Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy
More profit is what's got us in this housing mess, you keep banging on about the market but who in their right mind would use our current housing bubble as a guide to anything, we have buy to leave investors snapping up vast swathes of property just to sit on, not to rent but sell on empty in a few years at a profit due to cutting an already limited supply, estate agents literally making rents up as they go along in an attempt to screw a few more quid out of people and the biggest subsidy of all that people should be moaning about that actually costs us all real money is the land lord subsidy of housing benefit.
Beside which i don't even think this is new policy, not with housing associations anyway, my pal's tenancy is reviewed every five years and one of the things they look at is how much he earns. Extending it to council housing is quite logical and I'll have to check this but iirc the earning limit they have set is actually higher than his housing association set. Also imo the reason people like housing association and council property isn't because there a bit cheaper, it's because the tenancy is more secure, you aren't beholden to the whim of a landlord.
---------- Post added at 22:02 ---------- Previous post was at 21:59 ----------
Exactly the cost of building them was subsidised and in most cases has been repaid many times over. The grants were actually scrapped for a time, hence why some housing doesn't have a right to buy attached
|
How can you say it's in the past, when the subsidies/grants are still in place to this very day. Something built last century, decade, year, or week has been subsidised.