What Did Thatcher Ever Do For Us?

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

If council housing had been left to serve it's original purpose, and property developers had continued to build houses for sale, then the total housing stock would have continued to increase, and the housing market would probably not have overheated to the point of meltdown in 2007/8.

UK politics is still obsessed with the idea that house-ownership is the only way to go, and the latest 'help-to-buy' schemes threaten to kick off another round of market distortion.

The government has talked of putting money into infrastructure, and its austerity programme looks less and less convincing.

Now might be a very good time to fund a massive programme of social house-building. It would provide jobs and houses, as well as an alternative to the game of leapfrog which, these days, we all have to play in order to find somewhere to live.

TruckerT

how did sell council house stop builders make more homes?

how did Thatcher stop builders building and so making profit?

as you know because you are well informed and intelligent; UK home ownership is lower than the EU average

there is a very good argument for building more home for decent people by reducing planning rules and reducing capital ratios of banks for mortgages as it costs the taxpayer nothing and produced lovely homes for people and new jobs

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

how did sell council house stop builders make more homes?

it didn't

how did Thatcher stop builders building and so making profit?

she didn't

you are well informed and intelligent

thank you

UK home ownership is lower than the EU average

statistic?

What I meant to say was that if the housing market had not been distorted by the cut-price sell-off of council housing, many of our current problems might have been avoided.

I can understand the Thatcherite idea of encouraging home-ownership, but I don't understand why it should have involved giving windfalls of tens of thousands of pounds to hundreds of thousands of probable Labour voters....

TruckerT

CLAPTON

how was the housing market distorted by the sell off of council property?
are you saying all those council tenants were about to rush out and buy expensive new build houses?
as a political idea, thatcher assumed that owner occupiers would appreciate that taking care of their own property was a good idea as otherwise they would lose money and so understand the Conservative principles of thrift

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

how was the housing market distorted by the sell off of council property

It would be a bit like a Labour government today saying that all private tenants have a legal right to buy their privately rented home from its current owner at discounts of up to 60% or so of 'market value'.

The Conservative principles of thrift have not been very apparent in recent times, except in the need to cut the welfare bill whilst slashing the tax bills of the rich.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

It would be a bit like a Labour government today saying that all private tenants have a legal right to buy their privately rented home from its current owner at discounts of up to 60% or so of 'market value'.

The Conservative principles of thrift have not been very apparent in recent times, except in the need to cut the welfare bill whilst slashing the tax bills of the rich.

TruckerT

no idea what thrift has to do with your statement but

how much has the welfare bill been cut?

how much has the tax for the rich been cut?

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

thatcher assumed that owner occupiers would appreciate that taking care of their own property was a good idea as otherwise they would lose money

I disagree - I think Thatcher calculated that by dishing out thousands of pounds to natural Labour supporters, she would win political support.

I have no idea how much the welfare bill has been reduced, nor the tax bill for the rich. But I have never heard George Osborne or IDS deny that their aim is to achieve reductions in both.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

I disagree - I think Thatcher calculated that by dishing out thousands of pounds to natural Labour supporters, she would win political support.

I have no idea how much the welfare bill has been reduced, nor the tax bill for the rich. But I have never heard George Osborne or IDS deny that their aim is to achieve reductions in both.

TruckerT

yes indeed

but very very occasionally it is useful to actually know that facts

just like the idiots that say Thatcher closed the mining industry although the actual facts are freely available
(the internet is your friend)

grizzly1911

TruckerT wrote: »

I disagree - I think Thatcher calculated that by dishing out thousands of pounds to natural Labour supporters, she would win political support.

Liquidated assets to keep the ship afloat.

That is why the funds were not released for further social housing. Long term assets sold to provide state liquidity.

Assets sold at undervalue, reducing liquid assets of or increasing the liabilities of the recipients. The fact many were then sold on for profit funded further consumption fuelled by additional personal debt to keep plates spinning a bit longer.

The fact that thousands were now brought into the capitalist ideal was convenient.

TruckerT

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Liquidated assets to keep the ship afloat.

That is why the funds were not released for further social housing. Long term assets sold to provide state liquidity.

Assets sold at undervalue, reducing liquid assets of or increasing the liabilities of the recipients. The fact many were then sold on for profit funded further consumption fuelled by additional personal debt to keep plates spinning a bit longer.

The fact that thousands were now brought into the capitalist ideal was convenient.

Mmmm - these things are hard to prove! It is also possible that the conversion of thousands to the capitalist ideal was the main aim, and the additional state liquidity was the convenient by-product.

TruckerT

grizzly1911

TruckerT wrote: »

Mmmm - these things are hard to prove! It is also possible that the conversion of thousands to the capitalist ideal was the main aim, and the additional state liquidity was the convenient by-product.

TruckerT

You are right these things are hard to prove but we were in a financial mess then as now. If money wasn't part of the issue it would have reused in capital projects not just to fund current accounts.It helped free up funds elsewhere for other pet "projects".