The ever glorious new economics foundation

The curse of nef strikes again.

That curse being that even when they do manage to get the analysis of the problem correct (a rare enough occurence) they then veer off into entirely insane proposals for the solution.

Here they manage to get correct that the major cost of housing in this country is the piece of paper that says you can build a house on a certain plot of land. Because planning permission is artificially restricted in supply it costs a lot of money.

Excellent, well done.

So, what do they propose? Granting more planning permission? You know, taking the thumb off that supply and demand scale thingie?

No, they propose taxing the granting of planning permission and the restriction to a monopoly of social landlords the ability to gain large scale planning permission.

Loons, just loons.

For the correct response to a supply shortage really isn\’t the creation of a monopoly of supply plus taxation of supply. It\’s umm, a loosening of supply restrictions which will increase supply and thus reduce prices.

6 thoughts on “The ever glorious new economics foundation”

  1. Surreptitious Evil

    Residential planning permissions above a certain minimum size to be granted only to social landlords

    Ah. So non-social landlords simply apply for planning permission in units of the regulatory size. And, I’m confused here, shouldn’t that be “maximum size” anyway?

    Or am I guilty of using elitist old English rather than modern, diversity-conscious Estuarine?

  2. There’s a bit from Hayek (The Constitution of Liberty, if memory serves) that to prefix something with the word ‘social’ is to invert or corrupt its meaning. It appears the nef* are advocating an even sterner collectivisation of land than the original 1947 Town and Country Planning Act envisaged. And the ’47 TCPA was perhaps the most iniquitous piece of legislation passed under the disastrous Attlee government. So yay, nef!

    * another rule of thumb: all lower-case like this almost always means you’ve hooked a bad ‘un.

  3. “That curse being that even when they do manage to get the analysis of the problem correct (a rare enough occurence) they then veer off into entirely insane proposals for the solution.”

    “The reformer is always right about what is wrong. He is generally wrong about what is right.”
    ~G.K.Chesterton

  4. The problem is markets, you see. Markets always react. They never react correctly, as they should, as they are expected to in order for Utopia to be attained. This is the proof that markets are evil.

  5. John Malpas – yes. Many of the greenies want to massively reduce the population, which should reduce demand for housing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *