Would you march for more affordable housing?

baby_boomer

It also subsidises wages.

If people couldn't live on their wages (especially the basics of housing, clothes, food & transport) in such an affluent society they'd riot and we'd have to make changes.

carolt

Yes

I don't think I get your point. Are you saying that housing benefit enables wages to be lower?

If we - as I suggested - had lower rents enforced by law - then we wouldn't need to top up wages with benefits.

Or have I missed your point?

ILW

I think you do get the point.
Without HB inflating what a landlord could get from renters, rents would have to drop, then house prices would also drop. This does not seem to be what the government want.

b0rker

Cleaver wrote: »

You can try and get government to intervene with various tools and methods to try and manipulate the situation, but until our culture changes I think we'll just continue on the same path. It isn't the government's fault, it's because we're all morons.

It's a wee island with not an awful lot of space to build houses on. We need arable land and green spaces not to mention more green energy projects which take up a lot of land.

How do we change that?

Land reclamation?

We all realise that it is a wee island with not much space to build houses on hence the 'moronic' attitude.

b0rker

moggylover wrote: »

Actually, since it is one of the most basic needs we all share I can't think of many better ones:o

How about renting?

undetterred

b0rker wrote: »

How about renting?

Why its a given right to own a house:rolleyes:

carolt

Yes

Don't you guys know anything?

It's a given right to own at least 2 houses - 1 to live in and 1 to get someone else to pay for your pension. :rotfl:

b0rker

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well sorry, thats not how things work.

They had their chance. It's not as if the advice to buy as young as you can hasn't been drilled into every youngster for at least my whole adult life. And no doubt for generations before as well. Everybody knows thats the right thing to do.
(:D I feel much better now )

I have got to agree with Hamlish on this one.

My mate worked very hard as a teen and in his twenties. Saved hard and has probably not missed more than a weeks work in his life. He bought when he was about 20 and is now mortgage free at 33. He has made a load in the HPI years but worked very hard for it.

I bummed around and !!!!ed my money away till the age of 30 (like a lot of my mates) and bought in 2007. I have bought at the top of the market and have struggled. I don't complain about it now as I have managed to luckily pay the mortage down by about 25% in 2 years due to some very well paid work.

My mate had been saving since the age of about 13 when he started his paper round!

If anyone got lucky it was me.

b0rker

moggylover wrote: »

Unfortunately you are right, at least for the forseeable future: but that doesn't change the fact that you are a pretty detestable example of why it continues and will probably remain a smug, self-satisfied and arrogant ......... for the rest of your days:D

Sorry but I think he was just stating fact in a logical and unemotive manner.

It is you who has introduced emotive language.

b0rker

Deleted_User wrote: »

If people in the South East were really concerned about the future of their children they'd be flocking to places with affordable housing. Or at least raising their children to have the expectation that they must move away from home as soon as they're old enough (unless they're lucky enough to get the very best paid jobs...or an inheritance). The problem is, I suspect most want the best of both worlds. They want all the benefits that come with living in the South East but not the downsides. So who's being greedy?

Excellent.

Thank you.