Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

Who will you be voting for?

  • Tory

    Votes: 38 9.9%

  • Diet Tory (Labour)

    Votes: 132 34.3%

  • Tory Zero (Greens)

    Votes: 44 11.4%

  • Extra Tory with lemon (UKIP)

    Votes: 40 10.4%

  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 9 2.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 31 8.1%

  • Cheese on toast

    Votes: 91 23.6%
  • Total voters
    385
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
True enough, Sturgeon doesn't have a track record to defend, but she is definitely a lesson to the likes of the Greens as to how your leader should be performing, Bennett has really disappointed me in the debates.
 
bring the ghost on said:
True enough, Sturgeon doesn't have a track record to defend, but she is definitely a lesson to the likes of the Greens as to how your leader should be performing, Bennett has really disappointed me in the debates.
Click to expand...

It's true that Bennett is no natural orator or skilled debater but her integrity comes through and with the Greens they are still part pressure group, part party. The link I posted above shows the urgency of their message.
 

Bruce Wayne said:
No, of course, that is very true. Like you, I've no idea how many social tenants buy a home on the open market. Instinctively I'd imagine that it would be relatively low, hence why right to buy schemes exist to try and make it easier, but I have no stats to back that up.



I suspect I don't know enough about the matter to have an informed opinion either way. If you're asking therefore if I think social housing should exist or not, my honest answer to you would be "I don't know".



I always imagined social housing was for those in dire straights financially rather than those with well paying jobs. That it's delivered at rents that are below market rates makes it a form of welfare imo.

The above was informed via Shelter by the way. If they haven't got the whole picture then of course, do please add some further context.

http://england.shelter.org.uk/campa...proving_social_housing/what_is_social_housing
Click to expand...

I'm going to refer you to the scheme I'm involved in. Designed to stop the lifeblood of our community being sucked away. The inability of younger generations to be able to afford houses because older generations have had time to accumulate wealth and reinvest it in housing is a serious issue.

It is a sad reflection on society that there are people who work for a reasonable wage who cannot afford to live in the communities they were born and bred in, whilst houses stand empty as 2nd homes/holiday accommodation.

If you see the social housing option as being welfare for these people then that's your perogative. I see it as being a tool to conserve the local community.

I know it's not the stereotypical HA scheme, but it's not as uncommon as you might think.

Read about it here
 
Mrk said:
Nicola Sturgeon is easily the most impressive person in British politics at the moment. No one else comes close.
Click to expand...


She is also an idiot with no credible policies..... The shame for Scotland is that someone like Danny Alexander, who has been the most impressive of the LibDems, who has thrown himself into sorting out the UK finances will be getting the elbow. If I was Cameron I would find a way to bring him back, he deserves it...........
 
Bruce Wayne said:
A question back at you though. Do you think those in social housing should stay in social housing for their entire life? Is a big part of why welfare exists to get someone back on their own two feet?
Click to expand...

Occasionally you say truly daft things like this which makes me feel you really don't understand the things you have a problem with.

Social housing isn't welfare. People can use housing benefit to pay for social or private housing; the only distinction is that social housing is owned by local authorities, and that it is allocated according to need.

If someone wants to stay in social housing for life and is employed, they pay rent to the landlord like anyone else. They are on their "own two feet".

You seem to think anything that is organised by the state is welfare, which is bizarre.
 

bring the ghost on said:
Good interview on the Andrew Marr show with Cameron, he grilled him on the right to buy and food banks.

There was a funny bit which went:

Marr - is it true that you said Fox hunting is your favorite sport?

Cam - No... Erm, I said..

Marr - you said it's your favourite sport and you love it.
Click to expand...
he didnt come over very well. looked short of anything new to say
 
the esk said:
Good work mate, I wish you well in achieving your objectives.

Have you started building yet?
Click to expand...

Yep we have 11 houses built. 1 was sold outright to provide funds to support the other 10.

Of these a 50% share was sold in 5. The owners pay no further rent. If they sell for a profit or try to step out, we reserve the right to claim rent retrospectively.

The final 5 are rental properties.

On the back of this we are now building 4 x 1 bedroom rental properties in one development and have secured the land to build 20 more 2, 3 and 4 bed properties which will again be a mixture of shared ownership and rental.

Unfortunately, because the Housing Association plays by the rules and is fully regulated, all the good work is in jeopardy of being undone by the proposed right to buy scheme. If we'd just done this as private landlords then we'd be ok. It seems that in doing something for the community rather than ourselves we are fair target. Stinks to high heaven.
 
daylightrobber said:
Yep we have 11 houses built. 1 was sold outright to provide funds to support the other 10.

Of these a 50% share was sold in 5. The owners pay no further rent. If they sell for a profit or try to step out, we reserve the right to claim rent retrospectively.

The final 5 are rental properties.

On the back of this we are now building 4 x 1 bedroom rental properties in one development and have secured the land to build 20 more 2, 3 and 4 bed properties which will again be a mixture of shared ownership and rental.

Unfortunately, because the Housing Association plays by the rules and is fully regulated, all the good work is in jeopardy of being undone by the proposed right to buy scheme. If we'd just done this as private landlords then we'd be ok. It seems that in doing something for the community rather than ourselves we are fair target. Stinks to high heaven.
Click to expand...

Well done mate. Pity politicians don't see the real benefits to local communities schemes like yours achieve.
 
daylightrobber said:
I'm going to refer you to the scheme I'm involved in. Designed to stop the lifeblood of our community being sucked away. The inability of younger generations to be able to afford houses because older generations have had time to accumulate wealth and reinvest it in housing is a serious issue.

It is a sad reflection on society that there are people who work for a reasonable wage who cannot afford to live in the communities they were born and bred in, whilst houses stand empty as 2nd homes/holiday accommodation.

If you see the social housing option as being welfare for these people then that's your perogative. I see it as being a tool to conserve the local community.

I know it's not the stereotypical HA scheme, but it's not as uncommon as you might think.

Read about it here
Click to expand...

Now there is a place to start if we really want to tackle inequality..... Holiday homes.......an absolute abomination..... Instead of headline grabbing divisive taxes such as 'mansion tax', I would love to see a government be radical and truly change the picture by bringing out a law that says no person can own more than one home, even current landlords of multiple properties........
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top