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!
Wow!
Comments
-
captainhindsight wrote: »I understand that and they probably wouldn't if they had the choice, but if all new developments were built in a way where it forced people to be neighbors with people they wouldn't usually be neighbors with I think it would be a step in the right direction.
There is nothing wrong with people on benefits, and by forcing (not really the right word but you know what I mean) people to live next to people they wouldn't usually choose to mix with I think would help to break down social barriers by making them interact with the individual not the stereotype.
And I think by both parties benefit from interacting with different ends of the social scale.
but you do mean that this should be enforced by law
and you do agree that the people paying for their own home should be forced to subsidise the social housing by law.0 -
captainhindsight wrote: »I understand that and they probably wouldn't if they had the choice, but if all new developments were built in a way where it forced people to be neighbors with people they wouldn't usually be neighbors with I think it would be a step in the right direction.
There is nothing wrong with people on benefits, and by forcing (not really the right word but you know what I mean) people to live next to people they wouldn't usually choose to mix with I think would help to break down social barriers by making them interact with the individual not the stereotype.
And I think by both parties benefit from interacting with different ends of the social scale.
Do you really believe that?
I know I would would be resentful when leaving at 6.30 in the morning to go and do a 12 hour day to pay the mortgage and having to walk past Miss Breeders identical house to mine who will not be surfacing till lunchtime and spending the day watching telly. I would not want to be constantly reminded where a chunk of my taxes are going.0 -
Check out Abu Hamsa's Mrs who is living in a 5 bed place in Shepherds Bush worth over a million and paying nothing.
Have a think about this. How many properties are worth over £500k in the UK? Then how many of these have a council house next door?
An unlikely set of circumstances?are you saying a single mother of 5 children would not be a candidate for designated social housing ?
if not then who would be?
No, I'm saying it's unlikely that a £500k privately owned home will have a council house next door occupied by a single mother and 5 kids.0 -
Have a think about this. How many properties are worth over £500k in the UK? Then how many of these have a council house next door?
An unlikely set of circumstances?
No, I'm saying it's unlikely that a £500k privately owned home will have a council house next door occupied by a single mother and 5 kids.
on new estates, the social housing is indeed generally to one side but the expensive houses are nearby depending of course on the size and structure of the development0 -
captainhindsight wrote: »I understand that and they probably wouldn't if they had the choice, but if all new developments were built in a way where it forced people to be neighbors with people they wouldn't usually be neighbors with I think it would be a step in the right direction.
What would be the reality?
The 6 bed would not sell as would be owners source from existing stock which does not have the same factors attached.
The 6 bed would then need to be converted into 2 off 3 bed terraced:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
but you do mean that this should be enforced by law
and you do agree that the people paying for their own home should be forced to subsidise the social housing by law.
What I'm saying that new housing developments should have a diverse range of property and residents not just slums full of pretentious middle management people and bmws like most of them seem to be.
Diverse housing estates are becoming more common and I think they are a good think to force different social groups to interact
I have not said anything about subsidising social housing"talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" - Euripides0 -
Do you really believe that?
I know I would would be resentful when leaving at 6.30 in the morning to go and do a 12 hour day to pay the mortgage and having to walk past Miss Breeders identical house to mine who will not be surfacing till lunchtime and spending the day watching telly. I would not want to be constantly reminded where a chunk of my taxes are going.
But it wouldn't be an identical house that's what I'm saying,"talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" - Euripides0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »What would be the reality?
The 6 bed would not sell as would be owners source from existing stock which does not have the same factors attached.
The 6 bed would then need to be converted into 2 off 3 bed terraced
I don't believe that no because go into any village you see diverse properties and people next door to each other"talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" - Euripides0 -
captainhindsight wrote: »What I'm saying that new housing developments should have a diverse range of property and residents not just slums full of pretentious middle management people and bmws like most of them seem to be.
Diverse housing estates are becoming more common and I think they are a good think to force different social groups to interact
I have not said anything about subsidising social housing
the current system is that by LAW new building developments must contain 30% social housing ('affordable').
The cost of this social housing has to be recovered by the builder by increasing the price of the 'normal house and/or making then smaller.
So the unfortunate people that buy new builds are forced (by LAW) to subsidise the housing of the social tenants.
You may well think it is a good thing to have such compulsion but when you grow up and have children, you, like so many other lefties hypocrites will change your mind.0 -
Have a think about this. How many properties are worth over £500k in the UK? Then how many of these have a council house next door?
An unlikely set of circumstances?
No, I'm saying it's unlikely that a £500k privately owned home will have a council house next door occupied by a single mother and 5 kids.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards