The Heygate Estate, London. Image: Flickr/ Lucy Anne
"An Englishman's home is his castle”. The phrase originates from 17th century England, when it referred to the principle of being able to refuse entry to your home. If you are browsing this article from home right now, you might question if that principle is particularly well applied in a time of mass surveillance. But today, when we say a person’s house is their castle it is usually to suggest that it is natural for us to buy a house – particularly if we are British. The implication is that we won’t feel safe and secure, certainly not prosperous, unless we own a home. This emotional connection to home ownership is something that politicians can be keen to connect to. Yet recent evidence shows unrestrained mechanisms for home ownership are actually an enemy of our prosperity.
How so? Let’s consider prices. When the costs of basic services like heat and light go up, we complain. Odd then, that when the cost rises for the building that we heat and light, we are told this is good for us. With measurements like GDP including house price inflation, it means such costs are counted as progress. For the majority of us, rising house prices means higher mortgage repayments and rents, which means diminished lives and, for some, poverty. In London in 1996, an average of 22% of 1st time buyers’ take home pay was spent on a mortgage, which had risen to 66% by 2007. The impact of such debts and loss of available income means people may give up on their dreams, stay in jobs they hate, just to pay a mortgage. No amount of gardening or DIY can mask how our heavily mortgaged homes are less like castles than dungeons for our hopes and creativity.
