Council tenants to be checked out financially

[Bulgarian]

So what is the solution?

 

give everyone a bit of land and let them build their own house, that would be awesome, you can imagine the kinds of things people would build.

[poppins]

I'm sure some people will be Grandfathered from it, I suppose then new affordable housing will be built up instead of out.

[chem1st]

But there was more industry and other influencing factors. Are you really trying to say that re-building houses after the war was the only reason why the debt fell?

 

Of course it isn't the only reason, but building low cost housing and having plenty of it, benefits all of us.

 

We can have people paying X rent to the state. And be left over with Y to spend in the wider economy.

 

Or we can have the madness we have now where people pay X+50% to a B2L landlord who keeps some and gives the rest to the banks.

 

Leaving less Y to be spent in the economy.

[spooky3]

give everyone a bit of land and let them build their own house, that would be awesome, you can imagine the kinds of things people would build.

 

That's sorta what happened a long time ago, been a few scraps since though...

[hard2miss]

So what is the solution?

The Gypsies have it susses, buy a luxury caravan and let the councils build some amenities for them to rent.

 

At least you can move about without having to re buy and mess about with the banks and mortgages ect.

[chem1st]

So what is the solution?

 

We build plenty of state housing. We do not allow for the state housing to be sold.

 

We place a cap on rents.

[hard2miss]

Of course it isn't the only reason, but building low cost housing and having plenty of it, benefits all of us.

 

We can have people paying X rent to the state. And be left over with Y to spend in the wider economy.

 

Or we can have the madness we have now where people pay X+50% to a B2L landlord who keeps some and gives the rest to the banks.

 

Leaving less Y to be spent in the economy.

People should listen to you because you talk a lot of sense my friend.

[spooky3]

Of course it isn't the only reason, but building low cost housing and having plenty of it, benefits all of us.

 

We can have people paying X rent to the state. And be left over with Y to spend in the wider economy.

 

Or we can have the madness we have now where people pay X+50% to a B2L landlord who keeps some and gives the rest to the banks.

 

Leaving less Y to be spent in the economy.

 

Wasn't Labours idea that all new build social developments (flats, complexes, etc), would hand over a percentage of the properties, or something?

 

 

Sorry what happens with Y, surely that's invested somewhere to make more money Z, which is used (hopefully in or benefiting this country) to provide more and better jobs so people can get out of depending on benefits.

 

As shown in other threads (e.g.your maths equations (albeit very good) can lack some of the factors, i.e. too isolated and in my opinion (say from writing physics engines for games) too perfect.

[Titanic99]

Poorer, not poor and still better off than the unemployed guy you strangely don't seem to give a stuff about.

 

I suppose whether they fall into the category of poor or poorer depends on what level of income over needs the Government will decide to evict them on, either way our wonderful new government have found another way of hitting those worse off.

 

Regarding the poor unemployed guy, radical that it may seem but why don't we build some new affordable housing and just for once let those who have made a lot of money over the last few years pay for it.

[my eyes only]

I think the council should look at the tenants who are living in there properties now and see if they can jig people around abit to free larger houses up for new tenants, where I live you will find big 4 bedroom parlor houses with only 1 person living in them, I find this a waste of a property, and think the council should make these people move into smaller houses.