Old Conservatives don't understand

Other countries do not have the same house ownership obsession as the UK so there is no point in comparing ownership rates.
One way to tackle the council house problem is to kick people out when they start to earn a certain figure, why when I go around my local council estates am I seeing cars parked outside that are worth more than the house. If they have the money for those cars then they can afford a mortage and leave the property for someone else in more need.
 
aveatry said:
Other countries do not have the same house ownership obsession as the UK so there is no point in comparing ownership rates.
One way to tackle the council house problem is to kick people out when they start to earn a certain figure, why when I go around my local council estates am I seeing cars parked outside that are worth more than the house. If they have the money for those cars then they can afford a mortage and leave the property for someone else in more need.
Click to expand...
How do you know those houses are council houses and not privately owned?
 
IMG_4734.gif
 
Murdochcat said:
one thing FOR SURE is that the ratio of those working to those who are retired is changing and not for the better
Click to expand...
That’s why we have high net immigration and will continue to do so

Governments know this so they want high immigration but they also know low immigration is popular so they tell the public they are tough on immigration
 
Notch7 said:
How do you know those houses are council houses and not privately owned?
Click to expand...
Well apart from living in an area all my life and getting to know the sure fire signs one way to be sure is that the council houses have all been externally insulated then rendered and the private ones have not.
 
from the link...

This is correct. The official data shows that the Blair and Brown governments built 7,870 council houses (local authority tenure) over the course of 13 years. (If we don't include 2010 - the year when David Cameron became PM - this number drops to 6,510.) Mr Copley has contrasted this figure with the record of Mrs Thatcher's government, which never built fewer than 17,710 homes in a year.

To look at it another way, New Labour built an average of 562 council houses per year. And Mrs Thatcher's Conservatives? 41,343. That said, it's also true that the number of council houses under construction declined steadily during Mrs Thatcher's era.

However while Tom Copley talks specifically about council-built accommodation, we should also consider the homes built and managed by housing associations. These 'social landlords' provide affordable housing to those on low incomes, and were responsible for an increasing proportion of social house building from the early 1990s onwards. Between 1997 and 2010, some 350,000 housing association dwellings were built. If we look at both housing association homes and council houses, Labour built more affordable properties in 2009 than the Conservatives did in each year between 1987 and 1990.

...so it helps to c&p the text to highlight how statistics can be seen in context with the proposed narrative of the thread. People have a way of skating past links to avoid giving away the position they adopt during an argument.
 
Council house building was under discussion, notchy was denying facts that new labour built less council homes in their time in office than Thatcher did in a year.
Shooting from the hip especially in notchys case sees him come a cropper time and time again on an industrial scale and makes him look like nwgs said silly.
It wasn't hard to find the link and if he had done so he could have put forward the argument about housing associations and even made himself look level headed.
 
It's easy to just post up a bunch of relevant links but it takes time to read through the text to find the relevant section and by that time a thread can be somewhere else in the discussion. It's a bit of a cop-out to throw up a heap of 'em to 'prove' a point and end the argument in one way or another.
 
Were enough houses built to replace the ones that were sold off during their time in office ? You will always have people in low paid jobs and incomes, even more so now. They still need a place to live and raise a family.
 
Andy165 said:
Were enough houses built to replace the ones that were sold off during their time in office ? You will always have people in low paid jobs and incomes, even more so now. They still need a place to live.
Click to expand...
They just need to work harder apparantly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top