The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The BTL will be paying out of their income plus the income of the expected tenant."
He will also have greater expenses as he ALSO needs to pay for his place to live.
"This means BTL drives BTO out of the purchase market."
Which needs not be a bad thing where there are too many owner-occupied houses and not enough ones for rent.
"So eventually the BTL's business plan will fail, with losses for both the BTL and the bank. "
Yes, so what? They made some during the good times, why should they not be allowed to take losses at other times? Plus, well, shouldn't the bank then stop giving more money to the BTL as the business model may not hold?
"The whole thing is a bubble and has to stop."
Then address the bubble, but not the idea of buying to let. Banning buy-to-let, in the long run, means that there will be no rental market at all.
Now, I know why right wing politicians would see that as a good thing: it has been demonstrated that owning a house makes you much more likely to vote righ-wing. But in general, I don't see how having lots of owner-occupied houses is a nice goal per se.
Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Migeru - Aug 24 12 comments
by Melanchthon - Aug 23 22 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 18 62 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 6 117 comments
by gmoke - Jul 29 8 comments
by ARGeezer - Aug 5 4 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 3 19 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 29 17 comments
by Migeru - Aug 2412 comments
by Melanchthon - Aug 2322 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 1862 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 6117 comments
by gmoke - Aug 5
by ARGeezer - Aug 54 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 319 comments
by Democrats Ramshield - Jul 303 comments
by gmoke - Jul 298 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 2917 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 2869 comments
by gmoke - Jul 282 comments