Is it time to cap house prices?

squinty

Cranston wrote: »

Can you give a specific example?

Yes, one example is Waverley Council - who collect £22m in rent, but pay nearly £11m to goverment.

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/story.aspx?storycode=6500385


If this amount of money is taken out of council housing, how can local authorities be expected to provide good quality local authority housing?

BTLNEWbie says "The councils have no interest in supplying homes and the necessary upkeep to make them delightful homes for people to live in"

But does not acknowledge the fundamental difference between local authorites and the private sector. A local authority in effect has rents set by central government - these are set by following a governenment formula, if the authority set a rent that is higher than this, they lose any addtional income through an increase in their negative subsidy. The private sector has no such control, and too a large extent are able to charge whatever they want for accommodation - this is illustrated in most areas by the local housing allowance (in effect the lowest rent) in the private sector being much, much greater than the average council house rent

So in the example of Waverly if the average rent (from using the govt formula) is £80 per week, but £40 of this goes straight to central government they are effectively providing accommodation for £40 per week. I am sure that most councils would prefer to ensure that all their homes are delightful, but how is this possible under this finance system?

Would BTLNEWbie be abel to operate a business if the same rules applied? My guess is probably not !

bo_drinker

Easiest recent example of the man in the street being fleeced is the various MPs 2nd home and maintaining said homes. New kitchens when required etc etc When I want a kitchen I have to pay for it myself. We are taxed every minute of the day I don't know how much exactly goes back in taxes to them. But after they have it they want more to pay for their kitchens and 2nd homes. Is that right ???

RecoveringAlcoholic

bo_drinker wrote: »

Easiest recent example of the man in the street being fleeced is the various MPs 2nd home and maintaining said homes. New kitchens when required etc etc When I want a kitchen I have to pay for it myself. We are taxed every minute of the day I don't know how much exactly goes back in taxes to them. But after they have it they want more to pay for their kitchens and 2nd homes. Is that right ???

If you are an MP prices are based on the John Lewis catalogue.

If you are on benefits prices are based on the Argos catalogue.

m00m00

the clearest example of a shift in taxation to the better off, from the worse off, has been the shift over the past 30 years away from income taxation towards consumption taxation.

lostinrates

keeprenting wrote: »

I used to work at the Bar (albeit only briefly) and I don't know of any barrister who uses cocaine, although I know several bankers who do...

well, I'm certanly not going to make a list here!

I should add I've never clerked for some one who I thought was in Court fresh from a powder room, but I, sadly do know many habitual users at the bar socially. Not that its any more relevant (or trustworthy, I'm aware these are just words from the ether on a forum) I should say I am not a drug user, I'm very anti drugs, but it was sadly not always the case and though I never had any 'problem' I am used to seeing signs i saw in my previous relationships, when I am most certainly not looking for them.

The very public case I refered to was heavily plastered through both the national and legal press end of the year before last.