MrSmith Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 And what about the millions on the waiting list that now see another 2 million house disappear only to be replaced by 100,000………… why are you finding this so hard to grasp. Where will 2 million houses disappear to? They are occupied, the millions on the waiting list can't move into them anyway because someone already lives in them. It really isn't that difficult to grasp that if a family lives in a house another family can’t move in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Where will 2 million houses disappear to? They are occupied, the millions on the waiting list can't move into them anyway because someone already lives in them. It really isn't that difficult to grasp that if a family lives in a house another family can’t move in. What about the demolished council houses & the greater demand for houses now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 Where will 2 million houses disappear to? They are occupied, the millions on the waiting list can't move into them anyway because someone already lives in them. It really isn't that difficult to grasp that if a family lives in a house another family can’t move in. The two million house belong to the council ……….. out of that lot a significant number will die or move on thus freeing up their house ……….. that’s how social housing works but you want to remove those two million houses and give them to the private sector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 What about the demolished council houses & the greater demand for houses now? Why are you asking me it was a labour policy to knock them down and I don't support Labour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 The two million house belong to the council ……….. out of that lot a significant number will die or move on thus freeing up their house ……….. that’s how social housing works but you want to remove those two million houses and give them to the private sector. They are not given to the private sector they are sold to the electorate/ tenants, if they remained as council houses the people that live in them now would still need a house so the council waiting list would be just as big. Selling them and using the money to build 100,000 new ones will reduce the waiting list, not selling them and not building any won’t reduce the waiting list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 All these people on the waiting list could maybe get off their backsides and find a house some other way. Housing Association, private rental or god forbid save up some money and get buy one. What do you think the rest of the population has been doing? Im delighted the RTB scheme may be reintroduced. Money into the public purse, less social housing to maintain and look after and less people leaching money out of the public purse by living in heavily subsidised rentals. As for the 43 average age - its complete tosh made up by some of the tabloids. The actual age is 29 around the UK or 34 in London. New schemes are also being developed to allow more younger people to get on the property ladder and own a house. The more the better. Public housing should be and always should have been for genuine dependants only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 Why are you asking me it was a labour policy to knock them down and I don't support Labour? And who stopped them building new ones. Laws restricted councils' investment in housing, preventing them subsidising it from local taxes, but more importantly, council tenants were given the "right to buy" in the 1980s Housing Act offering a discount price on their council house. The Right to Buy Scheme allowed tenants to buy their home with a discount of up to 60% of the market price for houses and 70% for flats, depending on the time they had lived there. Councils were prevented from reinvesting the proceeds of these sales in new housing, and the total available stock, particularly of more desirable homes, declined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandad.Malky Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 They are not given to the private sector they are sold to the electorate/ tenants, if they remained as council houses the people that live in them now would still need a house so the council waiting list would be just as big. Selling them and using the money to build 100,000 new ones will reduce the waiting list, not selling them and not building any won’t reduce the waiting list. and more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 And who stopped them building new ones. The elected governments both Conservative and then Labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Why are you asking me it was a labour policy to knock them down and I don't support Labour? I never mentioned Labour. You seemed to be saying there should be more council houses available than ever because 100,000 had been built. You'd need to know a lot of other figures, particularly how many had been demolished in that time, to know if that stat was worth anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.