| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party 04:44 - Feb 29 with 12771 views | Zapers |
Has she been a good girl, or a naughty girl, and forgotten to pay her CGT tax on the sale of her council house.
Without evidence I'm not convinced i believe either her, or Starmer;) |  | | |  |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:16 - Feb 29 with 3147 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 14:27 - Feb 29 by DJR |
Despite all the flak it gets on TWTD and in the media, the SNP is the only truly progressive major party in Great Britain and abolished "right to buy" in 2016. [Post edited 29 Feb 2024 20:09]
|
They are that progressive that nearly 50% the membership voted for a woman whose beliefs on LGBTQ rights and abortion would make Donald Trump look woke. |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:38 - Feb 29 with 3121 views | itfcjoe |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 14:19 - Feb 29 by Herbivore |
Yes, completely agree with you on all of that to be fair. Right to buy is a ridiculous policy, I know the Thatcherites love it but I've seen first hand just how chronic the shortage of social housing is and RTB has contributed to a swollen private rental sector that still remains poorly regulated and that also impacts on the affordability of homes for first time buyers.
Those who can get social housing not only benefit from cheap, secure rental accommodation, they get the added benefit of being able to buy it well below market value, thus compounding the shortage of social housing stock.
I know a couple of people who bought their flats via RTB and both now own two properties and rent out the flats they purchased through RTB. There's no doubt they were eligible for social housing at the time they got their flats and they stayed in them for the required amount of time, but surely a scheme that ends up with people becoming multiple property owners when those who aren't fortunate enough to access limited social housing can't even afford one property isn't really fair? |
RTB is just such a bad scheme, we were having to price up an extension and refurbishment for a lottery winner a little while ago and wondered why they were spending so much to do up a house in a not great area.....because it was a RTB that they could now purchase so decided best to buy that and do it up opposed to buy elsewhere.
And my wife was previously a mortgage adviser and it's incredible how well off, decently earning people, can buy these houses (and especially flats) for an absolute song.
I can understand why people do it when they are in the position to be able to, because it is just a non brainer financially, but it is so bad for the country as a policy |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:46 - Feb 29 with 3080 views | Blueschev |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:38 - Feb 29 by itfcjoe |
RTB is just such a bad scheme, we were having to price up an extension and refurbishment for a lottery winner a little while ago and wondered why they were spending so much to do up a house in a not great area.....because it was a RTB that they could now purchase so decided best to buy that and do it up opposed to buy elsewhere.
And my wife was previously a mortgage adviser and it's incredible how well off, decently earning people, can buy these houses (and especially flats) for an absolute song.
I can understand why people do it when they are in the position to be able to, because it is just a non brainer financially, but it is so bad for the country as a policy |
I recently purchased an ex council house. When it was initially sold RTB at the turn of the century it went for just under 20k. I paid 13 times that for it. it's crazy. |  | | |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 16:00 - Feb 29 with 3053 views | DJR |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:16 - Feb 29 by GlasgowBlue |
They are that progressive that nearly 50% the membership voted for a woman whose beliefs on LGBTQ rights and abortion would make Donald Trump look woke. |
It's implemented policies, not personalities, that matter, and the SNP is firmly on the centre-left. My view is that this represents the prevailing view in the country because Scotland hasn't had a Tory majority since the 1950s. In contrast, at least since Thatcher, the prevailing view in England has been centre-right with the exception of the New Labour years when it was probably more centre than centre-left. [Post edited 29 Feb 2024 21:37]
|  | | |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 20:01 - Feb 29 with 2930 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 15:38 - Feb 29 by itfcjoe |
RTB is just such a bad scheme, we were having to price up an extension and refurbishment for a lottery winner a little while ago and wondered why they were spending so much to do up a house in a not great area.....because it was a RTB that they could now purchase so decided best to buy that and do it up opposed to buy elsewhere.
And my wife was previously a mortgage adviser and it's incredible how well off, decently earning people, can buy these houses (and especially flats) for an absolute song.
I can understand why people do it when they are in the position to be able to, because it is just a non brainer financially, but it is so bad for the country as a policy |
What is wrong is that the revenue thst went into local government coffers from selling housing stock wasn’t ring fenced to be used on replenishment.
