Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Come on folks, if you post the news do it right, try adding 2 more zero's "Bloody hell. It'll be an island of streets from end to end  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Come on folks, if you post the news do it right, try adding 2 more zero's "300,000 sounds a bit more news worthy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just heard this on the radio. My thoughts though are where ate they going to build all these houses? And will there be any countryside left?! " come to city center manchester theres at least fifteen blocks of "apartments " under construction with in a mile of city center good 1000 homes there .problem is we need lots of affordabke homes but bthey dint generate big profits so nobodys interested in building them upsets the shareholders at the AGM and cant have that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just heard this on the radio. My thoughts though are where ate they going to build all these houses? And will there be any countryside left?! come to city center manchester theres at least fifteen blocks of "apartments " under construction with in a mile of city center good 1000 homes there .problem is we need lots of affordabke homes but bthey dint generate big profits so nobodys interested in building them upsets the shareholders at the AGM and cant have that " I've heard of this too. Afordable being the key word along woth land banking practice | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the torys need to give all that dosh back to the councils that they took from their little right to buy experiment that went horribly wrong and get them to spend it on some new council housing ... fuck all this housing association bullshit, it hasn't worked. there are some key areas of infrastructure where the private sector just shouldn't be allowed anywhere near, and social housing is one of them" That's exactly what needs to happen.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the torys need to give all that dosh back to the councils that they took from their little right to buy experiment that went horribly wrong and get them to spend it on some new council housing ... fuck all this housing association bullshit, it hasn't worked. there are some key areas of infrastructure where the private sector just shouldn't be allowed anywhere near, and social housing is one of them" Housing Associations that sell properties under right to buy are now able to use the money to go towards building new homes, additionally the discount is less for HA residents unless they were legacy council tenants so I guess improvements are being made, albeit too little too late. I also disagree with council houses beng for life, I know one woman that had a 3 bed council house to herself, whilst her two children had council flats that they both shared with their children, obvious solution would have been to swap, but no why do that when you can wait and all have a council house  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life " So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you "No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two. I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied. Ginger | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger "Is that the fault of the person who's been in the house for 40 years or so raised there children to be good tax paying law abiding citizens...or the government and councils that aren't building enough 3 bedroom houses ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Is that the fault of the person who's been in the house for 40 years or so raised there children to be good tax paying law abiding citizens...or the government and councils that aren't building enough 3 bedroom houses ? "agree 100% | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Is that the fault of the person who's been in the house for 40 years or so raised there children to be good tax paying law abiding citizens...or the government and councils that aren't building enough 3 bedroom houses ? "Absolutely the fault of the council or Housing Association, as with any process people will always exploit it, but the fault lies with those that enable it to be exploited. I do believe there were talking about introducing 5 year checks that would reassess peoples needs for social accommodation, but this would be for newer tenants so would take a generation to really filter through to benefit younger and future generations. Ginger | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Is that the fault of the person who's been in the house for 40 years or so raised there children to be good tax paying law abiding citizens...or the government and councils that aren't building enough 3 bedroom houses ?
Absolutely the fault of the council or Housing Association, as with any process people will always exploit it, but the fault lies with those that enable it to be exploited. I do believe there were talking about introducing 5 year checks that would reassess peoples needs for social accommodation, but this would be for newer tenants so would take a generation to really filter through to benefit younger and future generations.
Ginger "Id say government...and the reassessing thing might be good...as long as the tenant would be compensated for any unrest...but the bottom line is we dont build enough homes here or council homes....the fault lies firm at the Tories feet especially with Thatcher | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger "Ah right, perhaps if you articulated a little better that could be avoided | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Is that the fault of the person who's been in the house for 40 years or so raised there children to be good tax paying law abiding citizens...or the government and councils that aren't building enough 3 bedroom houses ?
Absolutely the fault of the council or Housing Association, as with any process people will always exploit it, but the fault lies with those that enable it to be exploited. I do believe there were talking about introducing 5 year checks that would reassess peoples needs for social accommodation, but this would be for newer tenants so would take a generation to really filter through to benefit younger and future generations.
