Saturday, Jun 14, 2008
Let the government provide subsidised mortgages
Yorkshire Post: Don't let regeneration become another victim of credit crunch
A little known fact is that local authorities have a history of providing mortgages and would routinely lend to hundreds of thousands of local residents right up until the early 1980s.
Today, the New Local Government Network is calling on the Government to look afresh at the potential for councils to step in to directly help those residents facing greatest difficulty. Under the scheme, councils could act as mortgage providers under prudential borrowing rules, in which interest rates can be lower than commercial rates.
Many Yorkshire cities have encouraged city centre living, and a collapse in this market could reverse the prosperity that has seen an economic and retail renaissance over the past decade.
Posted by little professor @ 04:17 PM (654 views) Add Comment
5 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. drewster said...
Great idea, hike the council tax for the prudent in order to subsidise the reckless.
"a collapse in this market could reverse the prosperity..." - No, it's the fall in prosperity which is causing the collapse in the property market. The tail doesn't wag the dog.
Also he mentions helping the residents, but in fact most of the new city-centre flats were bought by amateur landlords. The few residents are tenants and they aren't in any difficulty.
2. quiet guy said...
"I am sure that there will be opposition to this idea. Why, you might ask, should we be using public money to prop up homeowners? Surely they knew the risks when they bought a property and, in any case, haven't many people profited from high house prices over the past decade? These are fair arguments, but surely as a community we all have a duty to ensure that we support those most in needs at times of financial strain – and it is in all our interests to stabilise the property market."
I am happy to see the property market being stabilised by letting market forces bring down prices. This article looks like a blatant attempt to buy votes by using the tax money of people who are priced out. Now if I was offered cheap beer on the other hand ...
3. Stevie Dee said...
Just another fix please... It's like the heroin addict can get all the benefits in the world, HB & JSA, free Council Tax, etc, etc (nice little earner). And who pays for all these civil servants & politicians - We do!!! Totally inefficient in todays global market.
Organised chaos & corruption, spoon fed landlords, the system is past its sell-by date. Cometh the revolution!!!!
4. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
To put the record strtaight on him :
How Christopher Leslie voted on key issues since 2001:
* Voted a mixture of for and against introducing a smoking ban. votes, speeches
* Voted moderately for introducing ID cards. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals. votes, speeches
* Voted strongly for introducing student top-up fees. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for the Iraq war. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for the hunting ban. votes, speeches
* Voted very strongly for equal gay rights. votes, speeches
* Never rebels against their party.
A Labour clown in other words. Buying votes is exactly what he is doing. Shameless fool.
5. Spiderchannel said...
Thanks it_is_going _with_a_bang for pointing out that this is an article written by a vote seeking labour buffoon and drewster for pointing out that it is not the tail that wags the dog.