the trouble is mainly due to the fact we will allow people to buy 10-20-30 properties to rent out, private rents are artificially inflated.
also what chance does the average person on say 20k have of getting on the housing ladder at present? zero I would say even if renting in a subsidised house/flat.
Carryfast:
old 67:
So we ( the counsel, I.E. you and me ) have decided to pay for and build a house. It is being built because some people, for a huge variety of reasons can’t afford to buy or rent from the private sector. The rent for this house will the same as a comparable one in the private sector, that is £■■■/month. Anyone who is able to pay this rent will not be allowed to have it, as we don’t have enough houses for those who are unable to pay the full rent.
We will offer reductions in the amount of rent payable depending on the tenants ability to pay. If a tenants financial circumstances change, we reserve the right to increase the rent proportionally up to a maximum of the amount quoted earlier. In that circumstance we have one less house available for some one who NEEDS it at a reduced rent. We will not ask you to move to " free up " the house as we realise people need a settled home.
This seems quite reasonable to me, or have I got it all wrong, and it doesn’t work like this ?
Regards. John.Or we knock the whole contradictory bs socialist idea on the head and start to look on union militancy and a protectionist trading environment,which creates a better wage environment,that allows people to look after themselves,as a good thing.
Don’t intend to get into a political debate, just thought it was unreasonable to avoid paying the going rate for a council property if you find yourself able to afford it.
And as for asking your boss to give you a pay cut to help you avoid paying your way, just unbelievable in my opinion.
Regards. John.
war1974:
also what chance does the average person on say 20k have of getting on the housing ladder at present? zero I would say even if renting in a subsidised house/flat.
The reason why the ‘average’ worker is only getting 20k is because too many of the working class believed all the CBI Thatcherite economy bs that sticking together and fighting for more is ‘militancy’.Then to add insult to injury the CBI was actually supported in that idea by scrounging council tenants being given a cut price council house subsidised by the ‘militant’ home buying mortgage payers. 
As for the housing ‘ladder’ the definition of that is the idea of turning an ‘affordable’ first time buy house into an expensive profitable one to allow the move/upgrade to something better at the new buyer’s expense.IE when people are calling for an affordable first time buy to get on the housing ‘ladder’ what they are 'actually calling for is a built in profit margin to help them upgrade later at some one else’s expense.IE another example of the worst type of so called ‘Capitalist’ looking for a free lunch.
Carryfast:
robroy:
Looks like I’m in war1974 Sponger’s club also then.
Before my business went ■■■■ up in 96 ish I had a brand new house in a select area which I lost. I was on my arse with 4 kids to feed, (got a job even though I could have lived off the social with the 4 kids) and had to rent off a guy that done [zb] all in repairs but ripped me off every month. When I cleared bankruptcy I was a financial leper due to my history, the only mortgages I qualified for was the ones that had ludicrous sky high interest rates.
Eventually I was offered a council house. It conjured up in my mind a [zb] hole with scrap cars in the garden living next door to crackheads (btw I aint a snob, I was brought up in a decent home council house, but that is the way a lot are now) Luckily it was a end terrace house in a country village, in a nice setting surrounded by fields so I was delighted with it.
When the leper status had died off I was about 45ish so did not want to start another mortgage around my neck so we decided to stay.
I am not going to disclose my rent, mainly as it has [zb] all to do with anybody, but suffice to say it is realistic and cheaper than private.So like the other guy I am now going to give that last landlord a bell for my previous house, move out and make way for one of our long term unemployed, or a mother of 5 kids with assorted dads, or a smackhead.
In fact one of you lot that think I’m a sponger can give me advice.Council house tenants are only scroungers in the sense that the object of going to work ( should be ) to earn enough to comfortably afford a deposit and mortgage,on a decent privately bought house in a a decent setting,which can be cleared in a reasonable time.It’s obvious that will involve a large amount of ‘militancy’ and a different form of ‘Capitalism’ to create the wage regime required.
