We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
BOE to get more responsibilities.
Comments
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Very good point.
Ah, but they would only get a return over the life of the property should they sell,
Why do you draw that conclusion?"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »Why do you draw that conclusion?
You saidQuote:
Originally Posted by grizzly1911
At least they would get a return on their outlay over the life of the property.
Perhaps, you may wish to elaborate how they would get a return on their outlay over the life of the property.
To pre-empt your reply, if it was cash efficient for the government to provide social housing, why did they sell them off (and at a discount):wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »You said
Perhaps, you may wish to elaborate how they would get a return on their outlay over the life of the property.
To pre-empt your reply, if it was cash efficient for the government to provide social housing, why did they sell them off (and at a discount)
As you have pre emptied me you probably know that at a Government should be able to do it more efficiently as it borrows at far lower rates and would effectively let the property many times over. If it wasn't possible why are so many organisations and individuals willing to participate in the market many with considerably higher funding costs.
For expediency I will go with three.
1.) Governments have been selling off assets for many years because as they are mired in debt.
2.) Poor housing stock that had not been kept up to date.
3.) Social re engineering for political purposes.
HTBC:cool:"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards