jd678 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 This could have been written by someone on here: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2024/mar/19/end-of-landlords-surprisingly-simple-solution-to-uk-housing-crisis "Mass-scale housebuilding isn’t necessary – there is already enough housing stock. But we need to learn the wisdom of the last century when it comes to landlord ism" Has @Bland Unsight written a new book? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartelbe Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Actually I don't think so. This place seems to have been invaded by landlords and the last thing they want is reform to renting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobTheBear Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Great piece by Nick Bono. He could have also mentioned the bung to LLs called Housing Benefit. If you want just one reason not to vote Tory then licking the RENTERS REFORM BILL into the long grass is it. The Sensible Party will: Immediately on taking power end s21 totally so LLs can only sell to other LLs or if the tenant moves out of their own accord. Introduce rent controls at 50% of current market rents. Clamp down on tax avoidance by LLs - it happens I know one who has got away with it for about 15 years. Double stamp duty on rental property and second homes. Enforce standards on rental properties as per proposals in the RR Bill…… Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Far Canal Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 2 hours ago, BobTheBear said: I know one who has got away with it for about 15 years. https://www.gov.uk/report-tax-fraud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottbeard Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 I have mixed feelings on this. I'm not sure I do agree that the current housing stock is sufficient - look at how many adult children are living at home, how many young (and not so young) people are living in houseshares of 4-5 people who ideally would all want a home each. I think we DO need some more houses. Landlording in small quantity is good - I was very happy to be a renter as a student and when I first started work. But there is no need for this to be PRIVATE landlording: councils could provide this with any monies received going back into housing and the community, not the pockets of rentiers. What is unacceptable to me is anyone owning more than one home for just themselves though. The house next door to where my parents used to live was owned by a family from overseas, but they spent most of their time not even in the UK, let alone in that house. Their gardener confirmed that over the 9 years he was gardener there the house was unoccupied for all but about 2 weeks. The government should be able to simply compulsorily purchase such buildings and put them back to use for the British public. This family also owned a house in London too, so that was two houses effectively standing empty. As far as I know the houses are still empty and still unused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Lots of empty homes near me.......one or two falling into disrepair......many reasons why nobody living in them......would be plenty more real homes for local people if those in power cared enough and tweaked it to discourage this behaviour...... They won't because they simply don't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewy Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 29 minutes ago, scottbeard said: I have mixed feelings on this. I'm not sure I do agree that the current housing stock is sufficient - look at how many adult children are living at home, how many young (and not so young) people are living in houseshares of 4-5 people who ideally would all want a home each. I think we DO need some more houses. Landlording in small quantity is good - I was very happy to be a renter as a student and when I first started work. But there is no need for this to be PRIVATE landlording: councils could provide this with any monies received going back into housing and the community, not the pockets of rentiers. What is unacceptable to me is anyone owning more than one home for just themselves though. The house next door to where my parents used to live was owned by a family from overseas, but they spent most of their time not even in the UK, let alone in that house. Their gardener confirmed that over the 9 years he was gardener there the house was unoccupied for all but about 2 weeks. The government should be able to simply compulsorily purchase such buildings and put them back to use for the British public. This family also owned a house in London too, so that was two houses effectively standing empty. As far as I know the houses are still empty and still unused. Can the state take your car if you are deemed not to be using it enough? What about the stockpile of tinned food that you have kept for a rainy day? Oh and let's have forced vaccinations as well. The state knows best 🙄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 12 minutes ago, Stewy said: Can the state take your car if you are deemed not to be using it enough? What about the stockpile of tinned food that you have kept for a rainy day? Oh and let's have forced vaccinations as well. The state knows best 🙄 No they will not take it but they will tax it to death......how can an older ford fiesta, well looked after, low mileage, drives well high mpg under 1000cc clean because passed MOT emission test be nearly £400 car tax a year?...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitemice Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 48 minutes ago, Stewy said: Can the state take your car if you are deemed not to be using it enough? The solution is cheaper land/housing that you pay through the nose in taxes to keep owning them. See Land Tax. Being able to hoard land, at little to no cost, is part of the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottbeard Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, Stewy said: Can the state take your car if you are deemed not to be using it enough? What about the stockpile of tinned food that you have kept for a rainy day? The state does not restrict the buying of cars and tinned food the same way they restrict the building of houses. If I want to buy a car, all I need is the money. Even if I have a piece of land, and enough money for a pile of bricks and pipes, I am not legally allowed to build a house. If the state is going to restrict the building of houses then as a quid pro quo they should restrict the hoarding of unused houses. 