Forum menu
More 'getting the big calls right' content.
https://twitter.com/FinancialTimes/status/1534465573920333824
Ah, I see that's already up there. Still, Johnson is still a useless ****, so it bears repeating.
Another “Remainer coup” update…
In all honesty I would rather he didn’t [carry on as prime minister]. I don’t see any contrition.
Who? You might well ask. The Telegraph calls her Brexit 'superwoman'… that’s how much of a remainer this Brexit Party voting Tory Peer and government advisor is.
A good week for announcing dodgy decisions…
https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1534560673082097664?s=21
The only thing I take from PM questions week after week is that Lindsay Hoyle is **** useless
Already a known known! 😉
Today we have allowing folks on housing benefit being able to buy a house with it! Completely out of touch with house prices, cost of living and workforce flexibility.
Paired with "promises" that the social housing stock will be replaced like for like... which everyone knows, including them, will absolutely never happen.
Paired with “promises” that the social housing stock will be replaced like for like…
Social housing stock is non-existent, as is rental stock in some parts of the country. A relative of mine with a normal income is currently looking for somewhere for her and her kids to live in southwest England, and there is literally nothing available.
Her only real hope is that the inflated air bnb/second home market falls apart once we get into recession next year.
The 'market' to Tories is like beer to Homer Simpson - the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.
Social housing stock is non-existent, as is rental stock in some parts of the country. A relative of mine with a normal income is currently looking for somewhere for her and her kids to live in southwest England, and there is literally nothing available.
The property next door to me went back onto the rental market a few weeks ago and the person who moved in said she'd spent nearly 2 months of being on Rightmove every single day looking for rental properties in the area (moving to be closer to a new job). There is nothing out there, anything that comes onto the market goes in hours if not quicker.
As a result, it's a landlord's dream, they can charge more or less whatever they want.
I see that BJ's announcement is a classic long-termist thing that can quietly be left to fail of it's own accord. Much like levelling up.
According to Labour it is "in principle a great idea". Labour's criticism appears to be based on lack of detail, although I didn't think it had been officially announced yet, firstly that there had allegedly been no discussions with lenders, and secondly that those on universal credit are unlikely to have the cash savings required for the deposit.
Which don't necessarily sound like insurmountable problems to me, ie, the government could have discussions with lenders and some sort of scheme to provide a government loan for a deposit.
It would appear that yet again Labour are attacking the government not for what they are doing in principle, but for apparently not doing it right.
@kelvin slight correction. Ever since 'right to buy' became a thing no government has ever replaced the stock even close to the amount they lost. And the amount required in new developments are pitiful, and push the boundaries on 'social'. 'Affordable' is questionable.
Paired with “promises” that the social housing stock will be replaced like for like… which everyone knows, including them, has
willabsolutely never happen(ed).
Yup, it takes money to build new housing stock. Sell off existing stock at a discount, and you need to spend big to replace it like for like (cost of renting and quality/size of the property). It needs to be done the other way around. Build much more social housing and then you can consider selling off the older stock at a discount to residents (with shared ownership probably being the option that widens who can take advantage). It has to be that way around, or it will only ever result in reduced availability and quality of affordable social homes.
The only consolation about this policy in its current half sketched out form is that it will probably never happen. They're just scrapping around for old policies to talk about "delivering for the British People"... it's unlikely to be actually delivered at any volume this decade.
The flaws aren't insurmountable, but they do require government spending to fix... which this government is about to get very twitchy about. As Johnson said in his letter to his MPs, he claims it's time for cuts, cuts, cuts.
Which don’t necessarily sound like insurmountable problems to me, ie, the government could have discussions with lenders and some sort of scheme to provide a government loan for a deposit.
A friend of mine benefited from a scheme like this in manchester - not to buy social housing but to buy in the general market. They lived in social housing with a decent income but no way of saving for a deposit to buy. I don't know if it was a loan or a grant but the local authority provided them with a deposit to buy a house as an incentive for them to get out of social housing to free up social housing for someone in greater need
Wrong answer to the wrong problem IMO - whats actually needed is more social housing and far better T&C for private rentals
those on universal credit are unlikely to have the cash savings required for the deposit.
