Re: Housing : Sun Dec 01, 2013 4:45 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

There's a couple of errors there.

My local council is not a charitable trust.

You used the word "home" in the sentence above, I believe that what you are talking about is a "house" or "dwelling".


But ultimately we come back to the difference of opinion that I eluded to in my response, by your own admission you've only been working as a housing officer since 1998 and you can therefore be forgiven for having no knowledge of the original purpose for council housing, its a business to you, a matter of logistics and accountancy with little regard to the client but full regard to ticking boxes - quite sad really.

Officiousness and without the ability to think or see outside the box.
i would have to ditto your sad sentiment.

Re: Housing : Sun Dec 01, 2013 5:45 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Would you say the average standard of living is higher or lower than it was at the turn of the 20th century - if you believe it is higher then how has that happened? Is that not a tangible example of the trickle down effect?

No, that is not trickle-down economics.

Sal Paradise wrote:

The market in housing has stalled because an outside factor has disrupted it i.e. the lack of available money. If the usual people who could get mortgages yesteryear could get mortgages now then more new affordable houses would be being built - the fact that nobody seems inclined to lend money right now then why would anyone build houses they cannot sell?

They can easily sell them if they reduce the price.

Interesting which threads you're choosing to post on at the moment.

Re: Housing : Sun Dec 01, 2013 5:45 pm  

I

Sal Paradise wrote:

What Crow is doing is denying somebody on a low income the opportunity to rent his house?

No he isn't, it is the failure to build sufficient homes that is denying someone on a low income a house.

That is not the fault of Bob Crow

Re: Housing : Sun Dec 01, 2013 6:05 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Would you say the average standard of living is higher or lower than it was at the turn of the 20th century - if you believe it is higher then how has that happened? Is that not a tangible example of the trickle down effect?

Since we moved seriously to an economy based on neo-liberal ideology ('trickle down'/Reaganomics/Thatcherism), the cost of living has risen but income has declined for all but a very few.

We now have foodbanks growing massive;y, the Red Cross organising food parcels for UK people, Save the Children spending money in the UK rather than simply collecting it – and this in something like the seventh richest nation on Earth.

Trickle down is not working – and it never has.

Sal Paradise wrote:

The market in housing has stalled because an outside factor has disrupted it i.e. the lack of available money. If the usual people who could get mortgages yesteryear could get mortgages now then more new affordable houses would be being built - the fact that nobody seems inclined to lend money right now then why would anyone build houses they cannot sell?

Or ...

We could have a massive programme of building council housing that would be affordable for anyone, not just a few, or only on the basis of insane mortgages.

We are short hundreds of thousands of homes precisely because we have not, as a nation, built affordable housing for 20-odd years, not because the housing market has stalled a bit. Indeed, in the last year or so, the housing market has been going bonkers, with prices rising again massively. Housing is being built – and some of it is not even being put up for sale in this country, but advertised in the Far East. There's masses of building going on in my part of London – with prices in the ridiculous brackets for a one-bed flat on City Road, just north of Old Street: hardly a gentrified, quiet area.

The situation is unsustainable. And it's also completely counterproductive in terms of the national economy.

Re: Housing : Sun Dec 01, 2013 6:06 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What Crow is doing is denying somebody on a low income the opportunity to rent his house?

You talked of hypocrisy. I asked you for evidence. I'm still waiting.

Re: Housing : Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:48 am  

so, what do people see the purpose of Social Housing to be, and if you believe that purpose to be more than housing of need in a problem situation, how do you propose funding it?

still laughing that gobbler think I am a housing officer

Re: Housing : Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:15 pm  

Standee wrote:

so, what do people see the purpose of Social Housing to be, and if you believe that purpose to be more than housing of need in a problem situation, how do you propose funding it?

You've already had the first part of your question answered, the second part comes courtesy of 30 years of government thinking that council housing was not required.

The reversal of that thinking requires government to put back the money that was moved out of the housing budget over those years, it shouldn't be beyond the wit of politicians and accountants to find a way, they certainly found the funding during years of recession and some turmoil in the 1970s and early 80s but then again the attitude towards renting was totally different then.

Re: Housing : Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:26 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

You've already had the first part of your question answered, the second part comes courtesy of 30 years of government thinking that council housing was not required.

The reversal of that thinking requires government to put back the money that was moved out of the housing budget over those years, it shouldn't be beyond the wit of politicians and accountants to find a way, they certainly found the funding during years of recession and some turmoil in the 1970s and early 80s but then again the attitude towards renting was totally different then.

so, no answers, as usual, just rhetoric.

Re: Housing : Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:43 pm  

Standee wrote:

so, no answers, as usual, just rhetoric.

We've got answers but first we'd like you to answer some from the last couple of days.

Gidiot is borrowing extra hundreds of £millions just to pay benefits, we borrowed £1.5tn to bail out the banks. There is ample scope to fund a massive house-building programme, the same as there was in the 1950s & 60s when this country was in an even worse financial state than it is now.

The only thing missing is political will

Re: Housing : Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:52 pm  

Standee wrote:

so, no answers, as usual, just rhetoric.

You've had the answers.

This is very simple - everyone knows what you try to do with this persona of "Standee" that you invented, we even have people who say that you admit to them face to face that you deliberately try and inflame situations for your own amusement although you won't do it in person, we know this, so it won't work, if you ask a question you'll get an answer, if you try and provoke a more reactive and inflammatory reply then you won't get one.