3 ms·
Social housing belongs where the prices are reasonable, i.e. mostly not in central London luxury developments. We’re talking about the most desirable areas in
by ryanlol 7y ago
Social housing belongs where the prices are reasonable, i.e. mostly not in central London luxury developments.
We’re talking about the most desirable areas in the world here, trying to force in social housing is just weird.
It’s not like there isn’t a bunch of places within a very reasonable commute where they could put social housing. Fuck, I used to commute from Reading for a while!
- KUcxrAVrtI 7y agoThere is nowhere in the west where housing is affordable. In the UK you have to go to the Scotish mountains to find houses that are as affordable today as London was in 1990.
- madaxe_again 7y agoAnd how is somebody earning £60 a day going to pay for a £23/day commute, and housing on top of that, smartypants? Oh, right, taxpayer money. It’s almost like they’ve modelled this out before making it policy.
- ryanlol 7y agoWhat exactly is wrong about using taxpayer money to subsidize those commutes? I think we should certainly impose heavier taxes on the luxury developments and the rich living in them.
- xorcist 7y agoNo taxpayer money is being spent. That's the whole point of this system, to avoid spending on housing benefits by utilizing price caps.
- ryanlol 7y agoAre the developers not taxpayers? No spending is avoided here, it’s merely obscured a little. Taxing the developers for straight cash would at least give the government more control on how it is spend.