Well, it's a nice controversial subject for their next column, but they conveniently ignore all the good justifications for staying put and not moving.
Firstly, our house may be large but all the rooms but one are in regular use. We now have our own separate studies, which we didn't have in our previous house. And we have two bathrooms so there's no one banging urgently on the bathroom door.
Secondly, if there had been a lot more houses built over the last 20 years or so, there would be plenty of family-size houses and nobody would need to vacate a large house. Even if thousands of people sold their large houses right now, there would still be a drastic housing shortage.
Thirdly, a lot of elderly couples are staying in large houses because they intend to leave them to their children when they die. The bigger the house, the more it will be worth and the more benefit it will be to a large family.
Fourthly, a lot of elderly people living in large houses also give money to their children to help them buy a house of their own ("The bank of mum and dad"). In which case they're not depriving their children of a house.
Fifthly, many families couldn't afford to buy a larger house because of the price differential between small and large houses.
Is this just a desperate defence of our raging greed? I hope not.
These sanctimonious journalists should think more carefully before they lay into us "space hogging" home owners.
How big are their own homes, I wonder?
I’ve not heard the term, space hogging. However, over the last few years, when the housing market was so tight, there were complaints of senior citizens staying in their homes in the suburbs because families with young children wanted to move into the neighborhoods with good school districts.
ReplyDeleteBijoux: I haven't heard such complaints over here, though there's a continuing trend for people to move into neighbourhoods with good schools.
DeleteThis was a new term for me as well Nick, but there should be no need for older people to have to justify why they prefer to stay in their own homes. For many, it is also less costly as they already own their homes without monthly payments. If people can afford to stay in their own places, it is no one’s business.
ReplyDeleteBeatrice: I agree, it's no one's business, or rather it's the business of the government to maintain an adequate house-building programme.
DeleteCrikey, they'll be putting everyone over 50 on a space rocket to Mars at this rate.
ReplyDeleteI was reading an article in the guardian yesterday about how Boomers have sucked the life out of the young. Such sweeping generalisations in these articles. I remember the early 90's when house repossessions were rife, and interest rates were about 15%.
We all strive to put a roof over our heads.
Sx
Ms Scarlet: That was the article that inspired me to write this post. We managed to keep our mortgage paid-up in the nineties. We also got a nice little income from our savings account, given the huge interest rates.
DeleteI don’t recall having any savings! I was very young, but I did survive with a lot of help.
DeleteSx
Ms Scarlet: I managed to save a fair amount when I was living on my own in a shabby but very cheap bedsit (in Abbey Road).
DeleteI wonder if our paths ever crossed - I used to have to go to that area weekly for part of 1984. I used to cross the zebra. Anyhow, just a thought!
DeleteSx
Ms Scarlet: No, our paths wouldn't have crossed as I was there from 1973 to 1979.
DeleteThis is a difficult thing to discuss. We live in a big house too, but keep only 3 rooms for us (really suuficient) and decided very young that we will share our space with persons in difficult circumstances (war victims, refugees especially from Syria, Afghanistan and Africa) .To find and rent a flat is actually nearly impossible in Berlin. I know people who search for more than 1 year. Is it you and Jenny on the pic ? You look great and happy. I suppose that your children must be happy to come in such a nice house.
ReplyDeleteHannah .
Hannah: We haven't really got enough space for lodgers, but it's great that you take in so many vulnerable people. No, it's not me and Jenny in the pic. And no, we don't have any children! I must post a photo of the two of us.
DeleteI think as you said already people chose their way how to live and nobody has the right to judge about it. The Government has to assure that there are enough possibilities for everyone to find a home. Sorry I thought it was you and Jenny. No children can be a good choice too. We have one child and one grandchild.
DeleteHannah
Hannah: None of the four UK governments has been building enough homes. And of course that scarcity is one thing that's pushed property prices sky-high. The photo might have been me and Jenny, they look like a nice couple!
DeleteWe have friends still living in the house in which they raised six kids. With no mortgage payment now it where they can afford to live as retirees.
ReplyDeleteLinda
Linda: We paid off our last very small mortgage in 2014 so our everyday costs are quite minimal.
DeleteOh! I also thought that must be you and your partner in the picture. Could somebody please tell me why it is the government's business where you live? You paid for it, pay taxes every year for upkeep to the public spaces around you....boggles my mind that the journalists write about people like me and you rather than about why there is an extreme lack of housing!!
ReplyDeletePeace Thyme: Indeed, we need to know why there aren't enough houses being built. And why those of us in large houses should go through all the upheaval of down-sizing because of government failures.
DeleteJust ignore nonsense like that. Even if older couples moved out of their "mansions" what sort of young family with kids would be able to afford them?
ReplyDeleteTo me space is one of the most desirable luxuries of life. Which is one of the reasons I'll never resort to crime. Can you imagine being condensed into the confines of a prison cell? I'd rather sleep underneath a bridge.
So, should the worst come to the worst, please don't forget to hide a spoon in my cake birthday cake (make it [the spoon] plastic; otherwise it won't go through the metal detector) and I'll start digging as soon as your visiting hour is over.
U
Ursula: Good point that many families couldn't afford to buy our house even if they wanted to. As for prison, I wouldn't survive for longer than a few days in prison. It would be sheer suffering I would be incapable of withstanding.
DeleteI'm not taking the blame for successive goverments who failed to push through a proper housing programme. We like our space, we pay a tax to live there and it is no business of anyone to turf us out.
ReplyDeleteFly: Yes, we may have a large house but as you say we pay tax to live here, and it's a pretty hefty annual sum.
DeletePushing you out is not the solution to the housing shortage.
ReplyDeleteJoanne: Well said. The UK started a massive house-building programme after WW2 so why can't they do the same now?
DeleteLack of affordable land on which to build? In the Minneapolis area those WW2 housing areas became the first ring suburbs with public transportation included. Now we are on the, what, 5th ring suburbs that require you to own a car?
DeleteInfill houses cost more to build per house than whole subdivisions but they are probably the best way to go.
Linda
Linda: Yes, lack of affordable land to build on is a problem over here as well. Which is why developers like to build on less-expensive greenfield land, which is often strongly resisted by the locals.
DeleteMary says: "Some people get upset and annoyed over the most ridiculous things."
ReplyDeleteMary: Quite so. They apparently have nothing better to do than complain about the sort of houses people are living in.
DeleteThis idea has come up in Australia, as well. There was some talk of offering incentives to get older people into smaller places and I think it's a great idea. The reason for many of the worlds woes is the way we all think we have a right to have and do what we want, to consume what we want, to take up as much space as we want. If we can incentivise (not force) people to have smaller dwellings we might free up some housing stick, we will use less resources to heat and cool said houses. We will live with less which is ultimately desirable.
ReplyDeleteI have a friend who is a single woman in a two lounge room, four bedroom, two bathroom house. It's wasteful and stupid, not a judicious use of resources
Kylie: I agree that your friend has a house much larger than she needs. But even if thousands of people moved out of over-large homes, there would still be a drastic shortage of tens of thousands of homes, so I think that would be no more than a partial solution. And the large houses would still be using the same level of resources (more if families move into them). I think in the end it's still up to governments to build enough homes for growing populations. But I also agree that we should all be consuming less and not casually plundering the world's resources.
Delete