Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder what the country would be like of we all live in ha/council houses

193 replies

JazzAnnNonMouse · 17/01/2013 09:15

And no one owned property? If everyone lived in a space that was good for them and their family and we all paid the same based on space ie 1 bedroom = PCM 2 bedroom = a bit more PCM.
This would mean that no one would get the rough end of the deal as mps would also be in the same situation.
Fair rent for everyone, money constantly going to the government.
I wonder if it'd encourage people to have more children or prohibit them from wanting more I they had to move to allow for another bedroom but then had to pay more?
Probably flawed massively somehow but I don't see why it couldn't work?

OP posts:
flatpackhamster · 17/01/2013 21:20

JazzAnnNonMouse

But if it benefitted someone else more and they could create happy memories there too then why is that evil?

But how do you even decide who benefits 'more'? Who makes the decision to apply happiness standards and how do they gauge it?

The problem that we come back to, time and time again with your ideas, is that they look at a problem and decide that the solution is for the government to take control. You've got a hopelessly optimistic view of the efficacy of government. Do you not realise how corrupt government is? Can you not imagine an official tasked with allocating housing taking bribes?

Its not saying right now you have no where to live its just saying you have some where different to live. It's surely just progressive housing?

I'm sorry, it's what? "Progressive" housing? No, it's communism. Don't try to rebrand it as something less ghastly.

My op was flawed (as I've said previously) as it didnt take into account all things that place a value on a house but suggesting its evil is quite silly!

Communism is evil. It's treating people as objects to be moved around by the state for the state's convenience. What's good about that? The state shows no respect for the individual's desires, motivations, or anything. It requires them to conform. It's a brutal, oppressive system that sucks the joy out of being human.

What you're proposing is communism, it has no respect for people, and it's evil.

You seem to think that those that have now are more deserving of it than those that don't. This isn't always the case.

And who decides what's "deserving"?

flatpackhamster · 17/01/2013 21:21

Thisisaeuphemism

Ooh bagsy I get to decide where everyone lives. I'm really selfless, me!

(everyone who agrees will get a nice place)

You're amazing.

I'd like JazzAnnOnnMouse's house please. Since she's so selfless and Committed To The Revolution, she'll gladly hand it over to Further The People's Paradise.

NotGoodNotBad · 17/01/2013 21:27

Just been reading a history of St Kilda - pretty equal society there. Housing allocated by need, food collected by those who could, and distributed equally amongst the community, including the old and the sick who couldn't get their own. For a long time they lived without money as it was meaningless for them; they did trade though, and they had to pay rent to the island's owner, which was paid in goods and he in return supplied things they couldn't produce, like salt.

Mind you, no-one had a house near the train station Grin. And they did discourage individualism - one guy apparently wanted to put a wooden floor in his cottage to make it more cosy, but the rest dissuaded him.

mrscog · 17/01/2013 21:29

But all properties aren't equal are they? Take two different 3 bed homes of identical size inside, but one has a downstairs loo, the other doesn't. One has a small lounge and a big kitchen diner, the other has a small kitchen and 2 small reception rooms. One has amazing views and a south facing garden and the other is opposite a nightclub and next door to a fish and chip shop. Would it be fair for the occupiers of both homes to be paying the same? Who would decide this kind of thing? Who would be responsible for paying for the upkeep?

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 21:31

all property is theft

CloudsAndTrees · 17/01/2013 21:35

What, like the property you pay for out of earned money you mean, ukfirestorm?

CabbageLeaves · 17/01/2013 21:39

If you level the playing field so that everyone has the same and let's just imagine there was no opportunity to manipulate a house in the better spot etc etc..... Why would people work harder? or work at all? because there would be nothing to gain from it?

I work harder than I need to because I have pride in my work BUT some days are bloody awful and without a need to pay a mortgage I'd walk away and spend days walking my dog.

Thisisaeuphemism · 17/01/2013 21:43

I'm deciding mrs cog! You, cloud and trees, morloth and flat pack are getting quite nice places (I reserve the best for myself naturally)
Ukfirestorm, jazzann, meh, not so nice.

NotGoodNotBad · 17/01/2013 21:49

"If you level the playing field so that everyone has the same and let's just imagine there was no opportunity to manipulate a house in the better spot etc etc..... Why would people work harder? or work at all? because there would be nothing to gain from it? "

Seems the St Kildans I mentioned above didn't have a problem with this - they worked because if the able-bodied didn't work the community would starve.

