| Posted By |
Discussion Topic: Eyesore going, going, going, soon be gone.
Similar Threads That Might Help :
Hoveton eyesore to go .What would you put there |
Where am I going?|
How fast am I going?|
how fast am i going|
I am going to win the 3R 2013|
-- Page:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
|
|
readyabout |
|
Forum Regular
Posts: 785
Joined: Aug 2010
Add To Ignore List
|
quote:"......1 person (well group) to blame and that was thatcher and her right to buy legislation......."
I'm surprised it took so long for her name - and the Torys (group) - to get a mention; unfortunately, many property problems arising today can be traced back to her 'reign'....
Her aim was to break the unions and increase the conservative vote-base by a concerted asset-stripping programme: first to privatise our infrastructure and then to sell off the country's local authority housing stock; all on the cheap: bargain shares for the ABC1's and give-away priced property for the recently disenfranchised union workers ('Essex Man' et al).
She got away with all this under the pretext of creating a 'leaner Britain' - which has since been proved to be a social disaster, allowing the creation a multi-generational under-class and facilitating the second home market - and by publicly accusing her male detractors of being 'wet'.
For property, the outcome has been a politically controlled speculative roller-coaster; the late-eighties interest rate-induced slump gave rise to a massive boom, pulling in Asian and Middle Eastern money to the south-east on a massive scale.
After the 2008 financial crash, rather than see a natural market adjustment - as has happened in the USA and Europe - politicians have 'instructed' banks to hold back on foreclosures and have offered inducements to new buyers to keep the market from tanking while banks have been forced to lend more responsibly due to post-crash liquidity constraints.
The result of all this is a totally artificial property market where everybody expects to 'win'; no doubt this view has contributed to the sad outcome in the case of the Wroxham fiasco.
America has recently said that the post-crisis quantitative easing programme should be disappearing this autumn; this will mean that artificially low interest rates in the UK will have to go - and the housing market will be obliged to return to some sort of normality; it will probably have to fall.
Regards
Paul
________________________________________________________
'readyabout' - the first meaningful adult phrase from my childhood....
|
|
Exile |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 2489
Joined: Aug 2007
Add To Ignore List
|
There is one thing that I have never understood about the council house sell off situation. Maybe TT or Readyabout will enlighten me given their comments here.
All the council houses that were sold still have people living in them. If they were still owned by local councils how would that help the situation? How would the councils be able to house more people in already full houses?
Does it make 1 iota of difference who owns a house? Surely if it is full it is full.
What am I clearly failing to understand is how councils can make two go into one! Or is that it, do councils put two families into one home?
A lot of people clearly think that the selling policy was a bad idea. But I know a few who believe that it transformed their lives, people who finally felt that aspiration was a valid thing, for both themselves and their children. It seemed to remove a lock that had been falsely holding them back.
Love her or hate her, it was a very clever move by Mrs.T. It brought many former labour supporters into her fold. Politically astute.
This message was edited by Exile on Mar-21-14 @ 4:21 PM
|
|
BroadScot |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 1573
Joined: Jul 2005
Add To Ignore List
|
quote:"......
It brought many former labour supporters into her fold. Politically astute.
......."
Maybe in England, we saw through her and now there is only ONE Tory MP in Scotland, and that's in a marginal seat.
Iain.
Lower your windscreen!!! Ooops
too late!
|
|
KenEldridge |
|
Forum Regular
Posts: 454
Joined: Jul 2007
Add To Ignore List
|
I believe that around 45% of former council houses are now in the hands of private landlords. It was a great way for MT to commence the transfer of assets owned by the councils into the hands of the wealthy at the expense of the state, such a waste. This figure has taken a number of years to achieve but grows on an annual basis, talk about the public being ripped off.
This message was edited by KenEldridge on Mar-21-14 @ 4:45 PM
|
|
Poppy |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 1976
Joined: Sep 2004
Add To Ignore List
|
Exile said "All the council houses that were sold still have people living in them. If they were still owned by local councils how would that help the situation? How would the councils be able to house more people in already full houses?"
The problem was not with the policy of 'Right to buy', but the legislative 'add on' which barred the Local Authorities from using the proceeds to replace the housing stock. Instead, 50% of the receipts went straight to Whitehall and helped to reduce tax ( where have I heard that before?  ) with the balance being retained by the councils to reduce their debts or increase their reserves.
Happy to support the honest and reliable pubs and businesses of The Norfolk Broads.
|
|
Exile |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 2489
Joined: Aug 2007
Add To Ignore List
|
But still no explanation of how councils could house more people in already full houses.
Edit to say... Sorry Poppy crossed with your post. See my new one below.
This message was edited by Exile on Mar-21-14 @ 5:13 PM
|
|
steve |
|
Moderator
Posts: 12239
Joined: Jan 2005
|
hi all ,
folks just a gentle reminder ,but the forum tries to stay clear of anything political ,
thank you
steve and vicky
|
|
Poppy |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 1976
Joined: Sep 2004
Add To Ignore List
|
Doh - They otherwise could have built more NEW ones.....
Happy to support the honest and reliable pubs and businesses of The Norfolk Broads.
|
|
Exile |
|
Been Posting For a Long Time
Posts: 2489
Joined: Aug 2007
Add To Ignore List
|
Poppy's point that the cash raised could and maybe should have been used to increase the housing stock is a fair one.
But it still does not alter the fact that the existing number of houses at the time were, and still are, full. So there surely has been no loss. Simply different owners.
All other objections to the policy seem to be of political principle rather than any form of practical solution to the issue of lack of housing in the country.
This message was edited by Exile on Mar-21-14 @ 5:14 PM
|
|
JennyMorgan |
|
Mudplug Juggler
Posts: 14666
Joined: Nov 2005
.jpg)
Add To Ignore List
|
Exile, we live in a changing society. Nothing political about that although I admit to having no great love of that awful woman.
Today we have, and it's well documented, a huge stock of empty houses, stashed away as investments for example.
We also have numerous two house families, many thousands if not millions, Mum lives in one house with the kids and Dad lives in another. That, once again is well documented and is a very major problem. When council houses were council houses there was some form of control but with the advent of private landlords there is no control.
We then have second homes, in some parts of the country, & I include Norfolk & Suffolk, it has reached epidemic proportions.
Now I will be political, because it concerns the Broads, that blessed woman has a lot to answer for 
Yacht 'Jenny Morgan'
The Broads is a member of the
National Parks family, it is
NOT a National Park though.
Worth a read:
http://www.thegreenbook.org.uk
|
Reply to Discussion
Mar-21-2014 @ 2:53 PM
