I think it’s reasonable to assume that introducing The Right to Buy wasn’t intended to allow the building of more council houses.
The objective was to increase home ownership.
Although the result, intended or otherwise, was to make banks, estate agents and private landlords a lot richer, and to make it more difficult for people to get homes.
It's simpler than that. Just give everyone their own home.
Well glory be....that’s exactly what Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin did in Russia.....he obviously went one step further than Margaret Thatcher and gave all the council tenants their homes.
Although the result, intended or otherwise, was to make banks, estate agents and private landlords a lot richer, and to make it more difficult for people to get homes.
I'd say it was an intended result. The same with selling off the utilities and other national industries.
Although the result, intended or otherwise, was to make banks, estate agents and private landlords a lot richer, and to make it more difficult for people to get homes.
It’s the folk who own their own homes who ultimately benefit.
Social housing creates a division in any society...the sooner the concept is abolished the better it will be for all.....
That's why I want council housing, not social housing. You know, housing for normal people, not just drug addicts, the long-term unemployed and single parents.
Social housing creates a division in any society...the sooner the concept is abolished the better it will be for all.....
There is already a division in society. The division is ideological and social housing vs private ownership is the dividing line.
Stopping private ownership would solve the problem the other way.
There is already a division in society. The division is ideological and social housing vs private ownership is the dividing line.
Stopping private ownership would solve the problem the other way.
I've made it clear in many posts on here that communism is not the only alternative to capitalism and that a Green sustainable economy is what I support.
No it wasn't a good idea. It could only have been justified if they replaced every home sold, so the availability of council homes to new tennants would have remained available!
The baby boomers and their parents generation, by buying up 80% of the council homes and always kicking off whenever attempts are made to build more council homes, have well and truly stuffed their childrens generation imo as well as causing the false economy we had from 1997-2007 and now the chickens have come home to roost! :mad:
We will never see another housing boom again I reckon which is a good thing but people are waiting and hoping there will be one!
Until they get it into their heads that we can't base our economy on rip off house prices and until we start building council homes en mass again, we will remain in very dodgy economic circumstances and will never be that far away from them if ever we do escape them, mark my words!
It was a good idea, lot's of people who could never have bought their own homes before could and leave something to their children and councils didn't have to maintain older housing stock.
What was dumb beyond belief was not using the proceeds to build new council housing to replace the old stock. Not doing do has meant less social housing stock when what we should have is modern, green, clean and efficient social housing that would be cheaper to maintain, rent and live in for the poorest in society who can least afford rents and heating with the bonus to everyone else it have meant a much reduced housing benefit bill.
Another solution someone mentioned in the 'minimum wage' thread would be to cap private rents.
I think that would be fair.
Yeah, but it wouldn't increase the housing stock. Simply capping rents would mean less people renting out property, and it would certainly mean less building.
No, rather than just making laws and issuing regulations, if the government is serious about affordable housing, they have to put their hand in the tax payer's pocket and start building.
It's not going to happen though. The Labour Party today is actually to the right of Thatcher in many ways.
Yeah, but it wouldn't increase the housing stock. Simply capping rents would mean less people renting out property, and it would certainly mean less building.
No, rather than just making laws and issuing regulations, if the government is serious about affordable housing, they have to put their hand in the tax payer's pocket and start building.
It's not going to happen though. The Labour Party today is actually to the right of Thatcher in many ways.
The problem with building more housing is that this country has a finite area and is already built up too much.
I'd prefer population control and using the empty homes that would be created as the population went down.
Another solution someone mentioned in the 'minimum wage' thread would be to cap private rents.
I think that would be fair.
Yes, and cap the amount of housing benefits that would be available to greedy landords which in turn should reduce council tax in theory. This system has been tried and tested and works very well in keeping rents down and making housing affordable of all levels of income.
Yes, and cap the amount of housing benefits that would be available to greedy landords which in turn should reduce council tax in theory. This system has been tried and tested and works very well in keeping rents down and making housing affordable of all levels of income.
I think it was a bad idea personally. Council houses were built for people who couldn't afford to buy their own homes. If you live in a council house and then found yourself in a position where you could afford to own your home then you should move and free up your council house for someone else.
