Whenever there’s a problem, governments of almost any political
persuasion think the solution is a new scheme dreamed up by government and
costing the taxpayer millions. Almost invariably a better solution is for
government to simply piss off and stop interfering in the market.
The British government’s recent “Help to Buy” scheme to help home
buyers is a nice illustration of the point. It will cost taxpayers £1.3bn. And
yes, it will help people buy houses.
But as is shown in this Policy Studies work, nearly 30% of the cost of
housing in Britain is accounted for by artificial constraints on house
building: specifically the difficulty in getting planning permission. And that
difficulty boosts the price of land on which houses can be erected.
So to repeat, government could cut the cost of housing at no cost
whatever to the taxpayer if government just pissed off – or to put it more
politely, if government stopped putting such severe constraints on house
building.
As to conservationists who want the countryside preserved, they need to
understand that there’d be little difference in the amount of countryside covered
with concrete. That is, relaxing planning regulations would obviously result in
more countryside being covered with concrete, but “Help to Buy” absent such
relaxation simply enables house buyers to BE ABLE TO AFFORD the higher land
prices that non-relaxation brings.
And just in case you hadn’t realised that conservationists are
deranged, most conservationists are in favour of mass immigration. They
apparently can’t work out the connection between increased population and the
need for more housing, roads, factories, etc.
(H/t to Mark Wadsworth)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a comment.