Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Yet refuses to set a target of when to meet the 3% defence spending… does anyone take anything he says seriously?
Do you want to discuss boring politics? (14 Viewers)
- Thread starter mrtrench
- Start date
Yet refuses to set a target of when to meet the 3% defence spending… does anyone take anything he says seriously?
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Not any more - if you are on Universal Credit, you get your rent paid to you as well "so that it teaches people how to manage their money". Yeah manage it away on fags, booze, bookies, Sky TV and huge mobile costs! Potentially, anyway.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Probably the USA
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
It’s yet more posturing and empty rhetoric.
The talk of “war-fighting” is almost certainly done with the US in mind
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Even if it was real, how is funding big companies billions to build weapons to fight yesterday's war a good idea? Russia has just had its air bombers of the kind built by BAE blown up by drones
He did say this to be fair:
And, third, the government will “accelerate innovation at a wartime pace”, he says. He says he wants the UK to be “the fastest innovator in Nato’.
And yes, saying it and doing it are two different things.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Beth Rigby from Sky took him to pieces in the Q and A session
Grendel
Well-Known Member
A couple on here hang on to his every word
The Philosopher
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately there are people out there who live chaotic lives / play the system who live up to your characterisation. There are a few on here (about 5) who will refute this absolute reality, but they also believe that everyone of the thousand boat migrants per day are doctors and engineers fleeing terror from the French coast.
But here’s the thing; private landlords used to give tenants on benefits a fair crack - the rent cheque was guaranteed if it went direct.
Now, try to getting decent private rental accommodation in a decent area whilst on benefits? Landlords will employment check / credit check and are more prone to turn down claimants.
The result? Integration between have and have nots or ghettoisation? It’s the latter.
The solution? Back to landlord housing benefit payments with new annual landlord certificates of inspection (think car MOT) whatever the status of the tenants. It’s in place for boilers anyway, just extend the process for electrics, damp, insulation etc.
If a benefit claimant complains to council about private landlord, council withholds rent until proof of remediation. Private renter can do same and have right to withhold without fear or eviction.
There would be some problems, but it’s a better solution than segregating society. Unemployed claimants have a better chance of getting a job with an Earlsdon address than a Wood End address (no offence to Wood End folks) children from less well off backgrounds should be able to school with better off. Try getting a rental in Earlsdon as an unemployed single parent? Not happening.
You know I’m right.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Because the air bombers were doing serious damage. Drones are a big deal but they’re not the only thing you need.
Which is it? Has war changed or is war a made up capitalist construct?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Where have I said that war is a made up capitalist construct? Who is Britain at war with?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Things certainly change very quickly
Keir Starmer accuses PM of breaking policy on nuclear disarmament
Boris Johnson’s announcement on Trident ‘ends 30 years of gradual disarmament’
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
But I think we should try and trust people should we not? Which is why I think it's fine to have it paid to the claimant but then get it direct to the landlord if they fall a couple of months behind. Gives the claimant the chance to show responsibility but then takes it away if they aren't.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
So a supply and demand issue has nothing to do with a small number of people hoovering up the supply for an income stream, and thus increasing the cost because they want to profit?
Residential properties should only be allowed to be owned by people and each person should only be able to own the equivalent of one home (i.e 100% of one house, 50% of two etc.) For a lot of the landlords it wouldn't be much of a problem as they'd just have the houses put in the names of family members.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Landlords have no bearing on the overall housing stock. The issue this country faces is that there’s a huge ‘deficit’ because the rate of which houses are built is not keeping up with the number of people that need houses. This fundamental issue would remain even if second home ownership was banned completely. If there’s not enough houses, prices become inflated.
You can accuse landlords of profiteering if you want (respectfully disagree), that’s only possible if there’s a general lack of housing provision. Ironically, some of the newer regulations and costs with being a landlord has pushed out private landlords and the sector has become more corporatised and more profit-driven.
Nuskyblue
Well-Known Member
The Gen Z gender pay gap has reversed - so what’s up with boys?
For the first time in history, many young women are out-earning their male peers. As boys lag behind in education and employment, Ben Bryant reports on how this signals a deeper crisis in masculinity
www.independent.co.uk
Not really a suprise is it.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
The Gen Z gender pay gap has reversed - so what’s up with boys?
