[diggers350] Proof- CAP causes houseprice rises?

[Mark Barrett]

while not in any way being in favour of CAP surel a far bigger contributor
to high house and land prices is the law of rent, one aspect of which says
that wherever you allow rent to be privatised (ie privately collected) as
opposed to being socialised (ie captured as tax for public purposes) any
overall increases in wealth in society as a whole will tend to go into
rising land prices (rather than finding their way into increased wages or
even interest on capital). ricardo said that in a roundabout way and it has
gained the status of a law, as far as i am aware whicih the perennial boom
bust and speculation on land as if it was just any other kind of asset, as
if, as if only goes to show.

On 9 May 2010 20:44, james armstrong <james36armstrong at hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> I have asked Office of Fair Tradiing to investigate thefollowing.
>
> . *This defra web site traces  a possible direct connection between CAP
> and high house prices*.  Taylor Woodrow and Wilson Bowden, two of the very
> biggest housebuilders and who the Barker Report listed in 2003 as holding
> giant landbanks of permissioned or potential building land- are listed as
> receiving CAP payments. You may not have associated these builders with
> agri-culture-and  you may be right!
>
>  The implication is that CAP rewards builders for hoarding surplus
> permissioned land so that they can charge monopoly prices for the scarce
> houses they build (Barker calls it ‘Trickling out’) while receiving a
> further double reward, -once from CAP and again as the national scarcity  of
> houses  drives up the value of the undeveloped land. I count that as three
> bites of the forbidden fruit called –“monopoly”
>
>  The amount and value of their  ‘landbank’,   is advertised in the  annual
> balance sheets.of the big national builders.
>
> Finding CAP payments to  housebuilders   establishes a direct causative
> connection between CAP and rising house prices.        The House-builders’
> landbanks are listed on page 81 of the  Barker Review of Housing Supply
> 2003. see www.//cap-payments.defra.gov.uk<http://www./cap-payments.defra.gov.uk>
> for cap  payments.
>
> Builders buy agricultural land for its potential as building land. It jumps
> in value (the windfall gain) the day it receives permission for development
> (even when the cows are still grazing on it)   A typical increase in value
> is X 125. Bulk land under Taylor Woodrow and Wilson Bowden ownership is
> likely to be potential building land.
>
> There is a more subtle and sinister  implication. In order to qualify for
> CAP payments you must apply in advance , and commit the land  for a
> certain number of years (5?) to a specific agricultural use. In other words
> there is no immediate or imminent intention of using such land for building
> houses.  This demonstrates an institutionalized attitude to withdrawing
> land from potential building use – a clear indication of creating a monopoly
> of the worst  sort. (Using a monopoly against the public interest is
> punishable by large fines by Competition Commission)  This is an
> indication of the need for defra to use the existing compulsory purchase
> powers of the planning laws to release land earmarked for housebuilding to
> self builders who are only too keen to  solve their own (and the nation’s)
> endemic shortage of houses at accessible prices.
>
>
>
> James, Dorchester 9 May.
>
> ------------------------------
> Get a free e-mail account with Hotmail. Sign-up now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/197222280/direct/01/>
>
> 
>



-- 
"We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet /Yet is there no
man speaketh as we speak in the street.”
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/private/diggers350/attachments/20100509/dd5b8ff7/attachment.html>