Rephrased - Problem Highlighting Text In...
Technology4 mins ago
Borrow More To Boost Building, Says Sajid Javid
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's not the job of the state to provide housing to those not able to afford market value rents.
They can subsides to an extent but not provide. If market rent is say £500 a month and 'council' rent is £300 then all the council is to do is give £200 in benefit to the renter. Far more cost effective than building, owning and maintaining a property long term.
They can subsides to an extent but not provide. If market rent is say £500 a month and 'council' rent is £300 then all the council is to do is give £200 in benefit to the renter. Far more cost effective than building, owning and maintaining a property long term.
Who says it's not ? The State is formed by people for the benefit of the people, or there's no point to it. It's not formed so citizens can say, "Blow everyone else, they're only there for those with gumption and lack of conscience to use for their own benefit." A community fit for purpose and environment looks after itself, not just certain individuals within it. The community has moral obligations to each other, the State us the way these obligations are fulfilled. Housing being an obvious need for all.
Whilst immigration and the population living longer are a contributor to the shortage of housing, the main problem is that we are building far fewer houses that we have done since the 1920’s.
https:/
https:/
Borrowing more and more is not a good idea. Could we please see sense and cancel the benighted HS train schemes? This would save billions and billions of expenditure. Some of the savings could upgrade the lines we have. At the cancellation a lot of houses which have to be compulsorily purchased will remain as homes for the families which occupy them and there will be plenty of spare money left over to divert to accommodating others.
I said 'accommodate' because I share EDDIE'S view about the inadvisability of permanently losing green belt land. I submit an idea which may sound daft, but please think about it. I have had several very comfortable, lengthy holidays in well-appointed static caravans on sites.
There is sanitation, water, electricity and gas. They have double-glazing, central-heating, shower-rooms, 3 bedrooms, fully-equipped kitchens, dining areas and luxurious lounges with all the gadgets you could need. Many people chose to live in them. They take up less room than house, are cheaper, building them would provide a variety of employment, could be rented out by councils very reasonably and would provide at least a 20 year bulwark against the current flood of homelessness, allowing a breathing space during which building could commence on brownfield sites.
Most importantly, at the end of their lives, the land would easily revert to green sites.
As others have said, the problem is that we are full.
I said 'accommodate' because I share EDDIE'S view about the inadvisability of permanently losing green belt land. I submit an idea which may sound daft, but please think about it. I have had several very comfortable, lengthy holidays in well-appointed static caravans on sites.
There is sanitation, water, electricity and gas. They have double-glazing, central-heating, shower-rooms, 3 bedrooms, fully-equipped kitchens, dining areas and luxurious lounges with all the gadgets you could need. Many people chose to live in them. They take up less room than house, are cheaper, building them would provide a variety of employment, could be rented out by councils very reasonably and would provide at least a 20 year bulwark against the current flood of homelessness, allowing a breathing space during which building could commence on brownfield sites.
Most importantly, at the end of their lives, the land would easily revert to green sites.
As others have said, the problem is that we are full.
The state i.e. The people, are not there to provide for everyone, they are there to give a helping hand. That is the difference. That is what a lot of people have forgotten because they see the welfare state, cradle to grave as a right.
The state is not mother and father. At best it is a kindly aunt that visits infrequently with a bit of pocket money and a few streets.
The state is not mother and father. At best it is a kindly aunt that visits infrequently with a bit of pocket money and a few streets.
Latest Posts
News21 mins ago
ChatterBank26 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles26 mins ago
News30 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles32 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.