As opposed to expecting the state and tax payers to subsidise the socialist cop out of council housing and/or in work benefits.While even your reference to the ‘right’ setting in the rural area is actually a hypocritical private sector housing criterea not council.Being that the socialist idea of ‘council housing’ would actually be to cover those fields in more high density urbanised council house development.In which case,as usual,the socialist idea of council housing ends up with a contradictory solution which only panders to the idea of a dependency culture,low wage employment and where no one with any sense wants to live.
■■■■ that…I go to work to feed and clothe my family…not to burden myself with a mortgage…been there, done that, got shafted by mortgage company when I got made redundant…will never buy property in this country again…unless I could pay cash for it.
Those of us on 14k a year would lovery an associate home but there aren’t enough to go around!
DonutUK:
Carryfast:
Council house tenants are only scroungers in the sense that the object of going to work ( should be ) to earn enough to comfortably afford a deposit and mortgage,on a decent privately bought house in a a decent setting,which can be cleared in a reasonable time.It’s obvious that will involve a large amount of ‘militancy’ and a different form of ‘Capitalism’ to create the wage regime required.As opposed to expecting the state and tax payers to subsidise the socialist cop out of council housing and/or in work benefits.While even your reference to the ‘right’ setting in the rural area is actually a hypocritical private sector housing criterea not council.Being that the socialist idea of ‘council housing’ would actually be to cover those fields in more high density urbanised council house development.In which case,as usual,the socialist idea of council housing ends up with a contradictory solution which only panders to the idea of a dependency culture,low wage employment and where no one with any sense wants to live.
[zb] that…I go to work to feed and clothe my family…not to burden myself with a mortgage…been there, done that, got shafted by mortgage company when I got made redundant…will never buy property in this country again…unless I could pay cash for it.
The idea of capitalism is that you’re ( supposed to be ) earning enough to cover yourself for redundancy with income protection insurance,combined with enough of a buffer in savings to cover the mortgage.As opposed to the socialist dependency culture which expects others to pick up the bill.
As for buying a decent house outright with cash there’s no way that even the best case form of 1960’s US Capitalism could pay for that. 
War-Machine:
Those of us on 14k a year would lovery an associate home but there aren’t enough to go around!
Trust me ‘if’ they took the socialist solution of building all the commy style housing supply to meet the criterea of 14k affordability you really wouldn’t want to live in the result.
So you are taking a pay cut, thereby telling your employer that he is overpaying you! He will think well if I can get one drivervat this lower rate I can get more. Saves him money brings down all drivers wages in the long run. It’s already going to be difficult with the announcement of the minimum living wage at £9.00 an hour, I’ve seen a few class 1 drivers jobs on not much more than that. Are we going to see better wages for drivers or are we going to end up being paid the same as people stacking shelves in supermarkets?
Carryfast:
peterm:
We copped the 18% rates around that time, but we’d used a bit of forethought and bought a modest place so even though it was a bit difficult, we managed. Unlike nowadays over here where every young couple have to have the posh house, two beemers in the double driveway and a [zb] off big tele in every one of their six bedrooms. I’m exaggerating a bit, but you see my point… Have I drifted off topic.It’s fair to say that the definition of a modern industrialised economy should be one that pays sufficient wages to afford something better than a zb small house in a high density housing estate in an over populated urbanisation.While also paying savers a decent return on the money they’ve lent to help buy it.
Point me to the bit where I said we’d bought a ■■■■ small house in a high density housing estate in an over populated urbanisation.
peterm:
Carryfast:
peterm:
We copped the 18% rates around that time, but we’d used a bit of forethought and bought a modest place so even though it was a bit difficult, we managed. Unlike nowadays over here where every young couple have to have the posh house, two beemers in the double driveway and a [zb] off big tele in every one of their six bedrooms. I’m exaggerating a bit, but you see my point… Have I drifted off topic.It’s fair to say that the definition of a modern industrialised economy should be one that pays sufficient wages to afford something better than a zb small house in a high density housing estate in an over populated urbanisation.While also paying savers a decent return on the money they’ve lent to help buy it.
