Vague_Boy Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 It shows that the sale of council houses has 'died' Or, that after 30 years, most of the people who were going to buy have done so. With fewer new council houses being built, of course there's going to be a tail off. It's not rocket science. Why can't the council's build? No money. Why don't the building societies build? Building societies were originally established to finance the building of homes. But that was in 1775. These days they operate more like banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 This is going to make Chem1st happy....Not http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063513/Government-revive-Thatchers-Right-Buy-scheme-2m-council-houses-sold.html Up to 2 million homes could be sold off to tenants. Excellent stuff. People will be able to buy and improve their own homes as they wish and they'll be encouraged to sell them for profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 That and we can get rid of the daft idea of council owned houses. That market should be in the private sector so rents will follow true market values based on what people can afford rather than some silly socialist trying to grab votes with silly cheap housing that costs council tax payers a fortune to maintain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrogo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 That and we can get rid of the daft idea of council owned houses. That market should be in the private sector so rents will follow true market values based on what people can afford rather than some silly socialist trying to grab votes with silly cheap housing that costs council tax payers a fortune to maintain. It would still cost dude. People at the lower end of society would still need affordable rented accomodation. The money these landlords would aquire through housing benefit and rent contributions would have to still go towards repairing private stock. Whilst ever we live in a soicety thats monetry based there will always long term benefit claiments, people who work god dam hard in low paid jobs, the middle class professionals, then a select few stinking rich people. Considering the majority of people at the moment are in low paid work or on jsa after loosing such jobs, I don't think many can afford to RTB or rent privately at true market rates. If someones flat on there ass one day, I'm sure they will be very thankful of the socialist ideal of helping someone get back on their feet. I do appreciate why many do have the attitude to people swining the lead on the social and still having more luxuries than people in work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sambuca Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I think if councils want rid of social housing more should be done to monitor landlords and the state of some houses they rent out. people on benefits or low wages are sometimes forced to live in private rents that are seriously damp, and when its reported you receive an eviction notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retrogo Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I think if councils want rid of social housing more should be done to monitor landlords and the state of some houses they rent out. people on benefits or low wages are sometimes forced to live in private rents that are seriously damp, and when its reported you receive an eviction notice. Coucil housing in sheffield turns over £100 million in paid rent. Sheffield wants to go self funding so it doesn't have to give this figure back to the government. Believe me, being the biggest landlord in europe is profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.