Friday, Apr 16, 2010
Why preaching HPC will result in doors slammed in our face
The Times: You want the truth? Here’s my anti-manifesto
"Like the NHS, house prices are a subject steeped in mythology and voodoo economics, best expressed in the Thatcherite slogan that upwardly mobile prices would produce “a cascade of wealth” from one generation to another. Instead, here as in the United States, they helped to trigger the recession. Stable prices are crucial to the economy, but if even buyers do not want them, what do you do? The solution? The Lib Dems’ idea of mansion-bashing is a typical bit of phoney muscle-flexing, designed as a diversion from the issue. The problem is not just the rich, it’s the lot of us, in fact. The solution? Pain undreamt of. If we treat our main homes as businesses, tax them as a business." Hat tip to The Times for this dig at homeownerism.
Posted by quiet guy @ 01:35 AM (722 views) Add Comment
7 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. mark wadsworth said...
That is awesome. A French-style health system, streaming in education and Land Value Tax. What's not to like?
2. need-a-crash said...
Mark may I take this opportunity of wishing you all the best in the coming election. However when you 'announced' you were standing on this site a few days ago I did wonder, as the above article details, how many doors may be "slammed in your face" if they knew you were a regular blogger on this site?
3. dbc reed said...
@MW Don't think he means streaming in education: he probably means something like the old tri-partite system of grammar,technical ,secondary-modern.Also none too keen on private health insurance.Look what the American insurqance firms got up to.
You're always going to be in trouble if you have some serious pre-existing condition going on chronic.
But the anti-Homeownerist rhetoric is very heartening.Pity the political parties are in a bubble of denial.
4. mr g said...
Excellent suggestions in all the areas mentioned.
5. tenant super said...
Educational streaming in comprehensives can never be effective. This is because the range of abilty is too wide to provide targeted teaching. I am a weak mathmetician and was in the top set out of six. My talented mathmetician brother was also in the top set hence the top set does not push him enough nor give me the additional support. The only way of doing this would be a 12 set system which requires too many staff members. We almost certainly both would have passed the 11+ in days of yore and he would have been in the top maths set and me in the lower ergo problem solved.
Problems with the old grammar schools were that dyslexic students who were excellent mathematicians and scientists would not have passed the 11+ neither would have those with strong verbal reasoning and a talent for arts or languages but not maths.
The solution is a 4 school system i) grammars for all round academics, ii) technical schools for the science types iii) academies for those more gifted at arts, languages or humanities iv) vocational schools with direct links to practical courses in polytechnics (which should be re-established).
You can introduce a no-frills governmental health insurance scheme which is non-profit to compete with private suppliers and keep price-fixing American style at bay. The French system is very good in some respects such as the method of regulating the insurance companies but I am not convinced that Jospin's move to universal coverage was sensible. Also, this is still in reality a tax not compulsorary insurance because it is a percentage of income (which is as far as I am aware uncapped). Cost of state supplied health insurance should be based on the composition of a family . This should then be multiplied by a factor dependent of your income band (higher income x1.5 lower income x 0.5 and middle income x 1) . I would also introduce a voluntary smokers premium to be paid to qualify you for treatment of smoking related diseases (if on the balance of probabilities have been caused by smoking).
LVT... well one can only dream
6. 51ck-6-51x said...
Housing Wealth Effect:
I'll post this, probably for the upteenth time
Housing Wealth Isn't Wealth (Willem H. Buiter, National [US] Bureau of Economic Research)
which was inspired by Swervin' Mervyn and I'll add a much newer, slightly more generic, working paper:
Wealth Effects on Consumption in the Euro Area (Ricardo M. Sousa, European Central Bank)
which states "housing wealth effects are virtually nil and not significant".
7. Solidec said...
I am all for capital gains on primary residents as long as capital expenditure can offset the tax.
Who in theirn right mind would ever do up their house to improve it if they will be taxed on the return of their investment even if they dont get out what they put in?
I buy a house for £100,000, spend £100,000 doing it up and sell it for £200,000, I am then gonna be taxed on the "profit" of £100,000 even though it is no such thing!