Even giving local authority the right to buy back housing stock would have helped. |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 20:51 - Feb 29 with 2885 views | You_Bloo_Right |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 20:01 - Feb 29 by Pinewoodblue |
What is wrong is that the revenue thst went into local government coffers from selling housing stock wasn’t ring fenced to be used on replenishment.
Even giving local authority the right to buy back housing stock would have helped. |
IIRC if a council had outstanding borrowing then RTB revenue was supposed to be used to pay that off.
Another part of the "household fallacy" favoured by Thatcher that erroneously compared running a country's (or local authority's) finances to running a household budget (ignoring mortgage payments of course) but writ large. You can draw a straight line, I believe, from that through things like PFI to the concept of "austerity". |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 21:05 - Feb 29 with 2857 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
An interesting issue that I have only had a quick scan through.
Am I missing something in irony or something but why is Zapers describing Rayner as a girl? |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 21:52 - Feb 29 with 2821 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 20:01 - Feb 29 by Pinewoodblue |
What is wrong is that the revenue thst went into local government coffers from selling housing stock wasn’t ring fenced to be used on replenishment.
Even giving local authority the right to buy back housing stock would have helped. |
Initially councils could only keep 20% of receipts. This was raised to 25% in 1990 but with more stringent conditions. In 1997 the 75% was directed straight to the Treasury, who made billions of pounds.
Like many Conservative policies, I wouldn't be surprised if it was designed especially to damage local authorities (Eric Pickles certainly did his best to hamstring them when he was Secretary of State in the 2010s).
I don't agree with the angle that RTB would have been fine if the receipts had been used to build new housing, especially in the case of flats. Being forced to sell flats meant that councils were suddenly freeholders to a large number of often hostile leaseholders. Whole new departments had to be set up to deal with them, and they cause endless pain, particularly when it comes to things like major repairs, which they are rarely happy about paying for (while tenants' rent paid over several years covers repairs, leaseholders have to pay in one-off chunks; for many older estates these works are often very expensive, resulting in bills of £10k+ per flat).
The various proposals to abolish leasehold are quite worrying for inner-city councils and RSLs, as there are several estates/blocks where the majority of flats have been lost to leaseholders, meaning the council/RSL would effectively lose control of the estates and not be able to maintain them properly. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:01 - Feb 29 with 2802 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 21:52 - Feb 29 by Clapham_Junction |
Initially councils could only keep 20% of receipts. This was raised to 25% in 1990 but with more stringent conditions. In 1997 the 75% was directed straight to the Treasury, who made billions of pounds.
Like many Conservative policies, I wouldn't be surprised if it was designed especially to damage local authorities (Eric Pickles certainly did his best to hamstring them when he was Secretary of State in the 2010s).
I don't agree with the angle that RTB would have been fine if the receipts had been used to build new housing, especially in the case of flats. Being forced to sell flats meant that councils were suddenly freeholders to a large number of often hostile leaseholders. Whole new departments had to be set up to deal with them, and they cause endless pain, particularly when it comes to things like major repairs, which they are rarely happy about paying for (while tenants' rent paid over several years covers repairs, leaseholders have to pay in one-off chunks; for many older estates these works are often very expensive, resulting in bills of £10k+ per flat).
The various proposals to abolish leasehold are quite worrying for inner-city councils and RSLs, as there are several estates/blocks where the majority of flats have been lost to leaseholders, meaning the council/RSL would effectively lose control of the estates and not be able to maintain them properly. |
Whatever the rights and wrongs of RTB, the depletion of council stock with a growing population has clearly led to a problem. It is the privatisation of council housing effectively. As with other public services, it is a short-term gain for a much greater long-term cost that benefits the wealthy at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:26 - Feb 29 with 2758 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:01 - Feb 29 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Whatever the rights and wrongs of RTB, the depletion of council stock with a growing population has clearly led to a problem. It is the privatisation of council housing effectively. As with other public services, it is a short-term gain for a much greater long-term cost that benefits the wealthy at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable. |
Ok. I'm a thickie.
This subject has always confused me.
Lets say there were 1 million people living in UK.
50% of these 1 million owned there own home, 25% privately rented and 25% had council homes.
If half of the 50% of the council home dwellers bought their council houses - how does this lead to a shortage of housing? |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:31 - Feb 29 with 2733 views | You_Bloo_Right |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:26 - Feb 29 by Lord_Lucan |
Ok. I'm a thickie.
This subject has always confused me.
