bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I think thats unlikely with the rise of the SNP. Labour doesn't have the support in England to get a decent majority.
Election 2015 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tad
- Start date
I think thats unlikely with the rise of the SNP. Labour doesn't have the support in England to get a decent majority.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
John Pienaar was talking on five live the other day, saying that the influence of SNP on English politics is being majorly over egged and that tory's are using that to scaremonger.
I must say, I'm disgusted at the Tory 'Alex salmond pick pocketing posters'.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I must say, I'm disgusted at the Tory 'Alex salmond pick pocketing posters'.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
and even he is a lying scumbag..
That was before the Ed Tablet
...back on the point, it is clear that no one can really predict the result with any confidence.
Last edited by a moderator:
and even he is a lying scumbag..
That was before the Ed Tablet
...back on the point, it is clear that no one can really predict the result with any confidence.
Yeah What a ridiculous stunt
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
My wife sees the same things at the school she works at, anybody who thinks this country is on the up should see some of the things she does.
I think there's a lot happening that Is down to Dogma and Ideology
Itdoesnt have to be this harsh and It doesn't require the stigmatization of the poorest / lowest in society
The selling off of Social housing Illustrates for me the utter stupidity of their policies
Leaving the Inevitable non owners at the prey of greedy private landlords
House rental fees are forecast to double by 2022 in Coventry
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Indeed.
I'll never understand why there's a desire to drag people down, rather than pull people up.
Again indeed. Where are people supposed to live?!? And of course if rents do increase then that encourages more with spare cash to buy places on Buy to Let, at which point younger people can't afford to buy as prices go up, so they have to rent...
We're going back to the times of Walpole and before, and the land owning gentry!
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Allowing people to buy their council house was one of the best policies any government has ever done to help working class people.
My grandparents were beyond poor in their youth, for them to be able to own thier house that they had rented for 30 years was a dream for them. Everyone should have the oportunity to own their own home, if more people owned their home they work take more pride in its appearence, instead of some of the shitholes we see people willing to live in.
My grandparents were beyond poor in their youth, for them to be able to own thier house that they had rented for 30 years was a dream for them. Everyone should have the oportunity to own their own home, if more people owned their home they work take more pride in its appearence, instead of some of the shitholes we see people willing to live in.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
It's a bullshit policy this time around. Didn't particular work last time as they never really replaced the housing stock.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
It's a bullshit policy this time around. Didn't particular work last time as they never really replaced the housing stock.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I would agree that this time round it seems as though much of the finer detail hasn't been worked out well, however the principle is still a great idea.
It worked well in the '80's as well, the fact that subsequent governments didnt build enough social housing since then is a seperate issue.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
Sell it at market value then so social housing has a chance to come up with replacements, not a discount.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
The problem is a) high private and unstable rental market, and people (who tend to be young) not being able to get on the housing market. So the conservative's answer is allow those on social housing who pay lowest rent and have the most stable and longer term leases to buy their properties. This will further reduce the stock of stable affordable rents, which will give private rent's more carte Blanche to charge more and keep on with the unstable 12 month deals, it won't drive housing chains, and the average person who is private rent or young person still living with their parents aged 28-30 any more chance of getting on the ladder themselves. Why should those in social housing get discounted price to buy after having the cheapest rent, when the average Joe doesn't? You're basically rewarding someone for being lucky enough to get in a social housing property. And it will further hinder not help the current shortage of housing.
I was talking to someone at work who bought their council house under thatcher, made a massive profit now owns 5-6 houses. All because the tory's pretty much gave away the house. It's almost a form of state aid.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Last edited:
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I guess this comes down to ideology. For me there should be no need for social housing. The long term goal of the government should be for everyone to own their own home, and all efforts should be made to make owning a home as easy as possible.
Social housing is a symptom of the economic and social problems that we have.
Social housing is a symptom of the economic and social problems that we have.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
No, because as unfair as it might be, there is nothing that can be done about it.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I agree with the first bit, in an ideal world there would be not welfare state, there would be no poverty, there would be no need for social housing, etc. I don't agree that everyone needs to own, there are benefits to renting (more mobility, etc), but renting needs to be stable, affordable with long term rental options like they have on the continent.
Unfortunately at the minute we need social housing, and no matter how many buy their house there will be an equal amount of people desperate sat on the waiting list for social housing stuck in high private rent, as the stock gets sold off. Perhaps the tory's should limit the number of properties people can buy to a max 2? Can't see that going down well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
that's the problem, it's great for people who actually want to own a home but if you aren't building new social housing at least as quickly as you're selling it off you've got a problem.
Should also put a restriction on them so they can't be let out. Seems to be a large chunk of social housing that was purchased on the cheap and quickly ended up in the hands of private landlords so you've got the same council that had to sell it off now renting it back for a stupid amount a month. I'd even go so far as to clamp right down on buy to let, its artificially pushing prices up and leaves a few people rich and many struggling. Change the law so any rental income is taxed at 50% and stop buy to let mortgages and you'd soon see things change.
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
In reality it is an unsustainable policy, selling social housing stock & replacing it might have some longevity, running down the social housing stock doesn't.
