Tell me this is not the best country in the world

triathlon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48637484

About half of my huge family now own second homes, we are living in a world where my parents could only once dream of when they first moved to England.

Rich2808

So your definition of being the best country in the world is that some people including members of your family own more than one home. You might find that most countries in the world allow people to own more than one home if they wish - so that doesn't really strike me as a useful definition? Quality of life, good public services, low crime, strong sense of community, low levels of inequality, good housing provision for all - those are probably more relevant determinants of best country in the world.

Of course in order to meet this accolade it might perhaps not be ideal to have thousands of people sleeping out on the streets in the rain and freezing cold every night, tens of thousands of kids living in damp accommodation or bed and breakfasts or tower blocks burning down killing dozens because of unsafe designs and poor cladding due to seeming negligence.

But hey - your family members own two homes so thats fine.

The UK has its positives - but if you think it is the best country in the world at the moment you probably haven't done much travelling!

Takedap

I would say we're probably in the top ten at the moment.



Although we appear to be trying to change this.

MobileSaver

Rich2808 wrote: »

So your definition of being the best country in the world is that some people including members of your family own more than one home.

You have to remember that some people are very narrow-minded, become fixated on what they believe is important and appear unaware that there's a whole world of different people, opinions and circumstances out there.

It reminds me of a teacher at school who genuinely believed that you could separate the bright and not-so-bright kids based solely on whether they knew the main difference between a helicopter and a gyrocopter... :eek:

From the BBC article (must have been a slow news day) :

"This suggests that only younger people who are rich can afford a second home"

Wow, some incredible investigative journalism and in-depth analysis going on there by their source. :rotfl:

triathlon

Rich2808 wrote: »

So your definition of being the best country in the world is that some people including members of your family own more than one home. You might find that most countries in the world allow people to own more than one home if they wish - so that doesn't really strike me as a useful definition? Quality of life, good public services, low crime, strong sense of community, low levels of inequality, good housing provision for all - those are probably more relevant determinants of best country in the world.

Of course in order to meet this accolade it might perhaps not be ideal to have thousands of people sleeping out on the streets in the rain and freezing cold every night, tens of thousands of kids living in damp accommodation or bed and breakfasts or tower blocks burning down killing dozens because of unsafe designs and poor cladding due to seeming negligence.

But hey - your family members own two homes so thats fine.

The UK has its positives - but if you think it is the best country in the world at the moment you probably haven't done much travelling!

Some people really need to open a Charles Dickens novel to have any clue what UK poverty is like, even in recent years it has been bad. Housing has never been better and their is no excuse for anyone going hungry, in fact too much food is an issue in the UK

Cakeguts

There has been some extremely bad reporting done by the BBC recently. They have reporters who seem to be working at the level of a GCSE exam. They don't research anything they just write what they think themselves about a subject.



For example they don't touch on the reason why people in the 60s who didn't qualify for social housing had to buy a home. The rent acts had reduced the amount of available rented accommodation down to about zero so if you couldn't get a council house you had to buy a house and you had to go without a lot to get the money together.

Cakeguts

Rich2808 wrote: »

So your definition of being the best country in the world is that some people including members of your family own more than one home. You might find that most countries in the world allow people to own more than one home if they wish - so that doesn't really strike me as a useful definition? Quality of life, good public services, low crime, strong sense of community, low levels of inequality, good housing provision for all - those are probably more relevant determinants of best country in the world.

Of course in order to meet this accolade it might perhaps not be ideal to have thousands of people sleeping out on the streets in the rain and freezing cold every night, tens of thousands of kids living in damp accommodation or bed and breakfasts or tower blocks burning down killing dozens because of unsafe designs and poor cladding due to seeming negligence.

But hey - your family members own two homes so thats fine.

The UK has its positives - but if you think it is the best country in the world at the moment you probably haven't done much travelling!

To answer this. Many of the people sleeping on the streets are there because NHS care of people with mental illness is just not good enough. Remember the NHS closing all the big mental hospitals and then selling the land? How much of that money do you think has gone into "care in the community?"



Where is the evidence that 10s of thousands of kids are living in damp conditions or bed and breakfasts? Please don't quote the BBC on this as we are already having problems with unresearched reporting.


Could you also provide a solution to parents whose children finish up in Bed and Breakfast because of rent arrears.



This is what the good food banks do as well as provide food. Some people just can't budget very well.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/jan/30/financial-advice-food-bank-struggling-people-guidance

bsms1147

Well, bully for you and your family.

shortcrust

Satire? I’m honestly not sure.

Surely no one really thinks second home ownership levels are an indication of national progress when there are so many people who are frustrated in their efforts to own their first home.

zagubov

Are you celebrating the fact that an increasing proportion of the housing stock is accommodating a decreasing proportion of the population?

Rich2808

zagubov wrote: »

Are you celebrating the fact that an increasing proportion of the housing stock is accommodating a decreasing proportion of the population?

I can forgive the OP a bit of greed but as the last line of the article makes clear your likelihood of being able to buy a home or own one in future is increasingly likely to be related not to your own efforts but what you inherit. If your parents and close relatives are poor and live in a council house no matter how hard you strive you are less likely to own one home or more than a lazy person who simply inherits property or assets.

Whether that provides for a healthy society or a productive economy moving forward is less clear.

"Britain risks becoming a country where getting ahead in life depends as much on what you inherit, as what you earn"