Right to buy - Boris style
- Thread starter toquark
- Start date
I would guess he's appealing to the new Tory core vote as traditional Tory voters have had enough of the idiots!
betweenthelines
Member
- Location
- southwest
Wasn't it "sub prime" mortgages in the USA that started the last big recession?
It was , now it's Russian mother fuc......
caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
Let's get this straight.
Boris wants taxpaying workers, who can't save enough to get together a big enough deposit to buy a property of their own, to buy a property for benefit claiments?
Presumably, discounts on the properties benefit claiments are residing in and would be buying, could equate to a taxpayer funded deposit, that would be paid directly to housing associations and councils?
Is this no more than a tax payer funded policy, to keep the gas ring burning under the house building pot, for the benefit of the Tories developer mates?
Why not just pay the developers tax payer money to build more social rental housing that will then be owned by the country?
Oh. Maybe that would take the heat out of the housing market?
Boris wants taxpaying workers, who can't save enough to get together a big enough deposit to buy a property of their own, to buy a property for benefit claiments?
Presumably, discounts on the properties benefit claiments are residing in and would be buying, could equate to a taxpayer funded deposit, that would be paid directly to housing associations and councils?
Is this no more than a tax payer funded policy, to keep the gas ring burning under the house building pot, for the benefit of the Tories developer mates?
Why not just pay the developers tax payer money to build more social rental housing that will then be owned by the country?
Oh. Maybe that would take the heat out of the housing market?
Last edited:
- Location
- Lincolnshire
The property price bubble is the last “asset” we have in the U.K. The government is wetting its pants that it will see a long overdue “correction” (crash) during the forthcoming recession. A long overdue correction would actually allow more people to buy their own homes but probably bust some of the financial institutions that are up to their neck in over inflated property in terms of loans and mortgages that wouldn’t be worth maybe 50% of what they thought they were. So now we see a deparate attempt to underpin the market by channeling benefits directly into mortgages. It might well be a worthier idea than channelling benefits directly into rents but has anybody noticed that it essentially means that you are better off staying in bed while some other mug goes out to work to buy a house for you.
- Location
- Lincolnshire.
The “government” now amounts to nothing more than Johnson’s delusional ramblings. Want someone to blame? Look no further than 221 spineless Tory MPs.
Last edited:
- Location
- SW Scotland
There's more to home ownership than paying the mortgage.
How are benefits claimants going manage when things go wrong with the house and there's no landlord to phone? How are they going to afford building insurance?
Even with the mortgage paid some of these people are going to end up drowning in debt.
How are benefits claimants going manage when things go wrong with the house and there's no landlord to phone? How are they going to afford building insurance?
Even with the mortgage paid some of these people are going to end up drowning in debt.
It ist pretty clever this when you think it through
instead sending cash to private landlords the government help people buy houses .......... which they then sell to pay for their social care further down the line, in the mean time you bump up house prices and the economy
seems rather unjust however to everyone who has worked hard to save a deposit and get on the housing ladder - this kind of socialism really disincentives working IMO
instead sending cash to private landlords the government help people buy houses .......... which they then sell to pay for their social care further down the line, in the mean time you bump up house prices and the economy
seems rather unjust however to everyone who has worked hard to save a deposit and get on the housing ladder - this kind of socialism really disincentives working IMO
doing the right thing? dosnt pay? being honest working hard? this started a few years ago, someone was seriously suggesting paying fat, overweight, oboise people money, public money to lose weight? Free school dinners, for all? wash childrens clothes for free next? but its not free? nothings free? someone has to pay fund this? Blair had a great scheme in reign to build more hospitals? get private capital to fund the building of the hospitals and running costs, then govt lease them? talk about the goose who keeps laying golden eggs? But looked good at the time, look blair govt has built all these new hospitals? but us poor mugs we do have to pay a price?
- Location
- Lincolnshire.
A government policy that disincentivises working isn’t clever, it’s an insult to people who have to rely on private landlords such as myself. They work in relatively low paid jobs (manufacturing, groundcare, care sector etc.) and this so called policy won’t help them one jot. Indeed as social housing (housing association owned) gets bought up working people will face higher rents. In short a right fckup.
toquark
Member
Red wall voters (whom this policy is presumably aimed at) are not the dole wolling 1980s throwbacks the tories seem to think they are, they are generally hard working, aspirational and have a dim view of benefit reliance.
A policy which patronisingly assumes their new voting block will appreciate a handout like this will not play well to the many who have worked hard to get on to the housing ladder in its current state such as it is, whilst simultaneously giving those reliant on benefits an unfair advantage over their own families.
A policy which patronisingly assumes their new voting block will appreciate a handout like this will not play well to the many who have worked hard to get on to the housing ladder in its current state such as it is, whilst simultaneously giving those reliant on benefits an unfair advantage over their own families.
Aspiring Peasants
Member
- Location
- North Pennines
I agree with this. I live in a red wall seat and probably once a week frequent a local kebab/pizza shop. They've been advertising for staff, full or part time for weeks. I asked the girl who usually serves and works like a trooper why they couldn't get anybody. She said they'd rather get paid to sit at home watching tele.
Government and opposition no idea about real life
i do agree - its an insult to hard working tax payers ……… a socialist conservative party, who would have ever thought it possible
they are rapidly loosing my vote, sick of being taxed to death now
linga
Member
- Location
- Ceredigion
Completely agree but is the alternative any better or even worse ?
ollie989898
Member
The alternative is to tax the rich a lot more and have a more equal society with happier people. Nordic model. Just the job.
linga
Member
- Location
- Ceredigion
who are the rich ?
I was really wondering whether the alternative politicians/party/Government would be any better.
"Anybody that has more money than you do" would seem to be the answer for many.
toquark
Member
No, the alternative is to tax everybody less. I’m in favour of a flat rate 20% across the board whether you earn £10 or £10m. Studies and examples have proven this would generate more revenue from all who are earning and disincentivise tax evasion at the top. Today even middle earners are looking to tax avoidance as more and more are sucked into the higher tax bracket whilst being clobbered with increased NI and inflation at 10%.