We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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!
1 in 4 MP's in Parliament is a landlord

wymondham
Posts: 6,356 Forumite



This is an interesting article - I know its the Mirror (and old) but in my defence I arrived here via the BBC!
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/housing-crisis-more-landlords-parliament-5044990
With so many Landlords 'in power', with their own interests obviously in mind, can housing ever be truly reformed or changed?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/housing-crisis-more-landlords-parliament-5044990
With so many Landlords 'in power', with their own interests obviously in mind, can housing ever be truly reformed or changed?
0
Comments
-
Nope. Politicians will always do what serves themselves best.0
-
If you're interested, look up 'the railway interest' on the Googlenets.
IIRC at one point 2/3rds of MPs had some kind of significant financial interest in a railway company in the 1870/80s.0 -
If you're interested, look up 'the railway interest' on the Googlenets.
IIRC at one point 2/3rds of MPs had some kind of significant financial interest in a railway company in the 1870/80s.
and what was the result?
railways before most the rest of the world?
a bad thing?
The problem is, that the interest isn't in MPs owning building companies which might lead them to push for more building. Its owning homes, which means the opposite of potentially objecting to development.0 -
and what was the result?
railways before most the rest of the world?
a bad thing?
The result was the companies MPs partly owned could forecedly buy land cheaply. They could also vote to set up companies (companies needed to be set up by HoC vote at the time).
As a result the canal system was bankrupted. The effective subsidy to the railway system drove the canal system out of business.0 -
Is there any evidence that MPs in their voting put their own personal benefit above those of their constituents?I think....0
-
Is there any evidence that MPs in their voting put their own personal benefit above those of their constituents?
Besides it being basic human nature?
MPs dont even need to be a landlord to benefit from rising house prices, they get elected then buy a new house in London and get the mortgage paid by HMT. Every 1% increase in that house price is cash in their pocket.Faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards