Big J on radio 4..

[Chalgravesteve]

21 minutes ago, Squaredy said:

I have been reading this thread with interest.  Fair play Jonathon you are good at starting interesting threads.

 

I think anyone who doesn't see the down side of the high property prices in the UK is being a little naive.  A lot of people have benefited from the high price of property and land....mainly land owners and anyone who owns more than one house especially.  And of course anyone who inherits a house or a share of.  The majority of people in the UK have done very nicely out of this bubble.  I may do one day when my parents/in-laws pop their clogs. 

 

But you have to feel for anyone trying to get their foot on the property ladder.  That is really what Big J is talking about.  OK he is wanting to do it slightly differently from most, but before the last 20 years of crazy property value increases it would have been probably quite feasible for him to do exactly what he is suggesting.  For an average decent family home in Devon to be worth maybe £350,000 when Devon is full of people in the tourist industry earning maybe £17,000 per year is a huge problem.  The system is broken.  Same problem in London and most of South East England.  Many people can only ever rent (at a rate that means they will never be able to save up a deposit) or hope they will one day inherit.

 

It is a very sad situation, not for the majority who are doing very nicely thank you, but for the millions who may never be able to get on the property ladder, and are stuck in a cycle of ever-increasing rent.

 

I for one think that if Brexit means the property market crashes, or at least drops 20% or so this could be very welcome relief for a lot of people.

 

I also want to just say that it is so ironic that as this thread highlights, the only type of activity that is fully supported and for which an AOC is likely to be granted is exactly the sort of activity that is contributing vastly to global warming and food insecurity.  Sustainable profitable forestry is not allowed, yet unsustainable animal agriculture is encouraged and heavily subsidised.  And when I say unsustainable animal agriculture, I am not suggesting all animal husbandry is unsustainable, but if you take a look at the bigger picture such farming is most certainly unsustainable.

Yes it is an interesting thread and the viewpoints of various contributors will be differing by age and/or financial restraints, depending on whether they have benefited from the "boom" or not.

 

The current stagnation in the housing market, in my view, is nothing to do with brexit. It is more a revaluation of property due to one thing, the major change in the way that buy to let and rental income taxation has changed. For the past decade or so, the boom in buy to let was fueled by the ability to deduct pretty much all of your maintenance costs including interest on a buy to let mortgage, before the balance became tax deductable as income. The result was that people could start with one house for rent, and then add others to increase their portfolio as they could afford to do so, funded by the ones they already own. So the first time buyer and the mid range houses were all being snapped up by the ever increasing number of people getting buy to lets. The massive competition and demand for houses boosted house prices upwards. 

 

With the changes that have come in, in the past few years, it is significantly less attractive to get a buy to let mortgage as in many cases it will not fund all of the outgoings, or the profit left after tax and expenses makes the acquisition of more houses less attractive. The market though, has not corrected itself downwards yet though, so the first time buyer is still being offered properties that are priced because of boosted prices and whilst they have significantly less competition from those wanting to buy to let, they still can't afford the price as it is now. Equally, the owner of the property who wants to sell, won't sell at a lower price than they paid unless they absolutely have to.

 

So you have a stagnant market at the moment which doesn't show any signs of picking up soon. A crash in house price values may be good for those wanting to get on the housing ladder, but comes at the cost of those that have managed to get on the ladder in the past 5 years or so, as they will go into negative equity and we have been there before on that one!

 

In the medium term, wages will pick up and will close the gap on the house prices if the market remains stagnant. I saw a report which said the bank of Mum and Dad was now the 7th biggest lender in the UK, as those with high value property try to assist their kids getting going.

  

 

  

 

 

[eggsarascal]

15 minutes ago, difflock said:

Eggs, Simon is it?, 

Anyway, despite our philosophical differences, we too started out with an previously owned and run-down 1100 sqft timber frame bungalow and very second hand furniture, plus a small(1100cc) self maintained 2nd hand car.

I improved the dwelling with CH and a garage, all done with my own labour, and we sold it to buy another dwelling nearer both our places of employment,

 

From where we took the gamble of buying bare agricultural land at public auction,

land that no-one else was interested in bidding seriously on btw.

 

Nowhere in the first 2 house purchase and sale transactions did we "make" any money.

Our current, and quite unfinished  25 odd years later build ,was also the receipt of much of my own labour.

And was not planned with any forethought as to maximize any likely aftersale, which would be a proper nightmare.

 

Nowt in life is free.

 

And again, I was discerning or fortunate(but madly and passionately in love nonetheless) in my solid choice(well her choice I suppose, as in I chased her until she caught me!) of a mongrel bred Army-brat lover and wife.

Marcus

Yes, it is Simon, but Egg will do. My first house in Stoke cost 3 and sixpence, could I afford it, could I hell, unless there was 100% mortgages , trying to pay the mortgage and paying dad back the little he lent me was torture but I got there, it taught me I couldn't run before I could walk. My last place is probably somewhere between £350k-£400k. Could I start over if I wanted to?  probably, but it would be in a small terrace or cottage if I want to stay around Sudbury. Cutting ones cloth accordingly springs to mind.

[ESS]

1 hour ago, Squaredy said:

 

 

 

 

 Sustainable profitable forestry is not allowed, yet unsustainable animal agriculture is encouraged and heavily subsidised. 

Why do you say sustainable forestry is not allowed? The way I see it the people willing to invest in land, pay their own establishment etc without grants is the thing that's not sustainable.

What direct subsidy payments are farmers receiving for livestock ? the subsidies livestock farmers are receiving, particularly hill farms are environmental payments for reducing stock numbers for the benefit of the birds and the bees, flowers and grouse.

Arable farmers receive subsidy for taking land out of production, buffer strips, set aside, for the same reason as above.

[Squaredy]

12 minutes ago, ESS said:

Why do you say sustainable forestry is not allowed? The way I see it the people willing to invest in land, pay their own establishment etc without grants is the thing that's not sustainable.

What direct subsidy payments are farmers receiving for livestock ? the subsidies livestock farmers are receiving, particularly hill farms are environmental payments for reducing stock numbers for the benefit of the birds and the bees, flowers and grouse.

Arable farmers receive subsidy for taking land out of production, buffer strips, set aside, for the same reason as above.

I am no expert I will admit, but farming in the UK makes more money from subsidies than selling their products.  And to be specific, don't small farms receive something called the Single Farm Payment?  A relative of mine who is a cow farmer certainly does and it is very important to him.  So as I said livestock farming is heavily subsidised.  Who do so many farmers neglect their woodlands and work their fields hard?  Because the agriculture is so much more heavily encouraged financially than the forestry.  Wales alone has around 150,000 acres of unmanaged hardwood woodland.  When did you last see a field that has not been touched for 70 years?

[ESS]

3 minutes ago, Squaredy said:

I am no expert I will admit, but farming in the UK makes more money from subsidies than selling their products.  And to be specific, don't small farms receive something called the Single Farm Payment?  A relative of mine who is a cow farmer certainly does and it is very important to him.  So as I said livestock farming is heavily subsidised.  Who do so many farmers neglect their woodlands and work their fields hard?  Because the agriculture is so much more heavily encouraged financially than the forestry.  Wales alone has around 150,000 acres of unmanaged hardwood woodland.  When did you last see a field that has not been touched for 70 years?

There is no direct headage payment for livestock, SFP is predominantly made up from environmental payments.i.e taking land out of production for the benefit of nature. Why do people think farming is subsidised? because otherwise produce in the shops would have to meet the cost of production which would result in families on low income etc. starving,..the consumer gets the benefit of subsidies also in the cost of their bread, milk, meat etc. Take subsidies away and we would have to increase the welfare payments to those that need them, ...

The main reason woodlands have been neglected was money, or lack of it, until more recent years the cost of harvesting, reinstatement etc outweighed the financial return, particularly for low grade wood. Admittedly the increased demand for woodfuels has seen a rise in prices, but often the return to landowners for low quality small blocks could amount to a few hundred quid.

[LeeGray]

I get single farm payment and thought it might be handy to have s few facts here.

 

For that I, like every other claimant has to obey the rules on animal management such as welfare, movement registrations, animal identification, keeping the farm in agricultural order, for arable crops there may be regulation on rotations that can be planted, we have to keep plenty of records and be available to be inspected every now and again by RLR, RPA, trading standards, animal health teams, etc....

but single farm payment is made related to nothing other than size of entitlements. The rate per entitlement is set for all. The entitlement you have is based on what was previously paid. No headage, no set aside etc anymore. 

 

You can buy and sell entitlements separately from the farm. Some farmers have no entitlements and do without sfp or some rent entitlement for a percentage of the sfp. Some entitlement owners don’t farm and need some land to partner there claim with in order to get paid.

 

The system is very poor value for money to the tax payer and the sooner we get rid of them the better it will be for everyone other than the farmers who’ve relied on them for decades. Farmers who can’t farm without sub will move on. New entrants and those farming without needing sub will carry on and pick up the vacant land.

 

Land prices, rents and machinery will all fall and become more affordable but I genuinely think food prices would only rise a small percentage. This would be the retailers and pack houses adding a bit of extra margin for themselves and blaming it on the subsidy for farming being taken away.

 

 

[AHPP]

Why do people think farming is subsidised? because otherwise produce in the shops would have to meet the cost of production which would result in families on low income etc. starving,..the consumer gets the benefit of subsidies also in the cost of their bread, milk, meat etc. Take subsidies away and we would have to increase the welfare payments to those that need them, ...

 

Current system:

Government taxes consumer 10p for carrot subsidy and 5p to administrate the collection of tax and distribution of subsidy. Government gives the 10p subsidy to a farmer. Farmer sells a carrot to consumer for 10p. Consumer gets a carrot for 25p. Farmer gets 20p for a carrot. Government gets 5p.

 

 

Free market:

Tax a consumer nothing. Farmer sells a carrot to a consumer for 20p. Farmer gets the same 20p. Consumer has the same carrot for 5p less. Government not necessary.

 

[AHPP]

And I was being bloody kind with the 5p.

[LeeGray]

6 minutes ago, AHPP said:

 

Current system:

Government taxes consumer 10p for carrot subsidy and 5p to administrate the collection of tax and distribution of subsidy. Government gives the 10p subsidy to a farmer. Farmer sells a carrot to consumer for 10p. Consumer gets a carrot for 25p. Farmer gets 20p for a carrot. Government gets 5p.

 

 

Free market:

Tax a consumer nothing. Farmer sells a carrot to a consumer for 20p. Farmer gets the same 20p. Consumer has the same carrot for 5p less. Government not necessary.

 

 

6 minutes ago, AHPP said:

 

Current system:

Government taxes consumer 10p for carrot subsidy and 5p to administrate the collection of tax and distribution of subsidy. Government gives the 10p subsidy to a farmer. Farmer sells a carrot to consumer for 10p. Consumer gets a carrot for 25p. Farmer gets 20p for a carrot. Government gets 5p.

 

 

Free market:

Tax a consumer nothing. Farmer sells a carrot to a consumer for 20p. Farmer gets the same 20p. Consumer has the same carrot for 5p less. Government not necessary.

 

Exactly this, obviously everyone would have to buy food direct from farmers and there’s not many avocado farmers in the uk so most of the vegan wankers would still be shipping them in from Peru where some shithead drug cartel own the plantations and take all the villages water but it is possible to get by without government intervention if the consumer supported it.

[Squaredy]

1 hour ago, ESS said:

There is no direct headage payment for livestock, SFP is predominantly made up from environmental payments.i.e taking land out of production for the benefit of nature. Why do people think farming is subsidised? because otherwise produce in the shops would have to meet the cost of production which would result in families on low income etc. starving,..the consumer gets the benefit of subsidies also in the cost of their bread, milk, meat etc. Take subsidies away and we would have to increase the welfare payments to those that need them, ...

The main reason woodlands have been neglected was money, or lack of it, until more recent years the cost of harvesting, reinstatement etc outweighed the financial return, particularly for low grade wood. Admittedly the increased demand for woodfuels has seen a rise in prices, but often the return to landowners for low quality small blocks could amount to a few hundred quid.

Why do people think farming is subsidised?  Because it is.  3 billion per year roughly in the UK.

 

Is cheap food really a benefit?  Maybe food waste and obesity might be reduced if people valued food more?

Edited August 30, 2019 by Squaredy