Ginger
Id say government...and the reassessing thing might be good...as long as the tenant would be compensated for any unrest...but the bottom line is we dont build enough homes here or council homes....the fault lies firm at the Tories feet especially with Thatcher " selling council homes to housing groups too | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Ah right, perhaps if you articulated a little better that could be avoided
"You took the first part of my post and disregarded the part where i went on to explain a situation of a single woman living in a 3 bed council house whilst her children and grandchildren lived in council flats. A situation that demonstrates that a council house shouldn't be for life. And as for articulation, from your terse response I could have presumed that you believed that an individual has a life-long right to remain in a council property no questions asked. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My neighbour is with a orivate housing group. It was council but after buying the estate have; - pulled out pristine condition wood windows and doors and badly fitted double glazing. After conplaining for months didnt come out. I adjusted the doors and windows that improved them a lot and took me 15 mins. But dilicone is also needed. - pulled out the gas fire and fitted electric fire he can't afford to run and left a foot wide hole in tbe side of the chimney brest. I gave him a sheet of fibre glass insulation as a temp. Cover while he tries to get it fixed. - used a circular saw to cut out tongue and groove floor boards to fix pipes under it, damaging them, then then fitted them badly its dodgy to stand on it in places - took off interior imperial sized doors of solid wood and reolaced them with badly fitted metric sized eggshell cheap doors. - refitted his bathroom with cheap pladtic fittings Social housing should be council owned where some standards must be kept and not owned to exploit tenants " Back around 2007 many of the council houses were sold or transferred to housing associations due to the council being unable to afford to meet the Decent Homes Standard. The anticipation being that the newly appointed HA's would be non profit organisations and the rents being invested back into the properties, unlike the council whereby a percentage of the rent would be lost to central government. Likewise with the right to buy scheme under the council all monies would go back to central government, with HA's the money goes to them to invest in existing propeties and pay for new ones. I our area at least they are building some new properties. I'd suggest your neighbour speaks to CAB or shelter as his home should meet the requirements of the Decent Homes Standard. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I also disagree with council houses beng for life So after a number of years, if they haven't got enough finance they get chucked into the street?!
That's nice and blue of you
No, not what I meant at all, but I don't agree with a single person having a 3 bed house to themselves when families are stuck in 1 or 2 bed flats because there aren't enough bigger properties for them. Or tenants whose incomes have significantly increased and they could afford to rent privately or buy but choose to stick with cheaper rent so they can buy another horse or two.
I'm a massive advocate for social accommodation but it needs to be for those that need it and proportionate to their needs,so not quite the cold hearted bitch you implied.
Ginger
Ah right, perhaps if you articulated a little better that could be avoided
You took the first part of my post and disregarded the part where i went on to explain a situation of a single woman living in a 3 bed council house whilst her children and grandchildren lived in council flats. A situation that demonstrates that a council house shouldn't be for life.
And as for articulation, from your terse response I could have presumed that you believed that an individual has a life-long right to remain in a council property no questions asked."Just a quick example of your second paragraph. That could be more clear. e.g : 'I also disagree with the same council house beng for life to a person/family. I know one woman that had a 3 bed council house to herself, whilst her two children had council flats that they both shared with their children, obvious solution would have been to swap with one of her offspring's council house, but no why do that when you can wait and both offspring have a council house each.' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" And as for articulation, from your terse response I could have presumed that you believed that an individual has a life-long right to remain in a council property no questions asked. " Actually, my response was based on your vague narrative | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We need more social housing, utilised properly. Along my row I am the only privately owned house, the other 4 in the row are occupied by 4 council tennant pensioners living alone. These are family homes, not for one person. " Ah yes. The government and councils dare not touch them because of the power of tbe silver voters. My neighbour is one of them but is in a miner's cottage type house | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Land value tax would solve almost every economic and political problem the UK has but it would never be implemented because it would give everyone a level playing field and take power away from the richest people in the world. The idea comes from henry Georges book progess and poverty. It was written in 1879 and was the bestselling book after the Bible at the time and sold over 1 million copies internationaly. It was also the inspiration for the monopoly board game. Kevin cahill wrote a book about who owns the land in Britain and here is a section of one of the reviews : Cahill analyses this landownership, showing how a tiny minority exploits British society. 