Isn't it about time for 100% mortgages for 1st time/non property owning buyers? Up to a limit?
Before the mortgage I always managed to pay rent on time for 20 years. If it wasn't for parental help we'd never have been able to afford the deposit & given the way house prices have rocketed in Cornwall (we bought 4 years ago & ours is now worth £30-40k more than we paid).
I know a lot of people aren't lucky enough to have that help & are trapped funding lazy lay about landlords savings & pensions.
It would appear that yet again Labour are attacking the government not for what they are doing in principle, but for apparently not doing it right.
Do you think maybe that's because if you don't do something right then you are doing it wrong. And wrong seems to correlate with failure.
And frankly who believes any of it will ever happen other than on the smallest scale
A couple of observations.
Social welfare income has been accepted as income on applications for some time now, but if you're going to rely on say; child benefit on your application for a 30 yr mortgage and your kids are 12 and 14, don't expect a positive from your lender.
There are hundreds of thousands of folks trapped in neg equity and over expensive payments from the last crash, it would probs be better to organise some help for those folks rather than encourage more people to get into potentially the same scenario a few years down the line.
Do you think maybe that’s because if you don’t do something right then you are doing it wrong.
Quite. Labour appear preoccupied with the Tories implementing their policies correctly.
Politically, the Tories and Labour resemble two wings of the same party.
Isn’t it about time for 100% mortgages for 1st time/non property owning buyers?
They would then come with higher interest rates to account for the increased rate to the banks.
It would also just help inflate prices further which is the problem with all the tories policies to date. They only help out on the demand side and not the supply (even depressing this side).
I do like the conservatives idea that its okay to strip assets from Housing Associations. Why stop there and not extend it to all landlords?
We'd be better off banning new private housing and making all new build affordable social housing on brownfield sites.
Provide decent affordable social housing for the quarter or third of families who need it, massive shrinkage in the private rental market (and housing benefit budget) pressure comes off the market for houses to buy.
More security for low income housing, better school attendance, better results, more opportunities, less pressure on social services, benefits and crime budgets down the line.
It's a 20 year plan. Will never happen. No politician will suggest it. They are happy with short term 5 year plans that deepen social division until our broken society eats itself. And them.
The housing market is broken and this idea will just make it worse. Every time something like Help to Buy etc is announced all that happens is that prices go up across the board as the lenders/sellers realise that people can now 'afford' to borrow more.
I'm 41 and am fully resigned to never owning my own place unless the market had a massive crash or I inherit a very large sum.
Isn’t it about time for 100% mortgages for 1st time/non property owning buyers?
That's how we bought our first house 30 yrs ago.
And self-cert mortgages too - good times! 🙂
Big risk, big interest rates, but we got through somehow.
Funny how this "right to buy" isn't going to affect private landlords, couldn't be at all related to Tory MPs dabbling in the private rental market or how they would lose the vote of many landlords.
how they would lose thevotedonations of many landloards.
Fixed that for you! 🙂
That’s how we bought our first house 30 yrs ago.
And self-cert mortgages too – good times! 🙂
Not good times for everyone - collapse of the market, the greatest crisis in the construction industry in history, the highest level of home repossession ever, and a Tory government that sat on its arse and did **** all - apart from claiming some bollocks about "adjustment" in the market.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/may/15/1990s-recession-looms--uk-inflation-rises
The housing market is broken and this idea will just make it worse.
It would indeed be a problem if it ever happened, which it won't. If this government had a theme tune it would be 'Nothing Ever Happens'. Nothing happens at all...
Boris announcing a policy is like him writing a letter to father christmas. Theres no plan, no timetable. It's basically just him musing out loud. Even if he meant to do it, the imbecilles in the cabinet lack the brains or ability to actually do it
They never actually DO anything. Thank god. They wouldn't know where to start. Its just more government by journalist
Remember that this was announced years ago by George Osbourne, to great fanfare. They trialed it and pretty much nobody took it up. If you're living in social rented housing the chances of you getting a deposit together, even at a reduced price, are practically zero.
