Sunday, June 5, 2011

Why we should build more

Thatcher's dream becomes a nightmare for a jilted generation

"There is one simple reason why so many people can no longer afford to buy. Property is incredibly expensive. A bolder policy solution would be to use the tax system to force down prices. The Treasury forgoes billions in revenues because people don't pay capital gains tax when they sell their main residence. Are you up for abolishing that exemption, Mr Cameron? Nope, thought not. You'd be lynched by your party. What about you, Mr Miliband? Your beloved "next generation", the younger ranks of your "squeezed middle", would be the net beneficiaries of a fall in house prices – so how about it? The Labour leader shakes his head for, like his rivals, he doesn't think that a declaration of war on the propertied middle classes would enhance his chances of winning an election."

Posted by quiet guy @ 11:39 AM (1703 views)
Please complete the required fields.

7 thoughts on “Why we should build more

  • A very good piece from Andrew Rawnsley.

    Perhaps people should start considering where current refusenik policy leads. Whether by stealth agenda or simple stumbling foolishness, Britain will return to Edwardianism in all but name. ‘That’s not progress’, I hear you cry – but then you vote for them. J’accuse.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • ‘That’s not progress’, I hear you cry’

    ~ It is for some.

    What a shame that the progress we are seeing isn’t as well orchastrated towards the peoples future advantage.

    We seem to have a mix of extreme competence on one hand and wreckless stupidity….

    The perfect foil for a complete take over. Does one get to vote in a world governmental senario.

    Take a look at the EU war mob for a clue to the future of democracy. Back door Obama loves em.

    ~ Do Sotty and Sweep write their own shows Mum?

    Please complete the required fields.

  • It may be nicely written but it ignores two key facts i.e. there are already too many people in the UK and there are not enough employment opportunities for todays youngsters domestically irrspective of how well educated or not they are. Building more houses does create jobs in the short term but without the lon term employment prospects to go with this it is catch 22. There is absolutely no point building more and more houses without addressing the economic sustainability of the UK first.

    Just think of Italy in the 1950’s when nearly 20% of the population left for good, they left for a reason and it wasn’t a shortage of housing it was a lack of employment opportunities.

    Unfortunately the most consistently difficult long term problem for politicians to address is quality long term employment for people in the UK. Unfortunately it is a problem they will never solve as long as the population is above 50 million or so and large numbers of low or no skill breeding migrants do not help the matter. If you value housing as a percentage of individual economic productive effort you will soon realise why it is unaffordable for most low paid workers.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • I’m not so sure this is a good article. The house price boom/demand is a function of mega cheap money and policies to bail out losers. It 100% isn’t shortage related since the population didn’t boom and crash, just credit and excitement. Interest rates will sort the situation out before any of the other stuff he suggests does!

    Please complete the required fields.

  • Build more houses = More banking profits.

    We want more migrants = build more houses = More banking profits.

    Unemployment and low wages = build more social housing = More banking profits.

    Reduce the swolen population of the UK = Less housing needed = Less banking profits.

    Please complete the required fields.

  • tyrellcorporation says:

    Yep, definately Thatcher’s fault and absolutely nothing to do with Labour’s policies over the last 13 years. 20 years later and while a very old woman she’s still wrecking things for the uk. Give it up woman!

    Please complete the required fields.

  • 2. Spot on.
    There are too many people here and not enough of them with in private employment, which raises the ratio of public costs to private tax income. Note: I deliberately exclude public employee tax income because it nets out as negative income i.e. a net loss.

    I blame all the parties who acted against our interests by conspiring with continental European Champagne Socialists to cripple the UK, both public and private, with masses of Red Tape including preventing us effectively controlling our borders and managing our population at a sustainable size.

    Please complete the required fields.

Add a comment

  • 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
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>