Houses are meant to be homes not bank accounts!
In a healthy society the poor and disadvantaged are cared for, this benefits everyone.
The most BASIC human need and human right is a HOME
It's a complete disgrace that in a wealthy country we have wheelchair bound people dying in shop doorways, children "living" in shipping containers...
Do none of you railing against the idea of a policy that will reclaim housing from Russian oligarchs and similar think that children and the disabled deserve habitable, HUMAN homes?
And I too am not buying the "woe is me" from private landlords. If it wasn't profitable for them they wouldn't keep doing it!
"the idea that you’ll win any votes from the tens of millions of people who own a flat or a house when your extreme socialist policies would destroy the housing market and all the value - literally trillions of pounds - tied up in them!" people are more important than wealth. I find it quite sad and disheartening that you find it amusing that someone might consider prioritising people having homes rather than housing being profitable.
TryingandFailing39 kindly meant but given the insecurity of the housing market under any colour of govt (surely the global crash showed this) why would you put all your eggs in a holey basket like that? I also don't really understand why you would live in at work and rent out your only property? If not for the profit? Private schools even if they are kept are frequently poorly run and insecure businesses I believe.
StickyStick - I remember the days when utilities, transport and telecoms were nationalised. My background is actually working in telecoms on an administrative/organisational basis and to the best of my knowledge it's the ONLY industry that has not only improved in service but also in reduced costs from becoming privatised and largely ending the monopolisation in this sector - I say largely because BT still owns far too much of the infrastructure in that area.
I used to get trains and buses a lot as I didn't learn to drive until I was 29, and I certainly remember them running much more smoothly - not perfectly - but certainly better than happens now and there are real problems with accountability now too. If you take a journey of any real distance you're using 2 possibly 3 different train companies and if anything goes wrong they all blame each other - and the fares are extortionate! I was able to travel extensively on "pocket money" type expenditure as a teen and early 20-something. Perhaps you're more of a driver and don't know how things have become? And buses - again fares are crazy! And in even semi rural areas it can be extremely hard to get about. This impacts not only on people socially but on where they can work! In my county if you don't live "in town" or drive you're pretty stuck for reliable transport to work. Many routes have plain been cancelled and most buses stop running between 6-7pm.
Energy prices have skyrocketed! And again service is not particularly better than when they were nationalised in my experience. There's little real competition as the main providers all have very similar rates. And even the profits the companies are making aren't necessarily staying in the uk as a significant number of energy companies are not uk companies (when you delve into the true ownership).
Being in Scotland I'm fortunate that water is basically still nationalised here. But I lived in England for a time and water prices were crazy too and the service appalling.
It's not headteachers that would be assessing their own schools. It would be locally set up agencies ao they'd still be inspected. Again we don't have ofsted here in Scotland but I have a number of friends who are teachers in England and was a childminder in England myself. Ofsted inspections are extremely subjective, some inspectors are tough, some too lax, making the results of inspections meaningless! My teacher friends would lambast me but I also think it's ridiculous that inspections are announced! Schools and other places that are subjected to ofsted inspections then go nuts prepping for the inspection which means inspectors aren't seeing education providers as they normally function. They should be unannounced. I know of several places with highly questionable practices or they had outstanding repairs to equipment etc which they left for many months but knowing they had an inspection booked they fixed what needed fixing. I think it should be a minimum of 2 inspectors per visit and that the inspectors don't remain in "teams" but are mixed up so they aren't influenced by each other.
"so we can have a system where you have to be a millionaire to live in catchment for good schools"
It already works that way in
England pretty much doesn't it? Here in Scotland no such nonsense. Comprehensive system and very few private schools. I know there are scots that feel the quality of education in Scotland has deteriorated in recent years, but I have to say having experienced both - the scots schools are MILES ahead! Showing that a state education system CAN be of good quality imho
Anti semitism is absolutely not ok, and I believe Corbyn has said so but I agree he could be doing more to address this matter. BUT if anyone thinks it isn't ALSO an issue within the tory party as well as all other forms of racism they're very much mistaken.
@oliversmumsarmy -
"I think you will find that the mortgage companies are the ones who won’t accept housing benefit." Not always, though that's often given as the excuse. And as not all mortgage companies do then landlords if they cared to NOT be prejudiced in this way they could use companies that don't discriminate.
That also doesn't explain/excuse the prejudice against disabled and single mum tenants.
"One of the biggest helps for housing would be to go back to the days when housing benefit was paid directly to the landlord." Actually with UC that's been happening a lot - except what's happening is people's rent isn't being paid because dwp are cocking up and it's resulting in increased evictions.
Your post at 2345 - that Model you describe has been proven to be false. What actually happens with slightly higher taxation, more people in work but working fewer hours but getting a living wage, is that there's more spending! This stimulates the economy, people having more free time AND a little more money spend more in businesses like restaurants, leisure centres, bowling alleys, days out etc.
Trickle down economics doesn't work - at all! When the wealthy have more money generally spending they don't spend more. When the poor and middle earners have more money - they spend it!