In addition to your points, having a net-migration of ~600K[0] and only ~255,000 homes being built[1] per year (March 2022-2023), we're getting stuffed. Barely enough supply to house the new people coming.

[0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-65669832

[1] https://www.savills.co.uk/research_articles/229130/347070-0/... (Apologies, the correct source is DLUHC)

Yes, an empty bedroom license, why not. I'm eagerly awaiting the spicy "oi m8! U got a loicence for dat bedroom?" memes.

Nonsense. The fact that we could squeeze everyone into the currently available bedrooms does not make sane housing policy.

I guess a spare bedroom tax would cause people to open out their (typically small) rooms or convert them into other uses.

You still see bricked up windows from when a window tax was operated.

A spare bedroom tax doesn't change the average space per person, but it does increase the median space, as well as dramatically reducing the cost.

As for tax avoidance, that's a problem, but not insurmountable. For example a similar idea operates for social housing.

For social housing, it is not a tax but rather that housing benefits can be reduced if there are surplus rooms.

Various studies have shown that it did not incentivise people to move, although of those who did move, some of them downsized.

All the major parties in the UK except the conservatives oppose it.

I honestly can't tell if this is satire.

Or we could just build more homes, rather than cramming everyone into a smaller space.

You know, like when we built a ton of social housing in the 60s.

Enforcing the flatshare life on everyone is about the worst idea I can think of.

edit: build up, build out, build down, do whatever. I'd prefer normal homes with gardens and I think most people would, but right now we could do with anything. Shuffling the deckchairs solves nothing.

  > Or we could just build more
  > homes, rather than cramming
  > everyone into a smaller space.

With a spare bedroom tax, the average space per-person doesn't change, but the median rises and the cost drops dramatically.

  > This message written from my
  > study, which you'd tax me to
  > be in because of course any
  > luxury must be eliminated.

A spare bedroom tax only applies to houses with two or more spare bedrooms. It also replaces propert tax, and so in your case you'd be better off financially.

> spare bedroom tax

This idea is ridiculous

Build up not out.

London could use more multistory apartments.

I feel the problem with the way the UK builds apartments is just so unsatisfying. The ones built targetting the luxury demographic seem to be habitable and provide ammenities that a commuinity would have. Such as grassland and seperate outdoor space.

Outside of these the rest just don't provide actual living spaces. They seem to be thrown up without any care for quality of living.

Edit: I do agree with you, I just wish living in an apartment didn't feel so reclusive.

The number of children per family is smaller than when the homes were built.

So what do you want to do - create larger families? Chop off unused bedrooms? Or should we all take in lodgers?

There are lots of good options if your house is bigger than you need. Where I live in Bath, UK it's common to turn a floor of a large house into a self-contained flat. Also there's the option of renting a room to a lodger.

Interestingly, owner-occupiers tended to support the "bedroom tax" when it was being proposed for those on benefits and in social housing[0].

[0] https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/more-support-opposition-bedroom-...