Right to buy. What about everyone else?

[BrownieBanana]

AIBU to think that it's all well and good to bring in new policy that allows better saving for RTB for council tenants, but that it doesn't help people who REALLY need help? If you're in a council property it is still vastly cheaper than private rent (over 50/60% where I live). What about the millions of young people living with their parents into their early and mid 30s who can't afford rent (this is me), can't get a mortgage as a single person even on an OK salary. Am I missing the mark here? I'm not saying everyone in a council property has it easy, if course not, however I don't think it's the right way to deal with the housing crisis at all....

Ok so it says the Zelensky was employed by an Oligarch in his media network, who then went on to back his election campaign. But they are now estranged.

I can’t see reference to his net worth being 7bn?

Who are the good guys anymore?

I think if Labour had introduced this the responses would be mixed

@BlueTitSmilingAtMe the guardian is as biased as the Daily Mail but in the other direction.

Still can’t where the 7bill is laid out clearly.

Paddington’s a fab show! 🧸

@Robinni I mean this is a sideshow to the current discussion really but Zelenskiy is an oligarch. I just goes to show how perceptions can change.

bykvu.com/eng/bukvy/pandora-papers-fallout-ukrainian-community-in-uk-stages-protest-at-zelensky-s-property-in-london/

Prominent Chinese business people who also participate in oligarch type behaviour ie obtaining and rinsing erstwhile state assets while said state carries out ethnic cleansing and human rights abuses and they also have their fingers in the UK property market as part of the global rush for asset acquisition. It's just what these type of people do.

Tbh I don't think there were ever any good guys.

Ask a Mexican who the good guys are. The ones who shoot each other in schools, elect a president who is clearly senile (just who is running biden?), are the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons - twice - and who for the past sixty years have engaged in proxy wars with shadowy unaccountable actors?

@BlueTitSmilingAtMe

Look we should be doing everything we can to get rid of foreign investors in property, second home owners who don’t use or rent their property and economic discrimination.

I’m not saying Zelensky is sainted. But that he’s unlikely to be worth 7bn. He isn’t a big enough player, though he may have through a raised profile become associated with some of them. Admittedly the culture over there is quite different. Even if he isn’t Paddington, what they are managing to do over there against a tyrant is admirable.

There may come a time to be quibbling over his investments, now isn’t it. And besides if the policy in this country facilitates buy up of real estate then that is what’s at fault not those that seek to gain from it.

You have a very niche interest in global affairs and corruption.

I'd be a bit pissed off if I were you too OP - however there's a lot of prelimenary policy offers on the table with this latest announcement of Housing Policy which is just an opener of many strands that need looking at.

They could all come to naught but it's not all about HA Tenants being given the same mahoosive discounts that Council Tenants once got, and a very few still can get.

My first suggestion would be that for every HA home sold at least 2 are built.

Second, the amount of Council-owned 'under-used' land is underestimated; many local Councils claim it is their 'Duty' to the Taxpayer to only sell at the highest price.

I disagree, it is more their Duty to ensure that their Local Residents have homes to live in; derrr.... they can pay more Tax and be less of a burden on the Public Purse for starters, if not giving a shit about the people you serve is your starting point.

I think it's a terrible idea. More social housing lost forever whilst no sign of demand reducing and plenty of parts of the country simply don't have the land available to just replace them like it's that easy.
This is pure distraction tactics from the government to try and move things on from BJ and his antics.

Load of bullshit that won't happen any time soon if you ask me...

There may come a time to be quibbling over his investments, now isn’t it.

I disagree. We live in a capitalist society and if you want to know where power tilts you need to follow the money.

Previous to bidens election the UK loved Russia. I mean we really fucking loved Russia. Nobody gave a shit when people got sent to the Stans, or got killed for being gay, or got slaughtered in Syria, or Crimea, or Chechnya. They didn't even give a shit about the Donbas at that point. Our PM when he was mayor of London - and this goes back more than twenty years - was more than happy to just hand over the property market ie the only tangible asset the UK has - to the Russians.

But with Trump out and Biden in, the US and UK think Russia is getting a bit big for its boots and needs someone to make it look bad. Step up Zelenskiy, erstwhile oligarch, bandit and controller of Ukraine media who after an initial flurry of success via a closed snap election (ie not democratic just to be clear) and the ultimate useful idiot with nothing to lose. They tell him they'll be his buddy, he sends his dodgy mate to winter out in Montenegro and starts poking the bear. Said bear was always aware of him but there's so many shady characters in the region he probably would have let it lie without that.