Point me to the bit where I said we’d bought a [zb] small house in a high density housing estate in an over populated urbanisation.
Assuming that you were actually saying that the idea of a decent 4 bed detatched,or at worse semi,with own drive and decent garage in a nice semi rural setting and 50 inch tele and decent car is a fair working class living standard then I apologise.But it didn’t exactly look like that’s what you were saying in the post.
No, what I meant was that we were happy to work our way up rather than jump straight in at the deep end, getting mortgaged up to the eyes, dripped up for cars etc and then having to walk away when interest rates went up by .01%.
peterm:
No, what I meant was that we were happy to work our way up rather than jump straight in at the deep end, getting mortgaged up to the eyes, dripped up for cars etc and then having to walk away when interest rates went up by .01%.
I think the argument is that life is too short to work any way up and a fair day’s work ( should mean ) a fair day’s pay.Meaning no need for anyone to be mortgaged up to the eyes because that’s what the deposit is for combined with sufficient salary to cover a realistic mortgage repayment amount and time regime.
The issue in this case being that earnings are too low to provide a sufficient deposit or pay for a mortgage.The result being that either too many people are reliant on state/subsidised housing funding.Or trying to rip off savers in the form of low interest rates,or each other in the form of the ‘housing ladder’.Which in reality means calling for an ‘affordable’ first time house buy which they then try to flog on at an outrageously inflated price/profit to give them a free upgrade.Which more or less describes the housing market situation and how it’s got where it is.
Carryfast:
War-Machine:
Those of us on 14k a year would lovery an associate home but there aren’t enough to go around!Trust me ‘if’ they took the socialist solution of building all the commy style housing supply to meet the criterea of 14k affordability you really wouldn’t want to live in the result.
Sorry carry
What I’m saying is that those, who can’t afford anywhere should have access to the houses not those who can afford to rent normally, or those that are here to scrounge of our country, both native and immigrant. I don’t know of the situation of others but I know for me the system is screwed
Carryfast:
peterm:
No, what I meant was that we were happy to work our way up rather than jump straight in at the deep end, getting mortgaged up to the eyes, dripped up for cars etc and then having to walk away when interest rates went up by .01%.I think the argument is that life is too short to work any way up and a fair day’s work ( should mean ) a fair day’s pay.Meaning no need for anyone to be mortgaged up to the eyes because that’s what the deposit is for combined with sufficient salary to cover a realistic mortgage repayment amount and time regime.
The issue in this case being that earnings are too low to provide a sufficient deposit or pay for a mortgage.The result being that either too many people are reliant on state/subsidised housing funding.Or trying to rip off savers in the form of low interest rates,or each other in the form of the ‘housing ladder’.Which in reality means calling for an ‘affordable’ first time house buy which they then try to flog on at an outrageously inflated price/profit to give them a free upgrade.Which more or less describes the housing market situation and how it’s got where it is.
This house price/rent issue wouldn’t be quite the same catastrophe it is now if we weren’t importing people faster than we can house them, it would have levelled off a long time ago during one of the natural peaks and troughs…there should have been a curtailing of prices even a reasonable drop during the 08 to 13 period of the current recession (which isn’t over by any means, nor is the economy in any way stable), instead of which the bubble continued to grow as millions more arrived.
It’s now gone way past stupid in the south east and in areas those who have got out of certain London districts and other cities due to the influx over many years have re-assembled…you’ll see more of that flight syndrome yet, and remember well when it’s your turn to be affected that the vast majority of you willingly did as you were told and voted for it.