Lets say there were 1 million people living in UK.
50% of these 1 million owned there own home, 25% privately rented and 25% had council homes.
If half of the 50% of the council home dwellers bought their council houses - how does this lead to a shortage of housing? |
That population figure increases over time?
Just a thought. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:33 - Feb 29 with 2710 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:31 - Feb 29 by You_Bloo_Right |
That population figure increases over time?
Just a thought. |
But mathematically that doesn't alter anything with regards to housing deficiency and Right to buy. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:36 - Feb 29 with 2704 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:33 - Feb 29 by Lord_Lucan |
But mathematically that doesn't alter anything with regards to housing deficiency and Right to buy. |
You can only put one family in a home.
The fact that the occupant owns the house or rents it from the council is absolutely 100% irrelevant. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 23:16 - Feb 29 with 2636 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:26 - Feb 29 by Lord_Lucan |
Ok. I'm a thickie.
This subject has always confused me.
Lets say there were 1 million people living in UK.
50% of these 1 million owned there own home, 25% privately rented and 25% had council homes.
If half of the 50% of the council home dwellers bought their council houses - how does this lead to a shortage of housing? |
Because RTB hugely reduced house building. Up until around 1980 the private sector and councils were building roughly the same number of homes each year (>100,000). When RTB took effect, there was no incentive for councils to build, as they could be forced to sell shortly after, and council housebuilding dropped off a cliff. However, private sector housebuilding didn't increase by much, which meant the number of new homes built each year dropped significantly. Combined with an increasing population, the reduced supply created a housing shortage. | | | |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 23:53 - Feb 29 with 2599 views | jayessess |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:26 - Feb 29 by Lord_Lucan |
Ok. I'm a thickie.
This subject has always confused me.
Lets say there were 1 million people living in UK.
50% of these 1 million owned there own home, 25% privately rented and 25% had council homes.
If half of the 50% of the council home dwellers bought their council houses - how does this lead to a shortage of housing? |
It's not that it creates a housing shortage, what it creates is a shortage of housing for social rent over time.
Without right to buy when a tenant's tenure ends (ie. they move, they buy a house, they die, they go overseas whatever), the house goes back to the state and can be used to house someone else who wants a council house.
If you sell it off that house is no longer the state's property and when the home-owner no longer needs use of it (ie. they move, they die, they go overseas whatever), they're going to sell it on, possibly to another owner-occupier or (often) to a private landlord. Something like 40% of RTB houses ended up in the private rental sector. Meanwhile, the waiting list for social housing gets longer and longer.
The short term effect of RTB on housing tenure was that owner-occupation went up and social renting went down, the long term effect is that the private rental sector expanded, first displacing the social rent sector and then eating into owner-occupation (because fewer homes for social rent made it more difficult for working-class families to save up enough money for a deposit). [Post edited 1 Mar 2024 0:05]
|  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 00:00 - Mar 1 with 2590 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 23:53 - Feb 29 by jayessess |
It's not that it creates a housing shortage, what it creates is a shortage of housing for social rent over time.
Without right to buy when a tenant's tenure ends (ie. they move, they buy a house, they die, they go overseas whatever), the house goes back to the state and can be used to house someone else who wants a council house.
If you sell it off that house is no longer the state's property and when the home-owner no longer needs use of it (ie. they move, they die, they go overseas whatever), they're going to sell it on, possibly to another owner-occupier or (often) to a private landlord. Something like 40% of RTB houses ended up in the private rental sector. Meanwhile, the waiting list for social housing gets longer and longer.
The short term effect of RTB on housing tenure was that owner-occupation went up and social renting went down, the long term effect is that the private rental sector expanded, first displacing the social rent sector and then eating into owner-occupation (because fewer homes for social rent made it more difficult for working-class families to save up enough money for a deposit). [Post edited 1 Mar 2024 0:05]
|
Top explanation |  | | |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 09:42 - Mar 1 with 2485 views | Radlett_blue |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 22:26 - Feb 29 by Lord_Lucan |
Ok. I'm a thickie.
This subject has always confused me.
Lets say there were 1 million people living in UK.
50% of these 1 million owned there own home, 25% privately rented and 25% had council homes.