Plus the fact that as tenants, then the housing association sort your boiler if it goes, and replaces your windows ever so many years. People don't want to own those homes and be liable for those costs. Why would you if you're barely scraping by as it is?
Its just more thinking-out-loud nonsense to grab the tabloid headlines, tickle the belly of the Thatcherites with nostalgia and provide another days distractions
SQUIRREL!!!
They would then come with higher interest rates to account for the increased rate to the banks.
It would also just help inflate prices further which is the problem with all the tories policies to date. They only help out on the demand side and not the supply (even depressing this side).
The whole point of the regulator put in place after the financial crash was to prevent lenders putting themselves at risk in this way. Increasing the interest rate for these loans doesn't really offset the risk to lenders from increased defaulting, in fact it just makes default much more likely.
We are slowly creeping back into the situation we were in pre-2008, first with unbridled consumer credit, and now the idea that unregulated mortgage debt is OK.
Measures to vastly increase the supply of housing stock, social and private, seem to be the only way to deal with this imbalance, plus punitive taxation on buy-to-let lending, second homes, air b&b type stuff.
Not good times for everyone – collapse of the market, the greatest crisis in the construction industry in history, the highest level of home repossession ever, and a Tory government that sat on its arse and did **** all – apart from claiming some bollocks about “adjustment” in the market.
Note smiley! 🤦♂️
I can't see that the market is any better now. All the measures that were meant to calm it and bring stability have failed.
Only difference is that the mortgage companies and developers have the power now and dictate the market.
Cut the head off the housing market by introducing a 100% tax for foreign buyers.
That will stop the London ripple spreading across the country.
British Homes For British People.
( To actually bloody live in)
Increasing the interest rate for these loans doesn’t really offset the risk to lenders from increased defaulting, in fact it just makes default much more likely.
Depending on the size of discount that could still come out positive for the banks.
Measures to vastly increase the supply of housing stock, social and private, seem to be the only way to deal with this imbalance, plus punitive taxation on buy-to-let lending, second homes, air b&b type stuff.
The former would be likely to deflate house prices and so get the primary voters upset. As would the taxing.
So best just to extend the failed policies of the past still further.
So... 99% agreement that the key thing is to get on and build more social housing stock?
Depending on the size of discount that could still come out positive for the banks.
Not sure about that. Repossessed houses are often auctioned at a significant discount - as much as 20 or 30%. It is the deposit that provides some buffer against that for the lender, but even then defaults usually mean a loss unless the customer has built up a fair bit of equity via payments. It's a terrible situation for the customer too, as they will be left with the difference as a debt hanging over them.
So… 99% agreement that the key thing is to get on and build more social housing stock?
Yes from me.
I've never seen the logic of right-to-buy. Just build a shit-ton of decent quality homes and make the rent affordable to someone on min-wage.
I look at the council estates near me built in the 50s and 60s and they are good-sized, well built homes with decent gardens and car parking. Not the bloody rabbit hutches being knocked up now for minimum cost and max profit.
The government/local authorities should be the developers. Not rely on private companies giving up a tiny percentage of new estates to social housing.
I’ve said it before, 100% estate inheritance tax. You want your parents house? Buy it at market value, use the money to build more social housing.
There’s no moral right to the money you’ve not earned. I understand it would be a non Starter, but we have to at least have a discussion
Walk around any city & you'll see dozens if not hundreds of unused flats above shops. New builds aren't the only solution to the housing crisis but that's another thread altogether.
