[Closed] Taking people property away if it's deemed you shouldn't have it - corbyn

So you're not a target.

OK, I'll clarify... My properties are outside of the capital so need tenants to make them pay. If they were in the capital, and I was in the lucky position that their values were growing at a rate far exceeding the rental profit yield, I'd be concerned about them remaining in good condition. Letting a load of unvetted, unemployed and in some cases illegal immigrants live there rent free isn't the perfect recipe for ensuring they remain in the condition they were left in.

So councilof10, is this one of your trademark slightly fascist or intolerant "thread bombs" ?

I wouldn't bother trademarking it, no-one else will want to use it...

councilof10 - Member

Just came across this on a primary school education site. For some reason I thought of this thread.

Why did the government issue ration books?

To make sure that everybody got a fair share of the food available.

The government was worried that as food and other items became scarcer, prices would rise and poorer people might not be able to afford things. There was also a danger that some people might hoard items, leaving none for others.

Rationing was introduced to make sure that everyone had a fair share of the items that were hard to get hold of during the war

OK, I'll clarify... My properties are invented [s]outside of the capital so need tenants to make them pay. If they were in the capital, and I was in the lucky position that their values were growing at a rate far exceeding the rental profit yield, I'd be concerned about them remaining in good condition. Letting a load of unvetted, unemployed and in some cases illegal immigrants live there rent free isn't the perfect recipe for ensuring they remain in the condition they were left in[/s] and I'm a troll and fantasist who's been found out.

No one is talking about booting people out of their homes. There is a finite amount of property available. Foreign investors by up property in premium locations across London and leave it purposely [b]EMPTY[/b] whilst it accrues value. Once a satisfactory profit margin has been reached they may sell to another investor and the cycle repeats. Meanwhile there are people who through no fault of their own who are homeless. How on earth to you reconcile this with owning a modest portfolio of BTL?

Corbyn is not, nor ever has, suggesting booting people out of their homes or seizing temporarily empty houses. These are properties kept permanently empty for capital gain.

@Scud - pretty pointless graphs, find one that lists value of assets.

And there you have your true colours, so you state that those with the greatest wealth and assets aren't the ones that his current Government hasn't done the most for? Why then is the gap between the richest and the poorest growing so fast, why is it that the richest can avoid tax and the politician can avoid prosecution for misconduct, fraud and voting for legislation that furthers their financial interests (particularly as land lords which many Tory MPs are)?

This is the issue, the current Government has shown to have done a lot to protect their own self-worth, their own financial misconduct is fine, they've allowed companies and wealthy individuals to skip paying large amounts of tax and they have awarded themselves large (10% in 2014 and more each year since) pay rises, whilst public sector workers have had pay freezes or less than inflation.

But to want a fairer/ more balanced treatment of people across the whole spectrum is to be a lefty liberal. I have never been out of work for more than a month, despite being made redundant 3 times (from good legal and insurance jobs), i've served my country in the army and my wife works for the NHS, we're not scroungers, we both have always worked hard.

yes coyote, but you fail to understand that helping people in need is EVIL and LEFTY and people who live in flats likely to go up in flames because their landlords did some work on the cheap only have themselves to blame for being born into circumstances of poverty. Anyone with any ambition would have been born into money - just ask Donald Trump or any of his representatives on Earth - they'll tell you

My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

I'm having this made in to a sign, just so I can have a laugh every morning. Pray tell, exactly how was your property hard won as described? Genuinely interested.

So councilof10, is this one of your trademark slightly fascist or intolerant "thread bombs" ?

Yes and no... It's pretty honest, I've not 'fabricated' anything and anyone who knows my identity (a few do) will know that I've discussed property/landlord/tenant issues at length in the past.

The whole thread is something of a false start, given that the OP was scuppered within half-a-page, but the resultant conversation has been quite interesting.

So rather than try to flower-up any of my comments, I've laid them out 'unsweetened'. Mainly in response to Slowster's assertion that there were no right-leaning opinions being posted.

