Property collspse

[robs1]

Its completely fair that they charge, I haven't got a problem with that.
BUT, you keep saying anyone can come here and its not so. You have to be wealthy.
You dont seem to understand that ordinary people on a state pension, who's dream was a little house in a quieter place to retire into, can no longer do that.

The impression you give is it's their fault for not being successful enough to have made enough money to pay whatever.

As I said even farmers paying hundreds of thousands for farms can't generate the earning capacity to take €60,000 personal drawings for a husband , wife and 2/3 kids. Unless they are very wealthy buying very large farms.

I dont think its their fault, the rules changed because of a democratic vote, did those who moved their prior to the vote care about workers in the UK who lost their jobs to cheap eastern eu labour ? I doubt it, personally I'm happy for those to be getting better wages now, sometimes life goes for you sometimes against we just have to make the best of it as it is, perhaps it's time for some of the poorer brits to get a chance of a better life. I think it was you ( but might be wrong) that claimed the tories were to blame, cameron and most of the cabinet were vocal in supporting remain, whereas corbyn was very lukewarm after always being anti eu, the government spent tax payers money trying to convince us to stay and many hours on tv etc spinning doom and gloom if we were to leave, the insults that were thrown at leave voters wont be forgotten either

 

[le bon paysan]

I dont think its their fault, the rules changed because of a democratic vote, did those who moved their prior to the vote care about workers in the UK who lost their jobs to cheap eastern eu labour ? I doubt it, personally I'm happy for those to be getting better wages now, sometimes life goes for you sometimes against we just have to make the best of it as it is, perhaps it's time for some of the poorer brits to get a chance of a better life. I think it was you ( but might be wrong) that claimed the tories were to blame, cameron and most of the cabinet were vocal in supporting remain, whereas corbyn was very lukewarm after always being anti eu, the government spent tax payers money trying to convince us to stay and many hours on tv etc spinning doom and gloom if we were to leave, the insults that were thrown at leave voters wont be forgotten either

This is spoiling this property thread as were veering off.
It was not me that said the Tories were to blame. H, I think. ( I did say Cameron only gave a ref. to sort the Tory party's internal fighting so to blame in it that respect)
Some who moved here did so because of cheap labour making it hard to compete. That was the government's fault, 7 years before Poles could work in France after accession date. Coming here was there better bit of life.
Which poorly paid Brits do you refer to? The ones that are clamouring to go cabbage cutting? Daffodil picking? I have huge sympathy for the p and o crew, they're being replaced by men working for reportedly £2,60 an hour! That's slavery! Shocking , why aren't the Tory government doing something about it? Wouldn't happen here.
There were lies told aplenty by the leave campaign, for sure, backed by Russian money, not so much by remain, as you didn't walk to WTO.
As for insults, cowards and traitors for moving here and voting remain has been thrown in our direction.

 

[SteveHants]

you really don't want the rich to leave our country - go spend time in a poor country to see what it's like


politics of jealousy at there worse !!!


BTW - biggest winners from carbon credit could well be all the "poor" farmers ........... despite their best efforts to dismiss it as rubbish ........... you couldn't make it up somedays !

WTF is this drivel?
The ridiculous "jealousy" argument has been put to bed ages ago, jealous people don't want more equity for everyone, only for themselves.
Argument doesn't stack up so we clutch at the "Communist Dictatorship" claptrap, when that has never been discussed on this thread.

Mixed economies exist and work.

 

[SteveHants]

everyone LOVED their council houses didn't they ? wasn't the past so lovely when viewed through the blurry eyes of old age ! ............ and how do you pay for these millions of council houses when all the wealth leave the uK to pay lower tax elsewere ? ....... I know you could nationalise land so its cheap ........ and then maybe nationalise a few house builders as well as we can't have builders making money can we now

I've spent time in communist countries, the kind of places where the state owns all the housing etc ....... without exception they are all dangerous, poor, oppressive shitholes that make you glad to live in a capitalist society

Pay for them?
Social housing did (far more so in the past) and even now does (with much reduced housing) generate revenue for the state, they don't cost anything, quite the opposite.

 

[robs1]

8

Pay for them?
Social housing did (far more so in the past) and even now does (with much reduced housing) generate revenue for the state, they don't cost anything, quite the opposite.

I would doubt very much they cover their costs when everything is counted in, but that doesnt mean they arent good value and are certainly needed.

 

[SteveHants]

8
I would doubt very much they cover their costs when everything is counted in, but that doesnt mean they arent good value and are certainly needed.

They do and have - housing stock was bought at cost of building it, those assets have usually long been paid for, so rent covers maintenance and pays back into councils.

Some city councils have set up shell companies to get round the govt no longer building/buying social housing to build social housing and the companies have managed to be reasonably successful at so doing and have paid for themselves (Salford is an example of this).

 

[robs1]

They do and have - housing stock was bought at cost of building it, those assets have usually long been paid for, so rent covers maintenance and pays back into councils.

Some city councils have set up shell companies to get round the govt no longer building/buying social housing to build social housing and the companies have managed to be reasonably successful at so doing and have paid for themselves (Salford is an example of this).

When the right to buy came into being there was a large debt on them, social housing percentage in new builds means there is a lot of new ones which are subsidised by those who buy the others on the sites

 

[pastit]

They do and have - housing stock was bought at cost of building it, those assets have usually long been paid for, so rent covers maintenance and pays back into councils.

Some city councils have set up shell companies to get round the govt no longer building/buying social housing to build social housing and the companies have managed to be reasonably successful at so doing and have paid for themselves (Salford is an example of this).

Far better than having private landlords charging excessive rents. People that support this must surely realize the cost off housing benefit, over the last 20 years adds up to aprox 350 billion, money that has all been borrowed for your children or grandchildren to pay back.

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

8
I would doubt very much they cover their costs when everything is counted in, but that doesnt mean they arent good value and are certainly needed.

It's just a question of ownership though, and how any subsidy is applied, don't you think?

 

[robs1]

It's just a question of ownership though, and how any subsidy is applied, don't you think?

The problem is one of supply and demand,not enough houses and the cost rises,, is it too many people including immigrants or too few houses due to not enough allocations of sites or not enough being built due to lack of labour of big builders holding back supply to keep prices up

 

[essexpete]

The problem is one of supply and demand,not enough houses and the cost rises,, is it too many people including immigrants or too few houses due to not enough allocations of sites or not enough being built due to lack of labour of big builders holding back supply to keep prices up

All of those things plus the lions share of development being carried out by large companies on land acquired from large land owners. It seems that combination has the greater success in developing sensitive araes, particularly if within GB.