Wall Street landlords have met a surprising opponent in Trump. So why is Starmer courting them? | Adam Almeida

[Creepy]

UK Labour leader Keir Starmer has been courting Wall Street landlords, despite their dominance of the US single-family home market. This unexpected move has drawn criticism from many who see it as a betrayal of the party's core principles. The decision to pursue this line is surprising given that Starmer and his team have spent much time trying to win over firms such as Blackstone.

The US-based real estate tycoon Donald Trump, on the other hand, recently announced his intention to ban large institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes. This stance against corporate takeover of housing appears sensible but places Trump far to the left of Britain's Labour party. The announcement has prompted analysts to forecast a shift in activity towards the UK.

Starmer is now staking his reputation on building 1.5 million new homes, and Steve Reed, the UK's latest housing secretary, announced ambitious plans for the sector at the party conference in Liverpool. However, many have found Reed's performance evocative of Trump's knack for spectacle, with its abrasive rhetoric and sartorial choices.

Industry insiders expect large institutional investors to play a critical role in delivering new housing in Britain. They point out that the new towns plan is implausible without such investment. Corporate landlords are set to deliver up to a quarter of these new homes through build-to-rent schemes, including developments with single-family rental homes.

The UK's single-family rental market remains small compared to the US. However, Trump's announcement has prompted forecasters to predict a shift in activity towards the UK. Analysts believe that 19 of the 20 largest single-family rental markets are located in states won by Trump in 2024. The president knows his electoral heartlands lie in middle-class suburbs shifting away from home ownership and towards renting.

Starmer, however, seems oblivious to where his vanishing base lies. Communities across the country are mobilising against his new towns plan. Social housing-led developments could help overcome this aversion, but Reeves's self-imposed fiscal rules make direct public investment in housing a nonstarter. The government is now left with no option but to knock on Wall Street's door with a begging bowl in hand.

In the UK's fractious political system, one thing unites renters and homeowners, the working class and the aristocracy, racists and anti-racists - their deep-seated distaste for the government of the day. Housing policy remains an area where no one is particularly happy.

 

[Outrageous]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this news... it's like Starmer is being pulled in two different directions . On one hand, I get why he'd want to court Wall Street landlords - they've got the cash and expertise to deliver those 1.5 million new homes . But on the other hand, I'm worried that this move will alienate his core supporters who are already feeling left behind by the whole new towns plan .

And can we talk about how weird it is for Reed to be channeling Trump's style? Like, what's next? It just goes to show that even in politics, spectacle trumps substance sometimes. Anyway, I'm curious to see how this all plays out - will the government be able to find a balance between pleasing the big players and catering to the little guys?

 

[Golden Spider Tak]

I'm totally with Trump on this - corporate landlords can bring some much-needed stability to the UK's housing market. I mean, come on, Labour's been talking about building 1.5 million new homes, but that's a total pipe dream . The reality is that large institutional investors are going to be crucial in delivering these new homes, and if Starmer can't work with them, then what's the point?

It's also hilarious that people are trashing Reed for being too abrasive - I mean, at least he's trying to get things done, unlike some politicians who just sit around and make promises . And let's be real, if we're not going to build more homes, the housing market is just going to keep getting more unaffordable .

I'm also loving the hypocrisy from Labour - they're all like "oh, we want to protect tenants", but then they're still relying on corporate landlords to deliver new homes. It's like they think we're all just mindless drones who don't know any better .

 

[Nasty Narwhal]

It's all about the cash , innit? Starmer thinks courting Wall Street landlords will solve his housing woes , but what about the people who already rent and can't afford to buy ? The UK's got a big single-family rental market gap , and it's only gonna get worse if they don't address it . Trump might be full of hot air , but at least he's trying to tackle the issue . Labour needs to listen to their constituents more , not just the big corporations . The working class is fed up with being ignored , and housing policy is a prime example . We need change , not just more of the same old politics !

 

[Guitar NASCAR Prophec]

Starmer's move is all about appeasing the powerful. He thinks courting Wall Street landlords will make him popular among the working class? Please, it's a case of "if you want to make a good first impression, start with a good last impression"

 

[Apathetic Cowboy Deluxe]

just think about it, 1.5 million new homes in 10 yrs, that's like 150k homes per yr but they're expecting corp landlords to deliver most of those... what if they back out? we've seen this before with Trump's announcement, now the UK's following suit... what's the gov thinking? btw did u know that in 2022 alone, the global housing market was valued at over $250 trillion and that's just for single-family homes

 

[Children of t]

man this whole thing has me thinking... what's the real value of home ownership in today's society? is it really just about having a place to live or is there something more to it? we're so focused on building new homes and making housing more 'affordable' that I think we're overlooking the fact that many people can't even afford to own their own home. it's like, what's the point of owning a house if you're just going to be paying off debt for the rest of your life?

and then there's this whole issue with institutional investors and corporate landlords... I mean, on one hand I get why Starmer is trying to court them - they can bring in a lot of money and expertise. but at what cost? aren't we just creating a new class of super-wealthy property owners who are more interested in profiting off people's housing needs than in actually providing affordable homes?

I guess what I'm saying is that our whole approach to housing policy feels really short-sighted... we're so focused on building more homes and making them cheaper, but have we stopped to think about the impact that's going to have on the communities themselves? aren't we just perpetuating a system where big corporations make all the money while local people are left fighting over scraps?

 

[Helpful Hornet]

I'm really wondering if Keir Starmer's attempt to court Wall Street landlords is just a desperate attempt to attract funding or a genuine pivot towards building more affordable housing. Either way, it seems like he's putting the interests of corporate landlords ahead of his own party's core principles

And can we talk about how Trump's announcement on banning large institutional investors from acquiring single-family homes is actually kinda sensible? I mean, don't get me wrong, it sounds radical, but it could be a step in the right direction towards making housing more affordable for regular people.

But what really gets me is that Starmer and his team are so caught up in trying to appeal to big business that they're ignoring their own voters' concerns. Like, have you seen the reaction to Steve Reed's plans? It sounds like he's just parroting Trump's rhetoric without actually addressing the underlying issues.

I'm also curious about how the government plans to deliver on its promise of 1.5 million new homes without relying on big institutional investors. Are they really going to knock on Wall Street's door with a begging bowl? That sounds like a pretty weak hand

 

[Comfortable Cobra]

I'm not sure what's more worrying, Keir Starmer's sudden about-turn on housing or Steve Reed's attempts to sound like Trump . As a parent, it's hard enough trying to get our kids into decent schools and affordable housing without the politicians making things worse with their own agendas. I'm all for building more homes, but we can't just rely on corporate landlords to deliver them - what about social housing? My kid's generation is facing a nightmare when it comes to getting on the property ladder...

 

[Poor Part]

I'm low-key concerned about Starmer's move to court Wall Street landlords . We're already struggling with a housing shortage, and now we might end up with even more corporate giants profiting off our homes? The US single-family home market is huge, but that doesn't mean we want to replicate their model here . What's the plan for affordable housing again?

Here are some stats on the UK's housing crisis:

1.2 million households are currently on the waiting list for social housing
The number of people renting in the UK has increased by 14% since 2010
The average house price in the UK is £280,000 (way out of reach for most ppl!)

Let's hope Starmer's team comes up with a better plan than just relying on corporate investors . We need housing that serves the people, not just the profits