It's quite nice to see that my cat landed amongst the pigeons though! 🙂

I'd be concerned about them remaining in good condition. Letting a load of unvetted, unemployed and in some cases illegal immigrants live there rent free isn't the perfect recipe for ensuring they remain in the condition they were left in.

It's a good job nobody is suggesting they live in those empty properties for free then isn't it.

Do you even have the slightest clue what you are talking about ?

Pray tell, exactly how was your property hard won as described? Genuinely interested.

I'm truly flattered that you find my story so inspirational! At the risk of setting myself up for further ridicule, I worked full time for several years whilst giving up my free-time and holidays to work as a freelance writer/editor - this allowed me to buy my first property very young. Then set up a business, bought commercial property and another residential, set up a second business and used profits to buy further residential, I now run 3 businesses and have a modest portfolio of residential properties with a couple of commercials and some farmland.
I work 6-days a week and haven't had more than a few days off in 10 years.
So compared to the nine-to-five hand-to-mouthers that have evenings and weekends off, 3 weeks in the sun and a skiing holiday once a year, I'd say it was pretty hard won!

So compared to the nine-to-five hand-to-mouthers that have evenings and weekends off, 3 weeks in the sun and a skiing holiday once a year, I'd say it was pretty hard won!

I know what I'd choose....

😉

Sotos also states that

He also mentions in the article that local policymakers in the Middle East are missing the fact that if ordinary people cannot play the game legally, they will be far less able to resist a terrorist offensive. The article received praise among high-level global politicians such as US Presidential candidates Rand Paul and Jeb Bush.[40][41]

In other words, he recognises that if society becomes so vastly unequal - then terror and revolution can take hold.

There's been some pretty damning and solid criticism of Sotos as well...

Corbyn is a revolutionary socialist. If you don't know what that means in practice, you should read up on it.
I suspect Corbyn has shot himself in the foot and alienated a lot of home-owning voters after his remarks, as people soon discard their Socialist Credentials when they think they might lose their property rights.

So rather than try to flower-up any of my comments, I've laid them out 'unsweetened'. Mainly in response to Slowster's assertion that there were no right-leaning opinions being posted.

It's quite nice to see that my cat landed amongst the pigeons though!

Well, thank you for posting, but I referred to 'coherent detailed arguments', and as the various replies to your posts demonstrated, you hadn't really properly thought through some of your arguments, especially this one:

And as far as empty properties are concerned, they're empty because the growth in value is sufficient that they don't need to be inhabited.

Just because something is a rational financial decision for an investor, that doesn't mean that it's something that society considers acceptable. And FWIW, I think it's perfectly possible for government to address this while respecting and preserving property rights. Obvious examples would be to increase the amount of both public and private sector homebuilding which would increase supply, and to use the tax system even more to discourage empty lets.

Badnewz - I don't think many British socialists own vacant homes in London, the rental market is too tempting...it would mainly hit Chinese and Indian investors.

Which wouldn't bother me...

Judging by the reactions on here some of you think you're about to get turfed out of your home to house NKVD employees.....

It's funny that the righties on here are squawking like mentally deranged cold war era shitehawks, about the rise of left wing populism though. Pot meet kettle! Only a year ago you lot were lauding the return of protectionism!

I work 6-days a week and haven't had more than a few days off in 10 years.

In that time I've had 3650 days off. Another extreme I realise but there aren't any pockets in shrouds.

Unless money and greed are your main pleasures in life your work/leisure balance needs some thought. Time to do some living?

I suspect Corbyn has shot himself in the foot and alienated a lot of home-owning voters

Most of those will be Tory voters anyway. (-:

Badnewz - I don't think many British socialists own vacant homes in London, the rental market is too tempting...it would mainly hit Chinese and Indian investors.

There are plenty of Labour voting homeowners in London, they may not own vacant property but they will be concerned over Corbyn's remarks. I think it was an error of judgement on his part and revealed his truly revolutionary nature (as if hanging out with the IRA wasn't a sign in the first place).

