600,000 plots of land with planning permission that they won't build on.
To quote:
"Getting planning permission isn’t the issue: England consistently grants twice as many permissions as homes that are started."
Maybe this is a use for that LVT everyone keeps talking about. If the developers were forced to pay tax on the value of the and they are sitting on they would start thinking about building on it soon enough.
If you follow through and read the article the opinion piece is citing you find the whole premise is bullshit. Some of the 600,000 doesn't have any permission at all, others are tied up in objections or have permission pending other conditions that haven't been met.
600,000 plots of land with planning permission that they won't build on.
To quote:
"Getting planning permission isn’t the issue: England consistently grants twice as many permissions as homes that are started."
Maybe this is a use for that LVT everyone keeps talking about. If the developers were forced to pay tax on the value of the and they are sitting on they would start thinking about building on it soon enough.
If you follow through and read the article the opinion piece is citing you find the whole premise is bullshit. Some of the 600,000 doesn't have any permission at all, others are tied up in objections or have permission pending other conditions that haven't been met.
So we can add this myth to 'Foreigners are buying up London new builds and leaving them empty' also peddled by Labour.....
The Democrats did their usual 'war on women' campaign. The democrat was male, the GOP candidate female.
Full disclosure - I live in the adjacent district.
That looks like quite a good Republican result.
Not sure about that... They won by 24 points in 2016 - down to 4/5 points now. Trump's record seems a pretty big drag on the Republican ticket so far....
If the Queens speech doesn't announce 2 million new homes, then tories are not serious about keeping Corbyn out of power.
Easy but these days you have to look every promise in the teeth. 2m houses over next 20 years is not much use. Spending promises used to be always per year - think these extended promises came the norm under New Labour
It's pretty difficult separating out the fake news from the real. The fear - the could-happen, from the actual, the likely-to-happen. In reality, everyone who matters is aware of the political sensitivity of grenfell and will be falling over themselves to ensure the sharp edges of the system get blunted and conscious that they really don't want to be portrayed as callous. I'd hope. There's no shortage of real journalists sniffing around every angle of the grenfell catastrophe picking out the nuggets of truth from the gossip.
I thought it should be pretty easy to separate fake news from real news. One reports the truth, the other is made up nonsense. Reporting the "could happen" as news is totally irresponsible.
Do you read the Mail, Rob? Or the Telegraph? Or the Express?
Fine until reality intrudes on your pipe dreams and leaves you and your compatriots in an even worse position. Real, rather than relative, poverty is almost (but not entirely) non existent in Britain. Things can and will get far, far worse under someone like Corbyn. When the country is like Greece and can no longer afford to pay for medicines then it is people like you who will be responsible.
Care to bet on these predictions of doom under Corbyn? Say £20 (or $ if you prefer) to a charity of my/your choice?
I can't see how you can bet on such things. How do we judge just how bad is disastrous? If you want to bet on the UK going into recession if Corbyn becomes PM then I am fine with that. If you want to bet on us losing ratings with the agencies then that as well.
FPT - okay how about this. If Corbyn wins a majority and is in government for a minimum of two years and the economy is not already in recession before he takes over:
Then if there is a recession whilst he is PM I will pay £20 to a charity of your choice. If there is no recession - you can give £20 to UNICEF?
If any of the initial clauses don't hold then bet is void.
Happy? Is that clear or does it need some modification?
I prefer recession to ratings agency... Feels more objective.
Yep that seems a reasonable bet to me. Actually I am happy with UNICEF as well. That way whoever loses they win. I always forget, which of the Peter's do we use as the Guardian of the Bet?
Great! Good luck! Not sure about which Peter....
Me, if you like.
That'd be great. Thanks. To be clear - I'm assuming Richard has responded to the single offer in this thread - not the second one I made later of two bets....
Yup. Like I say when you the government creates a problem on behalf of the voters, the voters will latch on to any far-fetched explanation to avoid admitting that it's the policy they support that's causing the problem. This thread has at least three different types of market participants set up as villains, and about 10 different suggestions of different ways to punish the alleged hoarders and profiteers.
Yup. Like I say when you the government creates a problem on behalf of the voters, the voters will latch on to any far-fetched explanation to avoid admitting that it's the policy they support that's causing the problem. This thread has at least three different types of market participants set up as villains, and about 10 different suggestions of different ways to punish the alleged hoarders and profiteers.
Yes 'restricted supply has driven up prices' is not an argument you're likely to hear from London home-owning commentators.....
600,000 plots of land with planning permission that they won't build on.
To quote:
"Getting planning permission isn’t the issue: England consistently grants twice as many permissions as homes that are started."
Maybe this is a use for that LVT everyone keeps talking about. If the developers were forced to pay tax on the value of the and they are sitting on they would start thinking about building on it soon enough.
If you follow through and read the article the opinion piece is citing you find the whole premise is bullshit. Some of the 600,000 doesn't have any permission at all, others are tied up in objections or have permission pending other conditions that haven't been met.
Comments
http://lselondonhousing.org/2017/06/overseas-investors-and-londons-housing-market/#How_many_new_homes_are_sold_to_overseas_buyers
Trump's record seems a pretty big drag on the Republican ticket so far....
To be clear - I'm assuming Richard has responded to the single offer in this thread - not the second one I made later of two bets....