However. Turns out he's not going to get his no fly zone (because amazingly no one actually wants world war three) but too late now, all his people die horribly at the hands of brainwashed traumatised Russian boys recruited into the ranks by poverty, rape and fear, no one really wins as such but Russia is weakened, Zelenskiy and his chums and Putin and his chums get to keep their money and Biden, Zelenskiy and NATO emerge as saviours of democracy.

Urgh.

RTB is a good idea if homes are replaced. Those is council properties tend to remain in them until they die so that's homes off the market for decades.

I'm in a HA myself and I don't plan on giving up my tenancy, if I move it'll be a house swap

I live in a council house I have the right to buy I get max discount£75k off valuation. I couldn’t afford to buy where I live (I’m referring to my council house home) with the discount . My adult twenty something sons can’t even afford to move out.
I guess I’m saying it depends where you live in the country.

@carefullycourageous it doesn't reduce stock as they have to replace it , you could argue it will increase
I live in a social housing house i can't afford on open market as no deposit but could afford RTB so therefore if i bought a property would be built to replace mine , without it I will be in this house for years so no social house availible for anyone else
Done properly it could work well

@oldstudentmum could you investigate getting a mortgage where all three of you are named? Then in 5 years time - taking into account the discount and hopefully increased price you might be able to sell, move to something just for you and distribute the remaining to them for deposits? Just an idea; 3 people on a mortgage is better than 1.

@BrownieBanana your mixing up policies , hb being able to be used to help pay a mortgage levels things up as if someone finds circumstances change rather than loose a house with maybe a small mortgage and then have to move to an expensive private rent and then larger rent paid
The person could stay and pay mortgage still and coat tax payer less
Also rtb you don't always need such a large deposit as one house os cheaper and two some mortgage companies consider the discount towards as the house is worth more than being bought for
Also if done right it could create more availible social housing as tenants like myself are stuck , can't afford on open market and not going to give up a social tenancy for private , so in my case my house won't be available for years, where as if I buy, another property is built
The problem lies in no funding to help ha replace at moment, if they can sort that it should work

@XenoBitch the policy is for ha which do not belong to the taxpayer , they belong to HA , they do not cost the taxpayed

@LuluBlakey1 its not that easy to get rid of tenants

@worriedatthistime I don't think there'll be housing benefit still for home owners? It's still a loan if you're out of work isn't it.
My worst fear is losing my job
I'd get no help towards my mortgage while I'm unemployed and it would all just stack up

@Stripedotsquare its capped they won't be giving 70% off of 800,000 and the property has to be replaced with another one
Some houses Ha would be glad to sell ones that cost them a lot in maintenance and then replace with a more economic new build
You also have to keep them for x amount of years

@purpleme12 well if they can use HB to calculate a mortgage and get one surely it would mean you could get HB and use towards a mortgage? I think its wrong that it can't be but do think it should be capped at maybe a couple years as wouldn't be right someone buys somewhere then uses hb to pay mortgage for next 25 years, but help for short time def

@purpleme12 but I could of misunderstood it , its never as good as it sounds
Just seems to me that if you can use HB to calculate a mortgage then surely you can claim it towards a mortgage?
But your right I may have that totally wrong , really wrong that Not more help for people that own when they have redundancies ,illness etc

@purpleme12 I wondered about this too; if they are going to let people use their UC entitlement towards a mortgage. Would this not then apply that they need to give all people with a certain level of income money towards housing, even if they already have a mortgage?

Perhaps this will be cheaper than the current bill for the socially housed as mortgages tend to be for a set period of 25 years whereas somebody getting housing benefit component of UC this could stretch on for 60yrs or more.

Also arguably it breaks the poverty cycle, as if the parents own something then they’ll pass it on, kids will have money and be more likely to follow parents example and buy rather than rely on subsidised housing, and earning as little as possible to qualify for it.

Theoretically anyway….

"Oldies" ?
Nice

I agree OP. good luck to you.

So ... maybe people who don't earn much now but will do later ... maybe people who won't need any kind of social care ... maybe people who can afford to maintain their houses ... maybe maybe some of these individuals on the margins will perhaps marginally benefit, others won't, but we'll all be arguing about them amongst ourselves for years to come if they do: "she got that and I didn't, he got this and I work harder" while completely ignoring the fact that benefit money is already going towards house purchases, only it's going towards private landlords purchasing while tenants claim benefits, and that if this goes through it will just be a further transfer of public assets to private hands, financed by the state, before the state claws back what it can from the marginals while cementing cash transfer to business.