If half of the 50% of the council home dwellers bought their council houses - how does this lead to a shortage of housing? |
If interest rates are fairly low, it creates a shortage of affordable rented housing. Look at London, where many people feel almost compelled to buy, even at what seem ludicrous prices, becasue it's cheaper than renting. |  |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 10:12 - Mar 1 with 2442 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 23:53 - Feb 29 by jayessess |
It's not that it creates a housing shortage, what it creates is a shortage of housing for social rent over time.
Without right to buy when a tenant's tenure ends (ie. they move, they buy a house, they die, they go overseas whatever), the house goes back to the state and can be used to house someone else who wants a council house.
If you sell it off that house is no longer the state's property and when the home-owner no longer needs use of it (ie. they move, they die, they go overseas whatever), they're going to sell it on, possibly to another owner-occupier or (often) to a private landlord. Something like 40% of RTB houses ended up in the private rental sector. Meanwhile, the waiting list for social housing gets longer and longer.
The short term effect of RTB on housing tenure was that owner-occupation went up and social renting went down, the long term effect is that the private rental sector expanded, first displacing the social rent sector and then eating into owner-occupation (because fewer homes for social rent made it more difficult for working-class families to save up enough money for a deposit). [Post edited 1 Mar 2024 0:05]
|
Very good points.
My father in law bought his council house and if not for RTB he would never have been able to buy his own home.
He and his wife are now dead and the house was sold by the kids and the money was divided.
So I completely get your point, that house is one of many houses that is now not available for a council tenant.
If the government had decided to build a new council house for every one sold then the scheme would have been counter productive as it would probably have cost more money than it raised.
Difficult one really, but I completely get your very well served points. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 11:06 - Mar 1 with 2376 views | OldFart71 |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 14:31 - Feb 29 by Radlett_blue |
I think the obsession with home ownership is one of the most destructive longer term impacts of THatcherism. She knew that if enough council houses were sold, she would be reinforcing a swathe of working class Conservative voters. THe Conservatives are still obsessed with keeping prices high, largely to keep their voters on-side & unfortunately hoem ownership is now so entrenched that it's near impossible to break this cycle, without a calamitous property crash. |
I am surprised anyone can afford these properties. In Needham there's a new development going up as you exit. A one bed mid terrace is a staggering £229,000. To give you an idea of housing v wages in 2002 I worked at a local paint factory, my wage then, on days 8-4.30 p.m. was £21,000. Now some 22 years later the wage of a worker on a 6-2, 2-10 shift is around £25,000. So £4,000 more in 22 years. When I left the Company and that was 2002 I sold my 3 bed detached house in Stowmarket for £132,000. The very same house is now valued at between £315-£345,000, so if you take a mid figure you would be looking at around £200,000 more. So in essence a huge chasm between wage increases and house prices. | | | |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 11:14 - Mar 1 with 2343 views | Radlett_blue |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 11:06 - Mar 1 by OldFart71 |
I am surprised anyone can afford these properties. In Needham there's a new development going up as you exit. A one bed mid terrace is a staggering £229,000. To give you an idea of housing v wages in 2002 I worked at a local paint factory, my wage then, on days 8-4.30 p.m. was £21,000. Now some 22 years later the wage of a worker on a 6-2, 2-10 shift is around £25,000. So £4,000 more in 22 years. When I left the Company and that was 2002 I sold my 3 bed detached house in Stowmarket for £132,000. The very same house is now valued at between £315-£345,000, so if you take a mid figure you would be looking at around £200,000 more. So in essence a huge chasm between wage increases and house prices. |
I'm not really in a position to judge affordability in Suffolk, but obviously the lengthy period of ultra low interest rates gave a massive boost to house prices. Plenty of people will have taken out fixed rate mortgages & as these roll off, they will have to refinance at higher rates. I've been predicting a fall in property prices for a while now, but it hasn't really happened, partly because the government does everything it can to avoid a property crash. | |
| |
| Angela Rayner, deputy leader of the Labour party on 08:49 - Mar 22 with 1847 views | DJR |
"A lie is halfway round the world before the truth has got its boots on."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68632621
As it is, Hunt made a joke at the Budget about the cut in CGT for second homes benefiting Rayner, when in fact he owns numerous properties himself.
And, according to Private Eye, Hunt pulled up the ladder on one tax break he benefited from a few years ago: stamp duty relief on multiple property purchases, which applied when he bought seven flats in Southampton in 2018. [Post edited 22 Mar 2024 8:50]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