1 hour ago, Stewy said: Oh and let's have forced vaccinations as well. The state knows best 🙄 How is that in any way comparable to commandeering a house that hasn't been used for 9 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewy Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 12 minutes ago, scottbeard said: The state does not restrict the buying of cars and tinned food the same way they restrict the building of houses. If I want to buy a car, all I need is the money. Even if I have a piece of land, and enough money for a pile of bricks and pipes, I am not legally allowed to build a house. If the state is going to restrict the building of houses then as a quid pro quo they should restrict the hoarding of unused houses. How is that in any way comparable to commandeering a house that hasn't been used for 9 years? I don't think the state knows best. You do think that though.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Those that have no possibility of buying in the city they were born and place where they work have ' bought for cash' a property in a cheaper area to let out, they own but they do not live in the home they own...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottbeard Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 17 minutes ago, Stewy said: I don't think the state knows best. You do think that though.. I'm happy with having a state planning permission system. I just think we can take more steps to free up under-utilised buildings. Not sure why in your mind that extends to me thinking the state knows best about everything, but what you think about what I think doesn't matter really, does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartelbe Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 Unbelievable, this place has been taken over by landlord parasites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspL4 Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 6 hours ago, winkie said: No they will not take it but they will tax it to death......how can an older ford fiesta, well looked after, low mileage, drives well high mpg under 1000cc clean because passed MOT emission test be nearly £400 car tax a year?...... Tell me about it! 20 year old Toyota Avensis 1.8i Petrol. £290 for 12 months VED. My mates 7 year old Audi A5 Quattro 3.5 diesel is less than half that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jd678 Posted March 20 Author Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, bartelbe said: Unbelievable, this place has been taken over by landlord parasites. Well I dunno - the fact it hasn't sparked a mass debate arguing over whether the article's way off the mark does seem to somewhat infer a nod of agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 23 hours ago, BobTheBear said: Great piece by Nick Bono. He could have also mentioned the bung to LLs called Housing Benefit. If you want just one reason not to vote Tory then licking the RENTERS REFORM BILL into the long grass is it. The Sensible Party will: Immediately on taking power end s21 totally so LLs can only sell to other LLs or if the tenant moves out of their own accord. Introduce rent controls at 50% of current market rents. Clamp down on tax avoidance by LLs - it happens I know one who has got away with it for about 15 years. Double stamp duty on rental property and second homes. Enforce standards on rental properties as per proposals in the RR Bill…… Any thoughts? This is anti-renter nonsense. A Communist fever dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 18 hours ago, scottbeard said: The state does not restrict the buying of cars and tinned food the same way they restrict the building of houses. If I want to buy a car, all I need is the money. Even if I have a piece of land, and enough money for a pile of bricks and pipes, I am not legally allowed to build a house. If the state is going to restrict the building of houses then as a quid pro quo they should restrict the hoarding of unused houses. How is that in any way comparable to commandeering a house that hasn't been used for 9 years? Everything you're saying screams "Abolish planning permission" 14 hours ago, bartelbe said: Unbelievable, this place has been taken over by landlord parasites. Typical commie strawmanning. Just because someone doesn't want the government to interfere in something, doesn't mean they do or don't want that thing to happen. And by the way, the current state of the rental market is 100% due to government interference. The brain rot in the OP penned by that commie spazmoid does not actually contain actionable suggestions. Just feel-good "hurrr landlords are the problem". If you leave food out in your house (e.g. restricting housing supply with planning permission, handing out housing benefit, etc etc etc) and get a rat infestation, you don't get mad at the rats and the solution is not to dump more macaroni (i.e. rent controls) under the kitchen cabinets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erat_forte Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 Stewey's fatuous comparison with houses, and other things like cars, tinned food, and medication, shows a deep confusion about the different categories of "things". I think this is related to the common confusion between Land and Capital - I think this confusion has been deliberately encouraged by the landed classes. The difference of course being that anyone can obtain their own capital, merely by producing stuff, and consuming less than what they produce. It is not possible to obtain land this way for the simple reason that no-one produces land, they just take it off the previous occupiers. Landlordism is basically a kind of private taxation, and has all the economic deadweight and fiscal drag characteristics of any other kind of taxation. The main thing missing from the article as far as I can see is that it doesn't discuss the role of mortgage lending as a kind of second order landlordism - it is just as much a private taxation, to extract an income stream out of private individuals as a condition of them occupying land. It is just more subtle and sophisticated than rent landlordism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msi Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 18 hours ago, Stewy said: I don't think the state knows best. You do think that though.. I'm surprised you know enough to tell the difference between your elbow and anus, but then you are here for comedic effect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeanutButter Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 D'ya maybe think we should have updated the concept of property ownership since the Middle Ages? We still have a monarchy ffs. We still knight people. You want to dump landlords, fine, but start at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.