We now have a massive shortage of council housing with huge waiting lists, and as times get harder these lists will get even longer.
Yes, but it is nowhere near enough. The cap on housing benefit in N.I for example is a maximum of 375 pounds per month which keeps rents to a sensible level, people are paying more than that per week in some parts of Britian. The cap needs to be reduced to the same level as N.I which in turn should reduce the amount of tax that people pay out indirectly in housing benefit.
Yes, but it is nowhere near enough. The cap on housing benefit in N.I for example is a maximum of 375 pounds per month which keeps rents to a sensible level, people are paying more than that per week in some parts of Britian. The cap needs to be reduced to the same level as N.I which in turn should reduce the amount of tax that people pay out indirectly in housing benefit.
But you also have to cap private rents so that people on housing benefit can afford them too.
Comments
Although the result, intended or otherwise, was to make banks, estate agents and private landlords a lot richer, and to make it more difficult for people to get homes.
Well glory be....that’s exactly what Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin did in Russia.....he obviously went one step further than Margaret Thatcher and gave all the council tenants their homes.
I find no shame in renting and would find no shame in renting social housing, if I could find any.
I'd say it was an intended result. The same with selling off the utilities and other national industries.
So who's going to pay for the free housing for all?
It’s the folk who own their own homes who ultimately benefit.
People would benefit a lot more if millions of council houses were built. It would be a lot easier for people to buy private homes then.
It’s simple really....housing is one of our basic requirements and it’s usually quite expensive.
By making home ownership more affordable it’s possible to reduce our living expenses and improve our quality of life.
So you do agree with me about the need to build more council houses!
Social housing creates a division in any society...the sooner the concept is abolished the better it will be for all.....
That's why I want council housing, not social housing. You know, housing for normal people, not just drug addicts, the long-term unemployed and single parents.
Oh dear!!!!
I think you have lost the plot.....:)
There is already a division in society. The division is ideological and social housing vs private ownership is the dividing line.
Stopping private ownership would solve the problem the other way.
So you are all for communism?
I've made it clear in many posts on here that communism is not the only alternative to capitalism and that a Green sustainable economy is what I support.
The baby boomers and their parents generation, by buying up 80% of the council homes and always kicking off whenever attempts are made to build more council homes, have well and truly stuffed their childrens generation imo as well as causing the false economy we had from 1997-2007 and now the chickens have come home to roost! :mad:
We will never see another housing boom again I reckon which is a good thing but people are waiting and hoping there will be one!
Until they get it into their heads that we can't base our economy on rip off house prices and until we start building council homes en mass again, we will remain in very dodgy economic circumstances and will never be that far away from them if ever we do escape them, mark my words!
What was dumb beyond belief was not using the proceeds to build new council housing to replace the old stock. Not doing do has meant less social housing stock when what we should have is modern, green, clean and efficient social housing that would be cheaper to maintain, rent and live in for the poorest in society who can least afford rents and heating with the bonus to everyone else it have meant a much reduced housing benefit bill.
I think that would be fair.
Yeah, but it wouldn't increase the housing stock. Simply capping rents would mean less people renting out property, and it would certainly mean less building.
No, rather than just making laws and issuing regulations, if the government is serious about affordable housing, they have to put their hand in the tax payer's pocket and start building.
It's not going to happen though. The Labour Party today is actually to the right of Thatcher in many ways.
The problem with building more housing is that this country has a finite area and is already built up too much.
I'd prefer population control and using the empty homes that would be created as the population went down.
Yes, and cap the amount of housing benefits that would be available to greedy landords which in turn should reduce council tax in theory. This system has been tried and tested and works very well in keeping rents down and making housing affordable of all levels of income.
Er, that's just what the coalition is doing.
We now have a massive shortage of council housing with huge waiting lists, and as times get harder these lists will get even longer.
Yes, but it is nowhere near enough. The cap on housing benefit in N.I for example is a maximum of 375 pounds per month which keeps rents to a sensible level, people are paying more than that per week in some parts of Britian. The cap needs to be reduced to the same level as N.I which in turn should reduce the amount of tax that people pay out indirectly in housing benefit.
But you also have to cap private rents so that people on housing benefit can afford them too.