For the first time in history, many young women are out-earning their male peers. As boys lag behind in education and employment, Ben Bryant reports on how this signals a deeper crisis in masculinity
Not really a suprise is it.
When men earn more than women, it’s the ‘patriarchy’ but as the roles reverse, the headline is ‘what’s up with men?’
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
The Speaker is exactly right here. And people accused him of bias under the last government. NO - he is doing his job of holding the government to account. Good on you, Sir Lindsay.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You said it was warmongers making up nonsense. And completely ignoring the entirety of the western defensive order going up in smoke with Trumps election.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
When men earn more than women, it’s the ‘patriarchy’ but as the roles reverse, the headline is ‘what’s up with men?’
We dumbasses. Everyone know that. Like white people are evil.
Dutch government collapses after Geert Wilders’ far-right party quits
So what’s up with Wilders in the Netherlands then? Even the populist partners in his coalition are pissed off with him for taking his ball and going home. Is he being stitched up, or is it an anti-immigrant party preferring to walk away from the problem rather than compromise on it?
So what’s up with Wilders in the Netherlands then? Even the populist partners in his coalition are pissed off with him for taking his ball and going home. Is he being stitched up, or is it an anti-immigrant party preferring to walk away from the problem rather than compromise on it?
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
There are a lot of empty properties.
Action on Empty Homes
www.actiononemptyhomes.org
There are fewer empty properties as a percentage than most comparable countries and they aren’t where people want to live. Unless you’re planning on forced relocation to Hull or the middle of Wales wherever.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Show me where you get those 'facts' from.
Besides what's wrong with Hull, Kasey Palmer moved there.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
There are a lot of empty properties.
Action on Empty Homes
There’s a shortage of 1.5m houses and that number is increasing. There aren’t that many houses left empty.
Where there are empty houses, they don’t tend to be in places that people want to live in as the areas tend to be places with high levels of economic inactivity.
Even in London, where the super rich have unoccupied properties, these aren’t properties that many could afford on the open market.
The fundamental issue remains that there aren’t enough houses being built to match the demand.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
There are over 14,000 "second homes" and more than 11,000 "holiday lets" in Cornwall, which cannot be far short of what the unmet housing need for that part of the world for the foreseeable future (4,421 new builds per year, according to the new government methodology for determining build rate).
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Second homes are needed to generate spending in that area
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
How many jobs are in that area? The local of economies of Wales, Cornwall and other seaside towns is dominated by tourism. There’s not many high skilled, high paying jobs.
Wales has tried cracking down on second homes. All it’s done is damage the local economy without helping people get on the property ladder because the locals often don’t have money to purchase the houses.
The second homes/unoccupied building issue is a side show to the wider picture to be honest. My personal view is that as things stand, we’re unable to build the houses to keep up with the growing population and that is mostly driven by net migration.
Until a government can actually beat their target of 300k houses per year, there’s nothing to suggest the country can sustain net migration levels of 400-500k per annum.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
Ok so you come at it primarily as a demand-side issue, which is fine, but what do you think is creating the supply-side issue(s)?
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Labour have made changes to the planning system to be fair, so it’s worth keeping an eye on that development. There’s also gaps in the infrastructure that needs to be addressed, e.g. transport, sewage, water, electric links. Finally, you need public services to support growing communities; schools, hospitals, GPs and so on.
I’m sure I seen somewhere that the ‘affordable’ homes targets was putting off house building because the hit on profit margins.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Not sure needed they definitely do bring spending into the area
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I get your point but equally landlords snapping up houses does cause issues. When I wanted to move from renting to owning it took 2 years to find somewhere in the area I wanted to live, well less wanted to and more needed to due to parental caring responsibilities.
There was a recurring pattern. Property would appear on the market, you'd book the earliest available viewing and then before you had chance to look your viewing would be cancelled as a buy to let landlord had put in an offer without viewing it.
IMO a large part of the reason landlords get accused of profiteering is how high rents are compared to mortgages, when I moved my mortgage was half what I was paying in rent for a house on the same street - and even now after the hike in interest rates its still lower than my rent was. Now that would be fine if properties were well maintained and landlords responded to issues in a timely manner but speak to pretty much anyone who has rented and they will tell you about problems with getting the landlord meet their responsibilities.
You can walk round the area I live and easily pick out which properties are rentals just by looking at the state of them.