I've got a feeling the 'like for like' bit is the real story here. I live in a street that's mixed private ownership and social (housing association) housing, the private houses are all well insulated, built to a higher standard, and on mains gas. The social housing isn't on mains gas (despite being literally next door to me) and didn't even have double glazing till last year. The housing association has spent the absolute minimum on them in the (20? years) they have had them, it will cost them a lot of money to bring them up to a reasonable standard. They wouldn't be allowed to build new houses that poor anymore. Yhey must be absolutely wetting themselves over the idea they could flog them off at around the current 'minimum 3 bed house in a nice area' prices (which lets face it, is what they are going to go for one way or another, with current demand being what it is. And then have the government give them a similarly sized new house built to modern standards in return. I've a feeling this is a way of upgrading social housing stock at no cost to the housing associations, not a scheme to help long term housing association tenants got onto the property ladder at all.
As an aside... building new social housing WITHOUT mains gas connections will probably be the norm in the near future. Properly insulated homes offering low cost heating probably needs to happen in the "not for sale" part of the housing sector first, due to the additional build costs. Can be done cheaper in more densely packed together homes as well, which social housing mostly is.
Isn’t it about time for 100% mortgages for 1st time/non property owning buyers?
We borrowed 5% as a "car loan" and had a 95% mortgage. Paid the loan off over three years. It would be harder if a 20% deposit is now needed for a mortgage.
The current announcement is just noise and nothing lasting will come of it.
like for like and rebuild all that are sold is obvious nonsense
Who is going to pay? Sell a house at a discount you have to find the difference between the sale price and the rebuild price. Its never going to happen.
the UK housing situation is bonkers and its a political impossibilty to cure it because anything to sort it out devalues property and upsets the middle classes
What we actually need is proper rent controls, proper standards for rentals, decent leases that give security and a massive programme of publicly owned house building.
The "market" is so skewed in favour of those who own property.
Most of Europe there is a fr greater % of people who rent - because they have these provisions. for many folk a decent secure rental is a far better proposition than buying in that its hassle free, secure and cheaper if done properly.
I’ve never seen the logic of right-to-buy.
Turn everyone into homeowning Tory voters... Thought that much was obvious.
Also, wasn't one of the given reasons that "owners take better care of their houses", apparently.
I might be misremembering it.
TiRed - how did you get away with that? - I've always been trempted to try that, but isn;t it strictly speaking illegal/fraud ? - although I doubt anyone would actually care if you are paying everything off.
There was a time when financial institutions (in the UK as well as the USA) were opening pushing the idea that a proportion of your new mortgage could send you holiday, pay for a wedding, get you that new car. One of many things that accelerated us into the credit crunch.
[ edit: I misunderstood... combining a unsecured personal loan and a mortgage to buy a home, without declaring that to both lenders, is and has always been extremely dodgy ]
Maintaining house prices for the middle class is bonkers. If all house prices fell by 50% what would be the difference? At least the younger generation would stand a chance. What they need to do is introduce rent controls (like in the past) and tax second plus homes out of existence. Problem is loads of politicianxs are landlords and Erik Armrest said at the beginning of lockdown he would defend the mortgagers and the landlords against defaulting. So, currently, no hope. Rentseeking is just a lazy way of screwing those in need of a roof.
Turn everyone into homeowning Tory voters
Right to buy was a Labour policy in a 50's? election. It wasn't meant to be the free for all the Tories turned it into, but it was largely invented by Labour
Turn everyone into homeowning Tory voters
More likely indebted wage slaves that can't rock the boat.
If all house prices fell by 50% what would be the difference?
You'd get a lot of people unable to move house, (relocation, larger place to suit new circumstances, maybe even downsize in extreme cases) because they'd be in massive negative equity.
You're right about the relative difference of house prices though for the property you live in.
You’d get a lot of people unable to move house
Currently unable to move as all the prices around us have become unaffordable. We could only afford a same size or smaller property.
Sell a house at a discount you have to find the difference between the sale price and the rebuild price.
You're missing the point that the cost to build a house is not the same as the selling price, particularly if you can control the land costs through restrictive planning consent. It should be possible to build new for less than a reasonably discounted house, plus you need to take into account rent contributions which will also offset the upfront cost of the new build.
Right to buy in principle is a great idea, a genuine redistrubutor of wealth, locking people into lifelong renting just consolidates wealth to the the landlords.
