they supposed to do?
Anyway most of the immigrants you talk of are already here, already have children and even grand children. We are not talking about some future shortage of housing if we continue with immigration. We are talking about the shortage we have now with the current population.
We should probably not, as I've never claimed they are. My theory oft repeated on here is that they are only welcomed here if they can earn enough to pay tax. That they come young and fit with no family (as a rule) That they contribute for a few years before becoming like the rest of the population, net takers. And that's the reason the government has to bring in another lot every year. What we should discuss is the idea that we need to recognise we can't have all the goodies we want without paying more tax. That comparing the NHS today with it in 1960 is ridiculous. That saying people paid into pensions that presumed they would live until 90 is ridiculous That automation has moved more money to fewer people and taxation hasn't followed. Now that would be a real difficult conversation. But this is a thread on housing and the reason for the shortage of housing is a lack of building land.
|
|