Those who think the unstoppable invasion won’t affect them in more rural areas had better not be too young, or they’ll live to see the results for themselves when their ‘‘doesn’t affect us up here’’ smirk is wiped from their faces, in all cases our own kids (not Lucifer Blair or his son Cameron nor any of the families of those who direct this regime) are going to be the ones to suffer, the vast majority will never see what this country was like in better days before overcrowding became it’s ruin and people prepared to put some work in could afford to buy a reasonable house and live a fairly peaceful life.
You have another chance, the final one you don’t deserve in the vast majority of cases, to throw a spanner in their project when you get to choose in the referendum…if you vote for freedom i suggest you use a pen to put your mark and if someone could kindly set the sat nav of the ballot box carriers and follow them to make sure they don’t go missing for several hours, especially in places like Thanet South for example (nothing to see here move along now), it would make it a bit more difficult for them to rig this one if the nation happens to find its nads and votes to rid us of this unending lunacy…they’ll still have the postal vote scam mind.
Juddian:
This house price/rent issue wouldn’t be quite the same catastrophe it is now if we weren’t importing people faster than we can house them, it would have levelled off a long time ago during one of the natural peaks and troughs…there should have been a curtailing of prices even a reasonable drop during the 08 to 13 period of the current recession (which isn’t over by any means, nor is the economy in any way stable), instead of which the bubble continued to grow as millions more arrived.It’s now gone way past stupid in the south east and in areas those who have got out of certain London districts and other cities due to the influx over many years have re-assembled…you’ll see more of that flight syndrome yet, and remember well when it’s your turn to be affected that the vast majority of you willingly did as you were told and voted for it.
Those who think the unstoppable invasion won’t affect them in more rural areas had better not be too young, or they’ll live to see the results for themselves when their ‘‘doesn’t affect us up here’’ smirk is wiped from their faces, in all cases our own kids (not Lucifer Blair or his son Cameron nor any of the families of those who direct this regime) are going to be the ones to suffer, the vast majority will never see what this country was like in better days before overcrowding became it’s ruin and people prepared to put some work in could afford to buy a reasonable house and live a fairly peaceful life.
You have another chance, the final one you don’t deserve in the vast majority of cases, to throw a spanner in their project when you get to choose in the referendum…if you vote for freedom i suggest you use a pen to put your mark and if someone could kindly set the sat nav of the ballot box carriers and follow them to make sure they don’t go missing for several hours, especially in places like Thanet South for example (nothing to see here move along now), it would make it a bit more difficult for them to rig this one if the nation happens to find its nads and votes to rid us of this unending lunacy…they’ll still have the postal vote scam mind.
I fully agree, You, my Friend are Spot On!!
Carryfast:
robroy:
Looks like I’m in war1974 Sponger’s club also then.
Before my business went ■■■■ up in 96 ish I had a brand new house in a select area which I lost. I was on my arse with 4 kids to feed, (got a job even though I could have lived off the social with the 4 kids) and had to rent off a guy that done [zb] all in repairs but ripped me off every month. When I cleared bankruptcy I was a financial leper due to my history, the only mortgages I qualified for was the ones that had ludicrous sky high interest rates.
Eventually I was offered a council house. It conjured up in my mind a [zb] hole with scrap cars in the garden living next door to crackheads (btw I aint a snob, I was brought up in a decent home council house, but that is the way a lot are now) Luckily it was a end terrace house in a country village, in a nice setting surrounded by fields so I was delighted with it.
When the leper status had died off I was about 45ish so did not want to start another mortgage around my neck so we decided to stay.
I am not going to disclose my rent, mainly as it has [zb] all to do with anybody, but suffice to say it is realistic and cheaper than private.So like the other guy I am now going to give that last landlord a bell for my previous house, move out and make way for one of our long term unemployed, or a mother of 5 kids with assorted dads, or a smackhead.
In fact one of you lot that think I’m a sponger can give me advice.Council house tenants are only scroungers in the sense that the object of going to work ( should be ) to earn enough to comfortably afford a deposit and mortgage,on a decent privately bought house in a a decent setting,which can be cleared in a reasonable time.