It's like everything else it needs to be done properly and will take 10 to 15 years to impact. There's no political will to sort the issues though or take on vested interests which include the housing associations.
I’ve never seen the logic of right-to-buy.
Turn everyone into homeowning Tory voters
Ok I am absolutely NOT a Tory, and I don't support the right to buy up social housing, but I don't think renting all your life is a good idea, at least not from private landlords.
If you rent because, your hard earned cash is going to some else's pocket - someone who already had money to invest so was well off. That means money is being transferred from poorer people (who can't afford to buy) to rich people, and this is fundamentally a bad thing in my view.
If poorer people can manage buy a house, then it is likely that their grandkids will get a windfall as they are starting out in life. These days that is likely to be swallowed up by housing costs, so home ownership in itself isn't a solution to everything. Other things would be required to control house prices otherwise the system just readjusts itself back to where we are now.
I think the real reason Tories created right-to-buy was to actually get rid of social housing and make it not the government's problem, which is their end goal.
We could only afford a same size
Being unable to move house affects labour mobility. If you needed a job and one was available elsewhere, you'd be able to sell up and move to the same sized house (in theory).
How's about right to buy for private renters?
TiRed – how did you get away with that? – I’ve always been trempted to try that, but isn;t it strictly speaking illegal/fraud ? – although I doubt anyone would actually care if you are paying everything off.
TBH your allowed to to sell the car as the moneys 'unsecured'(Assuming that its not one of them horrible secured loans) so all that has been done is missing out the buying step 🙂
Although if you read the small print it's probably very naughty.
molgrips - if you have a secure tenancy and rent is a lot cheaper than buying without all the hassle of home ownership then renting makes sense for a great many folk. This is how it works all over europe. No need to worry about house repair bills, no need to worry about interest rate rises and the reduced cost means you can build up savings or a pension.
its only because our housing market is so skewed that buying seems to make sense for many folk
Secure long term high quality rent controlled tenancies are the norm in the rest of europe
That means money is being transferred from poorer people (who can’t afford to buy) to rich people, and this is fundamentally a bad thing in my view.
Of course it is but as above this is a function of our dysfunctional housing market - not an inherent issue with renting.
Being unable to move house affects labour mobility. If you needed a job and one was available elsewhere, you’d be able to sell up and move to the same sized house (in theory).
This mobility block is already there if the jobs are in areas with higher house prices (which of course they are, because people want to live there because of the jobs).
Isn’t it about time for 100% mortgages for 1st time/non property owning buyers?
They used to be a thing.
Mrs_oab and I bought a house on student loan as deposit + 95% mortgage.
After a year, we re-mortgaged at 110% mortgage (Northern Rock anyone?) to renovate the place.
+1 on right to buy being nothing but garnering more voters for Conservatives.
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1534873504352444416?s=20&t=IgSc7f8AFx5zrKP-warRxA
Second only to Russia in terms of lack of growth for next year.
The circus that is the triple whammy of ideologically doomed - late, clumsy and corrupt clowns.
(I think projections are generally rubbish and I reckon it will be worse.)
(I think projections are generally rubbish and I reckon it will be worse.)
Isnt most of the growth down to how badly the UK performed in the previous period and if the performance over all of the pandemic is taken the UK does rather badly.
This mobility block is already there if the jobs are in areas with higher house prices (which of course they are, because people want to live there because of the jobs).
Surely that's the other way around? Higher house prices in the "non-industrial" areas (suburbs) where people actually want to live and then they commute to the high rise office environment or the industrial sector?
That brings transport into the equation too - it's all well and good having a supply of accessible housing but you're still incredibly constricted on education, job and social opportunities if the transport isn't there to allow people to move around effectively and efficiently (ideally without the cost and restriction of owning a private car).
It's why you can't just plonk a load of cheap houses down on some arse end of greenbelt and expect it to solve problems, it won't. If there are no / limited job opportunities, transport provision and social services then all you've done is build something which will end up in 5-10 years as a deprived ghetto.