Labour may have simply got a big protest vote at the last General Election, and the Tories are now going to have to lighten up the austerity, build more houses, and stop stoking the housing market if they want to get re-elected. The Corbyn alternative is frightening to a lot of people, especially when his shadow chancellor starts agitating for people to take to the streets at a very sensitive political moment.

but I referred to 'coherent detailed arguments', and as the various replies to your posts demonstrated, you hadn't really properly thought through some of your arguments...

Just because something is a rational financial decision for an investor, that doesn't mean that it's something that society considers acceptable.

Well back atcha sunshine! You're perfectly happy to take a broad brush to your arguments, whilst a little forethought would reveal the situation to be far more nuanced. I have a friend who probably falls into the category of landlords that this thread refers to, although most of his portfolio is mostly Chelsea and Knightsbridge. One of his properties has been empty for 5 years* since the last tenant moved out. Should he give it over to former Grenfall tenants? The last tenant was a popular music person called Robert Williams, so I'm guessing the fixtures and fittings would be rather costly to repair or replace. It's also the penthouse and there are some Foo Fighters and other well-to-do sorts living on the other floors, so I'm not sure how they'd feel about him letting it to DSS tenants.

*A certain Miss Minogue took it for a short-term lease a few years back.

Exactly the kind of property that could be requisitioned, C'10. Obvioulsy an average London rent would be paid for the use and London would be responsible for returning the property in good condition at the end of the requisition period.

badnewz - Member
I think it was an error of judgement on his part and revealed his truly revolutionary nature (as if hanging out with the IRA wasn't a sign in the first place).

are the tories now revolutionary troglodytes, you know, since they've been hanging about with the UDA all week? 😆

I work 6-days a week and haven't had more than a few days off in 10 years.

[img] [/img]

The Kensington property market is very very slow, the huge stamp duty costs of selling high end houses has caused a massive slowdown and a significant reduction in valuation. It is a very unsafe assumption that these empty properties are all owned by passive investors from abroad.

To put this into perspective, the sale of one particular house in Kensington raised more stamp duty than the whole of the City of Liverpool did in the same year.

Exactly the kind of property that could be requisitioned, C'10. Obvioulsy an average London rent would be paid for the use and London would be responsible for returning the property in good condition at the end of the requisition period.

I reckon you could pitch a few tents on the heli-pad too! 😀

anyone who knows my identity (a few do)

you are shibboleth and we all know this
I give you two more weeks.

Corbyn is a revolutionary socialist. If you don't know what that means in practice, you should read up on it.

Its really not us who need to read up on what it means. this is like me saying the tory party are fascists. its completely far fetched nonsense.

I suspect Corbyn has shot himself in the foot and alienated a lot of home-owning voters after his remarks, as people soon discard their Socialist Credentials when they think they might lose their property rights

Its ok to dislike corbyn or the tories but its just silly to let your hatred make a mockery of your intelligence and just having a wee rant

Well back atcha sunshine!

Why are you still posting here? Do you think we didn't spot that DD outed you some pages ago?

the sale of one particular house in Kensington raised more stamp duty than the whole if the City of Liverpool did in the same year

I give you two more weeks.

Citation please...

I work 6-days a week and haven't had more than a few days off in 10 years.

Probably to make up for the time you spend on here.

It is either the FT or Standard haven't got time to search but the property sold for £100 million so the Stamp Duty was more than £22 million. When you work out how many properties need to sell at lower rates you realise it is quite feasible.

Certainly plausible.
I got this about house sales in Liverpool [ not sure if merseyside or Liverpool IME southerners get confused about the two - later is a town former is a "county"

This finding came as new figures from HMRC revealed that there were 161,990 property sales of £40,000 or more, up 77pc on March 2015.

TBH it did not make sense to ask for a citation as its clearly a personal opinion. However your past behaviour/previous bannings coupled with your legendary lack of self control suggest its a reasonable starting point.

Perhaps over generous as the meltdown seems to be nearing full tilt

Shall I start a tats thread for you to self destruct?

I think a lot of the issue here is that we are constantly arguing the extremes of the matter.