Thisisaeuphemism · 17/01/2013 21:54

Even communes don't seem to work because someone always nicks the milk in the fridge, so st kildans aside, why would it work on a scale of 60 million?
Sorry notgoodnot bad and cabbage leaves, only crap housing left - but if you bung me a tender I'll sort you out something.

Original poster
JazzAnnNonMouse · 17/01/2013 21:54

'Money isn't a fair form of exchange.'

Flatpackhamster - you're quite aggressive. Changing how housing works doesn't automatically equal communism.

It's about trying to think of different ways of living, different priorities. I'm questioning how things currently are and if they work (do you think they do?) putting hypothetical situations out there and discussing them isn't evil. I'm not saying this is how it must be done and if you dont do it my way I'll make you...

It's obvious that you hate communism but I'm not actually talking about communism. I'm merely thinking about housing and how things could be different and what effect that would have.

OP posts:
Thisisaeuphemism · 17/01/2013 21:59

Discussing ideas is not evil of course - but your proposals have been tried before, in many different countries with the same disastrous results.

Didn't you ever see dr zhivago?!!

CloudsAndTrees · 17/01/2013 21:59

Grin Thisisaeupemism

Original poster
JazzAnnNonMouse · 17/01/2013 22:01

Never seen or heard of that, will google Smile

OP posts:
Original poster
JazzAnnNonMouse · 17/01/2013 22:06

Looks like a film about communism and seeing as I'm not talking about communism (repeat repeat repeat) it's a bit irrelevantHmm

I'm talking about housing. Not a whole overthrow of Current authority, not a revolution. Housing. Fair housing that could benefit all. Different ways of doing so - no ownership how would that work, owner ship but capped rents etc.

OP posts:
CloudsAndTrees · 17/01/2013 22:17

But making everyone live in the same type of house for the same amount of money practically is communism. You only have to take one little step further down that road and you are giving everyone the same pay, the same cars, the same holidays, and you have communism!

No ownership would mean that people who are capable of earning a large amount of money would jump ship and go somewhere that that their work actually benefited them. We would lose a whole layer of society, like I've already said, and that would mean that the people you are trying to be 'fair' to would actually miss out. Can't you see that?

As of capped rents, I already said what I thought about that but you didn't respond. It is worthy of discussion, but again would be wholly wrong without a whole lot of other measures.

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 22:18

Not my quote, but (and I speak here as a hypocrite) property ownership requires poorer people.capitalism engenders the fear that we will lose what we have amassed and promotes individualism, more evil than communism, but closer to mans natural state- nastt, brutish etc (also not my quote, and a paraphrase)

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 22:21

Also, council housing in this country is dead, will be a distant memory in ten years time. Thatchers children.

MiniTheMinx · 17/01/2013 22:21

What a brilliant thread OP and it raises so many interesting points.

I am in inclined to think that we no longer trust in human nature because capitalism and neo-liberal thinking leaves so little room for questioning things.

So could we run a country where everyone had a say in politics, yes by organising ourselves around where we live but also within the workplace. I would like to see more collectivised housing (or at least collectivised ownership and democratic decision making) co-ops are a great alternative both in terms of housing and work.

suburbophobe · 17/01/2013 22:25

I know someone who was born, grew up and lived in East Germany.

She told me they used to pay a tenner for rent per month.

no wonder it collapsed

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 22:27

Credit unions too.at least the situation here better than some other capitalist societies like the us, our poor at least have access to healthcare.

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 22:29

Also, great thread!I came to mumsnet expecting to find advice on nappies (which I have found!) Not expecting sociological thought experiments! Great stuff!

garlicblocks · 17/01/2013 22:32

Unread thread warning: There are lots of countries where renting is the norm, and fair rent controls are also the norm. You don't need a totalitarian regime to achieve it, ffs!

I'm sure others have posted good examples. I'd love to see this country lose its obsession with mortgages. The second you leave school, the race is on to get more and more into debt. It's insane.

Alternative answer to the OP: Everybody would have mile-wide flat-screen tellies, there would be a benefit goat in every garden and all children would be reared on froot shoots. Obviously Wink

ukfirestorm · 17/01/2013 22:34

For example france!

Original poster
JazzAnnNonMouse · 17/01/2013 22:35

Mini how would the workplace change?

I think it's interesting too Smile

OP posts: