UK Labour's Housing Secretary Keir Starmer has been courting Wall Street landlords, despite them being a vocal critic of Trump's plan to ban institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes. The move seems counterintuitive, given that the Democratic Party is known for its anti-corporate stance.
Starmer has promised to build 1.5 million new homes over the course of parliament, a ambitious goal that relies heavily on corporate investment in the form of build-to-rent schemes and single-family rentals. These developments are expected to deliver up to a quarter of the new housing supply, according to industry insiders.
However, critics argue that Starmer's approach is misguided, as it fails to address the root causes of the affordable housing crisis in the UK. Corporate landlords have been instrumental in driving up rent prices and pushing out long-term residents from their homes. The reality is that institutional investors own a significant proportion of single-family rentals, with one in every four or five properties being owned by a single investor or consortium.
The shift towards build-to-rent schemes has raised concerns about the commodification of housing and the lack of social control over these developments. In contrast, Trump's executive order to ban large institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes is seen as a surprising move that unites politicians across the aisle in their opposition to corporate takeovers of residential real estate markets.
It remains unclear why Starmer is courting Wall Street landlords, despite the fact that they are vocal critics of Trump's plan. One possible explanation is that Starmer is desperate to deliver on his promise of building 1.5 million new homes, even if it means compromising on his party's values and principles. In contrast, Trump's move appears to be driven by a desire to slash costs and bring back prosperity to the electorate before the November midterm elections.
The issue highlights the deep divisions within both parties over how to address the affordable housing crisis in the UK and US. While Starmer seeks to appease corporate interests, his opponents remain committed to social housing-led developments as a key component of their policy agenda. As communities across the country mobilize against the new towns plan, it remains to be seen whether Labour's leadership will continue down this path.
Starmer has promised to build 1.5 million new homes over the course of parliament, a ambitious goal that relies heavily on corporate investment in the form of build-to-rent schemes and single-family rentals. These developments are expected to deliver up to a quarter of the new housing supply, according to industry insiders.
However, critics argue that Starmer's approach is misguided, as it fails to address the root causes of the affordable housing crisis in the UK. Corporate landlords have been instrumental in driving up rent prices and pushing out long-term residents from their homes. The reality is that institutional investors own a significant proportion of single-family rentals, with one in every four or five properties being owned by a single investor or consortium.
The shift towards build-to-rent schemes has raised concerns about the commodification of housing and the lack of social control over these developments. In contrast, Trump's executive order to ban large institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes is seen as a surprising move that unites politicians across the aisle in their opposition to corporate takeovers of residential real estate markets.
It remains unclear why Starmer is courting Wall Street landlords, despite the fact that they are vocal critics of Trump's plan. One possible explanation is that Starmer is desperate to deliver on his promise of building 1.5 million new homes, even if it means compromising on his party's values and principles. In contrast, Trump's move appears to be driven by a desire to slash costs and bring back prosperity to the electorate before the November midterm elections.
The issue highlights the deep divisions within both parties over how to address the affordable housing crisis in the UK and US. While Starmer seeks to appease corporate interests, his opponents remain committed to social housing-led developments as a key component of their policy agenda. As communities across the country mobilize against the new towns plan, it remains to be seen whether Labour's leadership will continue down this path.
what's next, Keir? Are you gonna sell your soul to the devil and make the rich richer? I mean, I get it, building 1.5 million new homes sounds like a great goal, but at what cost? The fact that corporate landlords are already raking in cash from single-family rentals just shows how broken the system is. And now you're courting them like they're your BFFs? 
It's like you're trying to solve the affordable housing crisis by making it easier for them to exploit people. I mean, who needs social control when you can have corporate interests at play? 
...seems like he's more worried about getting 1.5 mil new homes built than actually tackling the affordable housing crisis. corporate investors own a ton of single-family rentals already, and build-to-rent schemes are just gonna push out long-term residents even more 
. what's wrong with social control over developments? seems like starmer is willing to compromise his party's values for political gain 
They got a lot of clout and can make or break the deal. Its like he thinks money grows on trees 
and that corporate investors care about UK folk who need affordable homes 
.
The build-to-rent schemes and single-family rentals are just gonna push out long-term residents and drive up rent prices even more 
. It's like, where's the soul in that? 
.
I mean, they're basically the enemy of affordable housing in my eyes. Like, how can you trust a bunch of rich investors to build homes for people who need them most? It's all about lining their own pockets and making a quick buck.
Like, if corporate landlords are bad news and Trump's plan is a solid move, why is Labour like "meh, let's just give 'em the keys to our kingdom"? 
. Building 1.5 million new homes relies on corporate investment which just means more profiteering from people who can't afford housing. It's all about lining the pockets of wealthy landlords instead of addressing the root causes of the crisis. And what's with courting Wall Street, it's like they're trying to sell out their own party 
.
. This whole thing is super confusing and it feels like Labour's just trying to fit in with the rich folks