Thatcher cemented the class structure even further
Its great aspiration to own your own home
However that sell off has helped create a shortage of that type of accommodation
It was good enough through the 50'to 70's
filled with proud working class folk, real communities.
You can rent a furnished two bed apartment as a young four person family In the cities of Germany while earning €3K a month for €125.a month
This preoccupation with home ownership Is not prevalent on the continent and their economies are less likely to flounder because of the economy being based on hipper expensive property
This allows a mother to not have to work and nurture the children,I guess it also prevents young fathers on low wages here turning to UKIP or worse because they're competing for rented property against 4-5-&6 eastern Europeans chipping in for one household while driving his wages down
The danger of basing your economy largely around the property sector has been proved likely to fail
Yet why?
I can't say I was aware In this country that their was massive defaulting going on when the crash came, more a failure of confidence started by Journalists like Micheal Peston
The solution If as we were told the bubble caused the whole thing would and should have been to distribute the hundreds of billions to the people with the problem, Homeowners and to be fair the rest of the population in some form of tax rebate rather than the banks who held on to it
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I agree with the first bit, in an ideal world there would be not welfare state, there would be no poverty, there would be no need for social housing, etc. I don't agree that everyone needs to own, there are benefits to renting (more mobility, etc), but renting needs to be stable, affordable with long term rental options like they have on the continent.
Unfortunately at the minute we need social housing, and no matter how many buy their house there will be an equal amount of people desperate sat on the waiting list for social housing stuck in high private rent, as the stock gets sold off. Perhaps the tory's should limit the number of properties people can buy to a max 2? Can't see that going down well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
I would be in favour of that. IMO one of the biggest things to cause the housing shortage is people buying a load of houses and then renting them out. It distorts the market, and causes the quality of housing stock to drop (private landlords generally spend as little as possible on maintenance etc).
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
I disagree with the class structure thing. Prior to the 80's there was an elite group of homeowners and it was quite difficult for anyone to break into that elite. Selling the council houses allowed millions of working class people to join the group of homeowners. Yes its unfortunate that not everyone could afford to buy their homes but allowing some to do it is better than allowing none. The whole principle of it was to break down class structure.
Very true pal
Massive Issue isn't It
Who will address It and build the required number
Again If your economy Is heavily based on it
there won't be much appetite to address the issue as that could lead to deflation
Osborne held it in check for 3.5 yrs then stimulated it, why didn't he do that earlier?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If labour get in it will be a very weak labour government with an idiot for a leader. Rather than be in for year's we'll end up in the same mess that the last labour government left the country in and we'll have to vote a conservative government in again to make the tough but necessary decisions again that have made them so unpopular this time.
Personally I think voting labour will ultimately rewind the country back five years so you may as well vote tory now and not lose ten years (the five years just gone and the first five years of the next tory government in this scenario) of recovery to labour.
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
One thing he certainly isn't, is an idiot.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
Anyway, assuming it is a hung parliament, I don't see how any of the leaders of the 3 big parties can come out of it with any credit.
If Cameron can't beat someone as useless as Milliband then he has failed.
If Milliband can't pick up the lost 15% Lib Dem vote then he has failed.
If Clegg loses half his seats then he has failed.
If decency existed in politics then they should all resign on Friday.
If Cameron can't beat someone as useless as Milliband then he has failed.
If Milliband can't pick up the lost 15% Lib Dem vote then he has failed.
If Clegg loses half his seats then he has failed.
If decency existed in politics then they should all resign on Friday.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
If you say so.
bigfatronssba
Well-Known Member
You mean its an act?
stupot07
Well-Known Member
The Tory PR machine is nearly as good as wasps!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The Tory PR machine is nearly as good as wasps!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Either that or the labour PR machine is as bad as SISU's
Not really, the people at the bottom are paying the price of globalisation more than anything. People earning $0.80 per hour in sweat shops around the world. People in the middle ground are expected to make up the shortfalls and the super rich keep doubling their fortunes !
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
A difficult decision voting wise for me in North East Fife but one ultimately made very easy by a desire to keep out the SNP, which means I'm having to vote Lib Dem. It has come to who I want to keep out rather than who I want to get in (which ideally is none of them).
Thing is people increasingly don't care where the money comes from so long as they get what they want. Labour give them that and they vote them back in. Becomes self perpetuating for longer than 10 years imo. Just my observations, I won't vote for either
It's a difficult decision. Part of me wants to vote tactically but on the other hand I really want to vote with my heart
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The big difference between the current bunch and Tony Blair's bunch is the calibre of people set for positions in the cabinet. Tony Blair's first cabinet was probably the best labour cabinet ever put together (non better than Mo Mowlem of course), Ed Miliband's on the other hand is set to be filled with ex Gordon Brown cabinet members with a track record in failure and rejects that weren't even good enough to make that. Not to mention when TB gained power it was well acknowledged at the time that it was the most important election in decades because John Major had done such a good job of getting the countries finances in order that whoever won that election was pretty much guaranteed a decade in power. We're far from being in that position this time. Just the opposite. Ed Miliband doesn't have that luxury like Tony Blair did.
My advice. If you missed the 70's and want to see first hand how politics of that generation failed on every level vote labour.
