Analysing GB's quote in more depth "I'm getting on with the job and I think it's important that in difficult economic circumstances we take the right decisions for the future to get fuel prices down, to get food prices down, to make sure we get the housing market moving..."Taking the quote a point at a time:"to get fuel prices down" is GB saying that fuel is becoming prohibitively expensive for the average Joe and he wants to find ways to bring the price back down to affordable levels."to get food prices down" is GB saying, likewise, that food is becoming prohibitively expensive for the average Joe and he wants to find ways to bring the prices back down to affordable levels."to make sure we get the housing market moving..." is GB saying that he couldn't give 2 hoots that houses are more unaffordable than they have ever been for the average Joe and he wants to find ways to ensure that things stay that way.Now, of the 3 subjects he tackles, can anyone spot the odd one out?The 3 basic necessities of human life are food, heat and shelter and yet, while GB seemingly wants to ensure the food and heat remain something that we all have ready access to, his approach to shelter is not to ensure that it remains affordable for all, rather it is to use the warped trading of it to prop up the economy for as long as it can be sustained.
I'm sure I don't need to point out to you that house prices today are orders of magnitude more expensive than they were a decade ago and yet nothing has been done to the housing stock of this country to add inherent value to it during that time (unless you class a bit of magnolia paint and some Ikea laminate flooring as somehow adding value).The perceived wealth that this country has experienced during the last 10 years is largely the result of poorly regulated credit expansion but that expansion had to run out eventually and now the banks are cashing in their chips. Frankly, I find it utterly irresponsible for your leader to seek to perpetuate this unsustainable expansion of credit and, in doing so, prop up the unjustifiably high house prices that we now see.For your average family to buy a humble 3-bed semi fin three towns today, they would have to have a deposit of £10k plus other associated costs taking me close to £15k. They would then need to saddle themselves with a loan equal to 5 times the average wage for the area. Most simply couldn't afford the repayments on such a mortgage and that is at today's interest rates, let alone what they will be in a year's time when Mervyn & Co increase them to try to check the rapidly climbing inflation.The bottom line here is that our economy is, sooner or later, going to have to take a very big hit in order to get the basic necessities back to the levels where young hard-working people can afford them once more. For your leader to seek to postpone that is only to prolong the inevitable agony that those who have over-borrowed (owing to an irresponsible lack of regulation on behalf of the Government) are inevitably going to experience. None of my peer group have a realistic prospect of owning their own home in the near future and yet "In supporting high house prices, the government continues to encourage the older generation to withdraw equity from their houses to spend on unnecessary luxuries, most of which are sourced abroad. Surely, this leads to a loss of capital to the country?"
The single specific question that I would like you to answer in the context of the above is this: When talking about our economy, why does your leader take it as read that a buoyant housing market is an inherently desirable thing for the people of this country? I put it to you that the absolute reverse is true and a return to long-term levels where average property prices are roughly equivalent to 3-4 times average salary is much more desirable for the people and long term future of this country.