Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
You realise these are actual real people, not just pieces on a chess board.
|
Yes of course I know they are real people but they are people with a real need and if that need can be met by (some of them) moving surely that is part of the solution. I am not suggesting forcing people to move but, as I said before, in the past people moved around the world for a "better life". And if some skilled people move at take money into poorer areas so those areas develop that benefits the receiving area too. And if you do build cheaper properties how do you stop the owners then selling on at a nice profit because demand is high? More council owner properties? OK that houses some but can councils afford to increase their portfolios? How do people then get out of public housing onto the property level? If the public purse lets you live "comfortably" that is even more disincentive to work.
(Now I know there are people who really do need help but how do you help them and keep out the scroungers who won't work, who won't look after a property they are allocated, abuse neighbourhoods etc. And if an area doesn't have jobs at the lower end what are people who live in this housing going to do for work?)
A possible further advantage is that as more people moving in, services can increase too which makes the area more attractive, even for those who currently live there.
What happens at the moment is an imbalance. Houses are built where there is demand (high housing prices) but few of that property addresses the need in that area as demand keeps the prices high and the poor still can't afford the properties being built over the green fields that all can enjoy. Another imbalance is property in desirable areas being bought for investment, holiday homes etc which again pushes property prices up and creates another area where poorer people can no longer afford to live.