I don't think Councilof10 should ever be knocked for working hard and wanting to be right by his family, life is a balance, but his choice how he chooses to live it.

Knightsbridge is only half "posh", like most boroughs of London, there is plenty of available housing and spaces that don't actually fall in the "have to be a rockstar" to own. As a young man i lived in London and you would see vacant spaces and property everywhere, many shops would be four storey buildings with only the bottom floor used etc, but there needs to be accessible housing for all.

I don't think any of these people are looking to be housed somewhere with a jacuzzi, but on the flip-side i think human decency, not politics, dictates that we owe these people affected by this tragedy a place to live.

Having lived everywhere from a 14 storey tower block in Hackney, to a house in most rural Norfolk now, the people you met in that tower block often had a greater sense of community and a greater sense of just wanting to do right by their families and earn a crust than any other place i've lived.

mefty - Member
It is either the FT or Standard haven't got time to search but the property sold for £100 million so the Stamp Duty was more than £22 million. When you work out how many properties need to sell at lower rates you realise it is quite feasible.

I'm curious, what does the stamp duty on palaces have to do with the price of cheese?

I don't think Councilof10 should ever be knocked for working hard and wanting to be right by his family, life is a balance, but his choice how he chooses to live it.

Indeed, working hard to provide for your family is to be commended, but the key bit [i]is [/i]the balance, it may be a personal choice but those who pursue money over everything else often can't see the merit in those who eschew it over other things, and vice versa. Diametrically opposed viewpoints will always struggle to see the middle ground, let alone the ground at the other end.

I work 6-days a week and haven't had more than a few days off in 10 years.

Which is why I can't work out if you think this is something to be proud of or annoyed about?

You're perfectly happy to take a broad brush to your arguments, whilst a little forethought would reveal the situation to be far more nuanced.

I welcome nuance, there's far too little of it about.

Personally I think the idea of requisitioning/comandeering empty houses of the sort that would normally be let to ultra high net worth individuals is probably a non-starter, and would probably have all sorts of unintended undesired consequences. It wouldn't surprise me if it were the sort of thing where if it did happen, the property owners would end up benefiting far more from government compensation than they would lose from any void period.

In being a very upmarket property let out to ultra high net worth individuals, your friend's house is something of an outlier (although less so in those areas), but even so it occupies land of which there is a limited supply, and a general move in tax policy to discourage long term empty lets would still respect his ownership rights, but might cause him to lower his prices a bit to the point that the less well off members of Take That could afford a couple of weeks' stay. More importantly it could reduce the number of long term empty homes generally, which is what matters in the face of a general housing shortage.

I agree with Teamhurtmore about the importance of governments respecting property rights, but it seems to me that many property owners see that as synonymous with 'respecting' the asset and investment values of their property. And 'respecting' in that sense really means protecting, or rather favouring, them to the detriment of others, such as the poor, those in social housing, the young, first time buyers etc.

I also find the solidarity being shown to the ultra rich here a bit curious. As if they would even give ye a lick of their shite. 😆

Aspiration beyond yer means is a strange emotion.

[quote=badnewz ]There are plenty of Labour voting homeowners in London, they may not own vacant property but they will be concerned over Corbyn's remarks. I think it was an error of judgement on his part and revealed his truly revolutionary nature

I must have missed the bit where he suggested removing the property rights from ordinary people. Or was there some other revolutionary talk I missed - is he planning on deposing the Queen? I don't own property in London, but if I did I don't think I'd be at all bothered by his remarks - I suspect it's only those who would vote for a monkey with a blue rosette who even think that there is anything wrong with them. You should probably also check out the latest polls for their effect on voters...

but it seems to me that many property owners see that as synonymous with 'respecting' the asset and investment values of their property. And 'respecting' in that sense really means protecting, or rather favouring, them to the detriment of others, such as the poor, those in social housing, the young, first time buyers etc.

And that in itself shows a kind of disrespect to that very right that they hold dear, 'preventing others' is a very different game to one of equitable opportunity.