160,000 families, 0.3% of the population, own 37 million acres, two thirds of Britain, 230 acres each. Just 1,252 of them own 57% of Scotland. They pay no land tax. Instead every government gives them £2.3 billion a year and the EU gives them a further £2 billion. Each family gets £26,875. By contrast, 57.5 million of us pay £10 billion a year in council tax, a land tax, £550 per household. We live in 24 million homes on about four million acres. 65% of homes are privately owned, so 16 million of us own just 2.8 million acres, an average 0.18 acres each. The top landowners are the Forestry Commission, 2.6 million acres, the Ministry of Defence 750,000, the royal family 670,000 (including the Crown Estate 400,000 and the Duchy of Cornwall 141,000), the National Trust 550,000, insurance companies 500,000, the utility companies 500,000, the Duke of Buccleuch 270,700, the National Trust for Scotland 176,287, the Dukedom of Atholl 148,000, the Duke of Westminster 140,000 and the Church of England 135,000. The Forestry Commission, Britain's biggest single landowner, runs its holdings conservatively and secretively. We could expand the forest estate by a million acres a year, producing rural jobs, getting profits from the sale of wood and pulp (cutting our balance of payments deficit) and reducing the output of greenhouse gases. This would cost between £588 million and £750 million. Through the 18th century enclosures, the landowning class stole eight million acres from the people. They still hide their crimes and their takings. The 1872 Return of Owners of Land was made, but then hidden and never updated. Shares have to be registered; land doesn't. The Land Registry does not know who owns between 30 and 50% of land. Cahill compares Britain with other countries where revolutions have ended the feudal tenure of land. Denmark redistributed its land to the peasantry in 1800. In Ireland, in 1876, 616 landowners owned 80% of the country. By 1930, 13 million acres of Ireland's 20 million acres had been sold to owner-occupiers. Now, there are no landlords - home ownership is 82%, Ireland's 149,500 farms are 97% owner-occupied and owner-farmed, there is no poll tax, water is free and pensioners get free transport, TV and glasses. Cahill claims that Blair's reform of the House of Lords "definitively cut the permanent link between power and the landowners." But just as in 1872, the state is defending landed capital by making it less visible. Class power does not depend on sitting in the House of Lords, but on private ownership of the means of production, protected and subsidised by a capitalist state. The Greens, like the heritage lobby, shield the landowners against public ownership of the land. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs says its mission is to shift EU subsidies from food production to land management, but the EU already does this, with its £2 billion annual subsidy to the landowners, not to working farmers. We need to produce our own food: food production is in our national strategic interest. It is a national security issue that must not be determined either by the EU or by the market. Landowners' wealth is a parasite on Britain, the least productive part of the economy, with the most state support. Their wealth comes not from farming, nor even from renting, but from trickling land onto the urban housing market. They sell land to property developers, at an average price per acre of £404,000 in 1999. The clearing banks and building societies strip our industries of investment capital, then support their clients the landowners by running the rigged and overpriced land market. Britain needs land reform. "Windfall gains on development land should be made subject to windfall taxes." We should also tax land and stop the owners avoiding tax through offshore trusts; this could raise £17 billion. The European Convention of Human Rights says there should be no confiscation without compensation. Haven't landowners had enough compensation already? We need more land for housing. This would cut land prices, free more to invest in good quality, spacious homes and gardens, and revive the building industry. I think land value tax and currency competition are the two most important ideas to understand in politics and economics. " So the National Trust owns 550,000 acres. It sounds like a great idea slapping a land tax on them!!! Yes let’s tax them, close down their estates, sell them off willy nilly for housing and loose our heritage, parks, walks, views etc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the torys need to give all that dosh back to the councils that they took from their little right to buy experiment that went horribly wrong and get them to spend it on some new council housing ... fuck all this housing association bullshit, it hasn't worked. there are some key areas of infrastructure where the private sector just shouldn't be allowed anywhere near, and social housing is one of them That's exactly what needs to happen. " woods my lefty part of my my lefty / Righty Party feelings kicks in here  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
