Manifesto Statements; Election Promises; Electioneering Guff - Believe it or Not

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Why would it allow more to put a roof over their heads? Those who are applicable are already in the house?

The rationale being that the funds available through the purchase would be used to build more houses - but that just isn't going to happen. Besides the government would have to pay the housing associations £millions for their loss. Why not just give the housing associations these £millions now and let them get on with building thousands of new houses where they are needed most.

 

[USER1999]

Added to which, why Rob people's pensions to pay for it?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Added to which, why Rob people's pensions to pay for it?

You could cite Robin Hood behaviour - as I might with other policies - but I won't because I don't see any wider benefit coming from this whatsoever. And they are telling us that it would be the most expensive properties that would be sold off. Well who is going to be able to afford one of these if they can't already. And the most expensive houses are generally in locations where there is a housing shortage - that's why they expensive. And where in such areas would you build more houses to replace the ones sold off. Quite. And so if they could - then 3 yrs after buying such a property - the delighted owner sells house for a huge profit and moves out of the area - and who buys these properties - often property developers - and split em up into flats for rental. And the rents are expensive for most, so taxpayer ends up subsidising the rent for lower earners who have to live in the area etc etc. Blatant pork barrel politics.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

You could cite Robin Hood behaviour - as I might with other policies - but I won't because I don't see any wider benefit coming from this whatsoever. And they are telling us that it would be the most expensive properties that would be sold off. Well who is going to be able to afford one of these if they can't already. And the most expensive houses are generally in locations where there is a housing shortage - that's why they expensive. And where in such areas would you build more houses to replace the ones sold off. Quite. And so if they could - then 3 yrs after buying such a property - the delighted owner sells house for a huge profit and moves out of the area - and who buys these properties - often property developers - and split em up into flats for rental. And the rents are expensive for most, so taxpayer ends up subsidising the rent for lower earners who have to live in the area etc etc. Blatant pork barrel politics.

Good post....If the right to buy 'rules' are similar to 1979 nearly all of the income goes to the Government whereas the Councils who invested in these projects getting pennies.

 

[SocketRocket]

As long as the houses are sold for a price that can buy the land and build a new one then it's increasing housing.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Good post....If the right to buy 'rules' are similar to 1979 nearly all of the income goes to the Government whereas the Councils who invested in these projects getting pennies.

The Tories say they will 'reimburse' the housing association for their loss - 10s of £millions. The housing associations say - just give us the money NOW that you say you'll give us as 'reimbursement' - and we'll build 10s of '000s of new houses where they are needed - no need to go through this sell-off nonsense.

Of course the housing associations aren't too happy at all - though last night on Newsnight Michael Give accused a spokesman for the NHA as 'being biased'. Erm well....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ll-off-homes-under-right-to-buy-10175492.html

And my thoughts precisely here

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...repeat-the-mistakes-of-thatcher-10174767.html

 

[JohnnyDee]

Just an observation really, but I wonder if any Tory voters *truly and genuinely* believe that the coincidental global recession that was wreaking havoc everywhere and at the time of the last general election, was in any shape or form related to the previous Labour government's domestic fiscal strategy.

If the answer is that you do believe that it was, then quite frankly I'm rather terrified that you're still at large in the community and have not been locked up by the powers that be..

*Don't believe the hype*

 

[SocketRocket]

Just an observation really, but I wonder if any Tory voters *truly and genuinely* believe that the coincidental global recession that was wreaking havoc everywhere and at the time of the last general election, was in any shape or form related to the previous Labour government's domestic fiscal strategy.

If the answer is that you do believe that it was, then quite frankly I'm rather terrified that you're still at large in the community and have not been locked up by the powers that be..

*Don't believe the hype*

No, but the massive borrowing in times of relative boom to support large increases in welfare spending and the open floodgates for immigration were definitely a party of their fiscal strategy and those responsible should certainly have been locked up by the powers to be!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

As long as the houses are sold for a price that can buy the land and build a new one then it's increasing housing.

They don;t have to sell the houses and compensate the housing associations - just give the housing associations the compensation they'd have paid them and let them get on building more new houses. New houses plus existing houses not sold off = increased stock of social housing.

 

[Ethan]

Just an observation really, but I wonder if any Tory voters *truly and genuinely* believe that the coincidental global recession that was wreaking havoc everywhere and at the time of the last general election, was in any shape or form related to the previous Labour government's domestic fiscal strategy.

If the answer is that you do believe that it was, then quite frankly I'm rather terrified that you're still at large in the community and have not been locked up by the powers that be..

*Don't believe the hype*

The economic crisis has a series of causes, US non-prime lending, the massive reliance on instruments based on debt, insurance schemes for same, too big to fail, etc, but pandering to the City and the resulting liberalisation of trading regulations including removing the separation between retail and investment banks in the UK encouraged US investment houses to set up in London and conduct much of their gambling there, and both Tories and Labour supported that, starting with the Wicked Witch, going through to Broon.

 

[chrisd]

I'm sure it was Gordon Brown who I listened to every week on PMQ's saying " we've abolished boom and bust" well he certainly abolished boom!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Barnstorming stuff from Sturgeon in front of the adoring fans

 

[SocketRocket]

Barnstorming stuff from Sturgeon in front of the adoring fans

Covert anti-Englishness. She's a liar when She says this election is not about Independence but making Britain stronger. Ms Kipper would be a better name (two faced) rather than Sturgeon.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Covert anti-Englishness. She's a liar when She says this election is not about Independence but making Britain stronger. Ms Kipper would be a better name (two faced) rather than Sturgeon.

This election isnt other than as a sub text and quite clearly as she says openly independencecis a longer term objective and clearly something the SNP work towards. If she thinks she can hasten the coming of the next referendum by being destructive in Westminster then I think she plays a dangerous game with the Scots electorate

Up to her and her MPs