Raised a smirk here…
When pizza throws shade at the government you know we're ****ed
Meanwhile, while everyones talking about housing, the government is getting ready to rip up the Northern Ireland protocol.
Radio 4 are reporting that now he's so weak he's having to court the ERG headbangers again, who along with the DUP are demanding the hardest possible rupture with the EU, which means unilaterally dumping major parts of the withdrawal agreement. Their proposals have been repeatedly re-written, getting more and more hardline every time to pacify the nutters (who will never actually be pacified) and sod the consequences for the rest of us
It's also been revealed that when brainbox Braverman said that their independent legal advice was that this wouldn't be in contravention of international law, they hadn't actually sought any independent legal advice. Instead, they just decided themselves that it wouldn't be in contravention of international law so thats that.
So our government's solution to the cost of living crisis, souring inflation and a stagnating economy is to break international law, start a trade war with the EU, piss off the Americans and put a hand grenade under the Good Friday Agreement
I really just truly despair at the irreparable damage these idiots are bringing on this country. They're going to completely destroy our economy, our international reputation is already in tatters, but the seem hell bent on turning us into a pariah state. All of it sacrificed on the alter of Boris's gargantuan ego and the unhinged lunacy that is Brexit
Binners, your contributions are infinitely superior to pasting up 1970s light humour. Stick with it.
@BillMC - I just stay away from the Keir Starmer thread nowadays and stick to this, football and occasionally even some stuff about bikes
For example: Today I learnt what carbon gripper paste is and went to buy some. I had been unaware of its existence until yesterdays road ride when I started getting that sinking feeling with my new blingy carbon seatpost 😂
It just gets worse. So here he is now promising homes for all, reduced taxes and using a Labour slogan to promote it. All with no substance behind it.
He’s got nothing, just sound bites of what he thinks people want to hear to keep himself in a job. It’s so transparent it’s painful.
Meanwhile, fuel is at £2 per litre, rail goes on strike in 2 weeks, food shortages are being announced from which panic buying will start…. Jesus!
they hadn’t actually sought any independent legal advice
Worse than that. They specifically told people working on possible legislation (many of whom have good knowledge of international law, trade and treaties) not to question the legality of the proposals. Wilful blindness. Something essential to keep "the project" moving in the face of facts and reality.
That may be so Binners - but BoJo the Clown has to get the legislation to disapply the NIP past UK Parly. This may be a problem for him..... I am buying popcorn.
Today I learnt what carbon gripper paste is
Really good for dropper posts as well. Stops you having to clamp them too tight to stop the fixed part of the post dropping in the frame. Good for bars in stems as well, not just carbon ones... etc etc.
I agree absolutely 100% with everything that @binners has written on this thread.
Although I did already know what carbon gripper paste was.
I wish I shared your confidence @hels and I hope you're right, but I seem to recall saying similar things many many times, when the Brexit proceedings were becoming more and more hardline, yet they all passed.
The Tory party is deranged when it comes to Brexit, and Boris has purged the party of non cult members, so I think this legislation, no matter how barking mad and incredibly destructive will simply sail through with all but a handful of abstentions on the Tory benches
We are truly ****ed!!!
Forgot to mention it the other day, did anyone else catch the soundbite of Johnson saying "Nothing and no one will stop me from carrying on as PM"
Did I miss the context, or has he finally gone full on Banana Republic
Another few months and he'll be wearing full military regalia, Gadaffi style, including a chest full of medals he's awarded himself
This may be a problem for him
Oh contraire... the "establishment" trying to stop him "getting things done" (ie. breaking Britain however he sees fit) is exactly what he needs, and exactly what these "policies" are highlighted by him for. Be it the UK courts trying to stop the government from breaking laws (as it tears up the asylum system), or the UK elected parliamentarians trying to stop him from breaking his own commitments made at the last election (undoing his own "oven ready" Brexit arrangements)... it's all about Johnsons being the strong man that takes on the status quo. Populism. The fight is what it's all about. That's where he gets his support from.
Forgot to mention it the other day, did anyone else catch the soundbite of Johnson saying “Nothing and no one will stop me from carrying on as PM”
Did I miss the context, or has he finally gone full on Banana Republic
Yes, I remember that, at PMQs. The context is that he's a complete ****:
EDIT
in fact what he actually says is "Nothing, and no-one, least of all her [Angela Eagle], is going to stop us, from getting on, er, with delivering, ah, mumble, [Tory backbench roars of approval]"
So it's not quite as bad as what was commonly reported.
Friendly reminder: The Tories have always messed up the economy no matter what anyone ever tells you.
This time it's on the streets though.
That brief bit of elation when your Uncle got you excited about British Gas shares was very much the highlight.
If you see Stan tell him not to bother because the future costs to us all were pretty dismal.
Walk around any city & you’ll see dozens if not hundreds of unused flats above shops.
Basically un-usable for anyone with small children who require some outside time and a place to run around in that doesn't require a walk to achieve it.
Brought home to me by my daughter's partner's kids who visited for the long weekend. The garden was a god send as they spent all day in it when the weather was dry. The wet day was a nightmare of frustration for them, especially the autistic/ADHD one.
molgrips – if you have a secure tenancy and rent is a lot cheaper than buying without all the hassle of home ownership then renting makes sense for a great many folk. This is how it works all over europe. No need to worry about house repair bills, no need to worry about interest rate rises and the reduced cost means you can build up savings or a pension.
Perhaps yes, but you still are handing over money to a rich person. And it's not all good news. when I rented in Germany the agency fees and deposit were huge - many thousands. This and other factors made it hard to actually find a new place and move if you wanted to. The short term tenancy we actually needed was very hard to come by, as was a furnished flat. This means that if you actually want to be mobile, as I did as a young person in the UK, it was very much more difficult.
What this means is that we need housing supply that is actually managed to serve the needs and wants of the whole population. So we should have some secure tenancies, some flexible, and easy paths to ownership for those who want it as well as social housing. But that is the opposite of what Tories stand for - they just want to let everything sort itself out, which invariably leads to poorer people being screwed over.
It doesn't have to be this shit.
People on benefits buying houses? If you've more than £16k you don't get benefits. Even with a 100% mortgage you've got stamp duty, conveyancing fees, removals costs, ....it is complete cods and they know it.
we need housing supply that is actually managed to serve the needs and wants of the whole population
i.e. houses are for living in, not treated as asset. Like I said, 100% estate inheritance tax will do that for you. It'd be wildly unpopular though.
You are probably right Binners - you usually are. Still, I like to think that the nodding dogs on the Tory back benches have been shown recently to be much less noddy, and may grow some moral fibre on such a big thing as Northern Ireland, or perhaps when they have to do it publicly rather than in a secret vote they may not have the backbone. One can hope!
I am rubbish at math - with a current government majority of 77 - how many of the 140 with no confidence have to cross the floor - is that 39? Edit - or abstain - I guess that number would be 78. Or even less if the Sinn Fein turn up. Again, unlikely to happen but popcorn would be spilt!
Hope grows! From the Guardian:
"Given the tumult of the Brexit days, Tory MPs said they faced a “nerve-wrecking wait” for the publication of the bill. When it starts its progression through parliament it is expected to trigger a significant number of rebellions because many MPs believe it could break the deal signed by the UK and EU.
Today the senior Conservative backbencher Sir Bernard Jenkin said he voted for the withdrawal agreement “against my better judgment” and added that if the bill did not seriously improve the chances of restoring the executive in Stormont, “I will vote against it”."
Hope you got the non gritty carbon paste? the gritty stuff scratches the sh*t out of the mating services. You'll hear the sandpaper like noise if you have this type. Horrid.
The non gritty stuff works just as well and doesn't scratch everything to hell.👍
This is why I have an almost full tube of the gritty stuff as I bought it before a thread on here wised me up.😁
Moving on from putting social housing in order, I wonder when they'll look at their own house...?
https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1534821628445696002?t=lPnL99TMfmJIkrEEhCqhpg&s=19