Personally I think the idea of requisitioning/comandeering empty houses of the sort that would normally be let to ultra high net worth individuals is probably a non-starter, and would probably have all sorts of unintended undesired consequences

Probably true, and we are in a kind of horse bolted, door wide open scenario aren't we, it's the fact that society has ended up in this position that's the problem, even if you agree in principle that it's a terrible thing to have people homeless and struggling to afford basic housing while other people buy up the supply and don't even use it, how to undo it is a bigger problem than preventing it in the first place.

I have no idea how to fairly achieve either BTW (prevention or fix), but if we were to replace 'housing' with 'food' I think people's attitudes would change, I know they aren't comparable but it's a good example of the issue, if rich investors were buying all the food and storing it for later there'd be uproar.

I guess it depends where you fall on the 'housing as a basic need' spectrum, and to what degree you thing your society should control or provide it. Probably fairly close correlation with those who buy houses as an investment and 'climb the ladder' upscaling whenever possible, and those who buy houses as a home and only upscale when they physically run out of room or need to move for work.

[quote=amedias ]Which is why I can't work out if you think this is something to be proud of or annoyed about?

I'm reading it as giving him a sense of entitlement.

There are plenty of Labour voting homeowners in London, they may not own vacant property but they will be concerned over Corbyn's remarks. I think it was an error of judgement on his part and revealed his truly revolutionary nature (as if hanging out with the IRA wasn't a sign in the first place).

I don't think they are worried they will be dragged from their own homes, kicking and screaming - likely needing tazering, to home some Muslims. I don't think that is realistic at all.

The Corbyn alternative is frightening to a lot of people, especially when his shadow chancellor starts agitating for people to take to the streets at a very sensitive political moment.

You mean like this?

[img] [/img]

Pot meet kettle. Anyone who's read Eric Hoffers work will know that in the current climate of blame, scapegoating and stagnating economies - Corbyns ideas will only strengthen his policy for the same reasons that right wing populism has proven popular, you Tories let the populist cat of it's bag. Do you regret it now?

The Kensington property market is very very slow, the huge stamp duty costs of selling high end houses has caused a massive slowdown and a significant reduction in valuation. It is a very unsafe assumption that these empty properties are all owned by passive investors from abroad.

To put this into perspective, the sale of one particular house in Kensington raised more stamp duty than the whole of the City of Liverpool did in the same year.

@mefty is spot on here. The Borough of K & C provides something like 6% of the total stamp duty collected nationally and that was before the last big rise (which I suspect will probably lead to a reduction in transactions and as a result less tax collected). All of that money goes to the government (thats my understanding) so pays for services nationally.

Requisitioning / Occupying (ie breaking into) properties is a political dog whistle anti-rich statement. It is in no way shape or form a workable solution to the rehousing problem.

but might cause him to lower his prices a bit to the point that the less well off members of Take That could afford a couple of weeks' stay.

He's worth £4.5billion, so I don't think he's desperate! 😉

Which is why I can't work out if you think this is something to be proud of or annoyed about?

Apologies, I seem to have made myself out to be some sort of work martyr - not my intention... I meant more than a few days in one go, ie never more than a week (if I'm lucky) and usually long weekends etc.

The type of work I do gives me plenty of free time if needed, but it tends to be everyday rather than 9-5 Mon-Fri...

Others who are self employed or run their own businesses would probably understand - the thought of working 8-hours solid for 5 days on the trot fills me with dread!

Anyway, got to dash as I have a tenant to evict... No, seriously... And to be honest, whilst the little **** has effectively robbed me and my family of a couple of grand, it's not something I'll take any pleasure in. Business is business. 😐

Requisitioning / Occupying (ie breaking into) properties is a political dog whistle anti-rich statement. It is in no way shape or form a workable solution to the rehousing problem.

A bit like the dog whistle racism the Tories brought on then? Is it only wrong, when the mobs anger is turned on you Jamby? You see Jamby, I unlike yourself - know that the 'victimised' mob can be quite easily led to vote very left or very right. Corbyn is just doing a better job of it than the Ukipers and Tories right now.