- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
- cross-posted to:
- unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/37944842
You must log in or # to comment.
Apparently I am financially able to pay someone else’s mortgage but I am not allowed to have my own.
It’s punishment for not having wealthy parents to help with a down payment.
Back in the 90s the landlords in my area required you make 3-4x the rent.
Bet it becomes less if they elect a Reform government! /s
We can’t pay our bills so we’re going to support another billionaire backed party that tells us brown people are the cause of all our woes.
It’s happening in your country too. The status quo is clearly untenable, so people will vote for the one who offers to change it. Reform UK willbe terrible for everyone but the wealthy, but people are done with parties that only seek to assist the wealthy. Labour’s austerity refusal to aid British citizens will only lose them votes
“Brown people are the ones that own all the real estate and keep demanding higher rent! I’m just an innocent little landlord… my hands are tied! I’m oppressed!”
And not just any regular asshole billionaire, but putler.
I’m sure they’ll divide it by half
We really need to tax the wealth of rich fucks and force them to sell their assets to commoners like us. We need to start owning stuff again.
I agree, but to afford the stuff we also need to increase wages to a level where they match the increased cost of living. Otherwise, the only people able to afford the assets, that the rich will be forced to sell are slightly less rich fucks, because regular folks still have to spend all their income on food and stuff like that.
If the wealth tax were introduced and the income tax removed (or the lower bracket increase to something like 100k), that would create a lot of air.
Setting the wealth tax low enough (say 10M) would include not only the ultra-wealth but the very wealth too. It can also start progressively. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
Why stop at half measures? Just do a socialist revolution already.
If things were that easy, there would’ve been a revolution already. Taxing wealth a step in the right direction. Also, revolutions don’t always turn out well. Just look at the Arab spring.
No one said anything about revolution being easy, and yes, they usually aren’t successful if they are spontaneous and don’t have serious organization behind them (and/or if world superpowers intercede and prevent success).
What would a socialist revolution look like? What would the end result be?
That’s ~50℅ more than it should be in a healthy economy
It’s ~100% more than it needs to be period. We’re past the need to have entry fees for basic standards of living.
About minus 100% the value if you account for the fact you’d have to live in Britain.
Not only in Britain. Nordic country, slightly rural, I pay about that 44%. Previously, in the capital region, my rent was roughly two thirds of my wages. And that wasn’t even in the center.
The average wage were I am - Portugal - is €1,741 before tax, whilst the average rent is €1,220 (for a 2-bedroom appartment)
Specifically for a 1-bedroom appartment it’s between €1500 in Lisbon and about €600 in the cheapest possible city.
So the average rent (for a 2-bedroom) is over 2/3 of average wage, whilst for a 1-bedroom it’s between 86% of a single average wage in Lisbon and 34% in the cheapest city.
Mind you, it has long been the case that, for example, to live near Lisbon in average both members of an university educated middle class couple must work full time, otherwise they can’t afford it.
Oh, and minimum wage in Portugal is €870, which means that for example a couple both earning minimum wage in Lisbon can only afford a 1-bedroom appartment if they don’t actually eat for most of the month.
Unsurprisingly birth rates in Portugal are some of the worst in the World.
The really entertaining thing is how successive governments have done all they can to push house prices up (same in Britain by the way: I lived there for over a decade and there too it was always government policy to prop-up the realestate market) so house prices in Portugal went up 17% just this year, and house prices going up invariably drag rents up.
(But hey, at least our Realestate Investor Prime Minister - who owns 54 properties - is 17% richer just this year).
According to the DWS Housing Affordability Report 2025 (pdf) - page 4 on the linked pdf contains a diagram comparing global cities - lists London among the least affordable cities citing. Within Europe, only Lisbon is less affordable.
In a nutshell:
- Salt Lake City and Austin maintain first and second place as the most affordable locations, while Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney climb the ranks compared to last year, completing the top five.
- US cities continue to be some of the most affordable globally, due to high income levels and often fewer supply barriers. Five US cities appear in the top 10, including San Francisco. However, New York and Miami remain notable outliers.
- Australian cities also score well, although Indian and Chinese cities pull down the APAC average.
- Europe sits squarely in the middle, although with notable outliers including a surprisingly affordable Munich, and the increasingly expensive home of digital nomads, Lisbon.
- Despite low affordability, global cities like London, Paris, New York, Berlin and Tokyo continue to attract people through their culture, career opportunities, energy and lifestyle – making high rents a price many still appear willing to pay
Average! It’s worse for many.
Or better!
Take back control, innit?
I lived in Britain for over a decade and every single government during that time had policies to prop up realestate prices.
Frankly I’m surprised it’s only 44% of average wages.
I bet the picture is far worse if you look at the norm of wages (i.e. the value around which most wages are) rather than the average.
“Swallows” instead of “gorges on”?
“Gulps down”? “Gargles”, “gobbles”, et al?
Pfft.