As usual Carryfast whilst you are in full flow you slip in a generalisation which is your own personal opinion, implying that it is the norm,but in reality is total ■■■■■■■■.
Not everybody wants to own their own house, many are quite happy to rent as either a lifestyle choice, or as a reaction to circumstances past or present as in my case.
As I said before previous generations of working people rented council houses for their entire lives, and were not scroungers.
^^^^^Exactly, I knew of several folk who ran their business from council homes including two haulage contractors and they were quite happy to do so. Nobody thought any less of them, I had school friends from council estates and nobody gave a toss!
Pete.
Its really not that easy to just “buy” a house!
I’m one of these working type in a council house, my ex partner walked out and left me with a 4 month old baby, I was fortunate enough to get social housing, I now work and claim nothing my rent keeps going up but it is still a decent amount I have a baby on the way and would ideal need an extra bedroom, as only in a two bed. My housing need is low so I wont get one through the council, I could private rent but its not worth the £200-300+ per month extra for one room, its ridiculous.
I would really like to get a mortgage but the average 3 bed in my area is 250k, I can only get a mortgage for 140k so unless I find a deposit of 100k its not going to happen.
So why should I give up my house, to pay more for less, Just so someone who has no intention of working or just come across on an axle can live for free.
robroy:
Carryfast:
Council house tenants are only scroungers in the sense that the object of going to work ( should be ) to earn enough to comfortably afford a deposit and mortgage,on a decent privately bought house in a a decent setting,which can be cleared in a reasonable time.As usual Carryfast whilst you are in full flow you slip in a generalisation which is your own personal opinion, implying that it is the norm,but in reality is total ■■■■■■■■.
Not everybody wants to own their own house, many are quite happy to rent as either a lifestyle choice, or as a reaction to circumstances past or present as in my case.
As I said before previous generations of working people rented council houses for their entire lives, and were not scroungers.
Firstly the economics of renting make no sense.Being that having to still pay the going market rental rates in retirement can be a deal breaker as to wether someone can continue to enjoy a reasonable lifestyle or be forced out into somewhere they don’t want to be.Whereas getting a mortgage out of the way and paid for means that housing costs are no longer an issue in later life.It can also make the difference between hauling the next generations out of housing costs/rental dependency in the form of leaving them a paid for inheritance especially in the case of only children.Or at least somewhere financially secure to live if their own circumstances don’t go to plan for whatever reason.
As for council house tenants or housing benefit claimants the fact is if rental is supposedly a life style choice then don’t expect home buyers to subsidise them.Especially in the hypocritical case of those taking advantage of such funding then calling home buyers ‘militant’,when they decide to fight for better wages to facilitate the buying of a decent house and supporting themselves.As applied in the case of a large part of Thatcher’s vote.In that case that made/makes them not only scroungers,but the worst type of hypocrite socialist when it suits them and capitalist when it doesn’t,too.IE the fact is rental,or at least state subsidised low wage rental or in work benefits,aren’t compatible with the idea of a modern advanced Capitalist economy.As opposed to mix and match of Socialism and Capitalism which we’ve got and which is all about subsidising low wage employment.
I know it sounds a bit daft I know, so bear wjth me, but how many working people could buy a house if there was no mortgage facilities.
If there was no mortgages building societies or estate agents the price of a house would be the TRUE value not some ridiculous over inflated artificially valued price that it is now.
In terms of price of brick by brick, timber, plumbing land and labour for say a modest 3 bed family house how much is the bottom line. I’m out of my depth here so I am more than likely way off but does 30k sound about right? I don’t know, but nowhere near the thick end of 200+ k or whatever they are in your respective areas.
My daughter works part time as she has a baby, her husband is a full time hgv driver but they can not raise the high deposit and are renting privately for the same amount as they would pay a montly mortgage.
