3 ms·
> To be clear, the failure was not in the act of selling itself, but in the decision to not reinvest the proceeds into new housing stock. This is the part that
by Jochim 3y ago
> To be clear, the failure was not in the act of selling itself, but in the decision to not reinvest the proceeds into new housing stock. This is the part that made the housing problem worse instead of better.
The kind of mass sell-off that occurred could only be considered a massive failure. Selling individual properties at market value when the intention is to reinvest that money is clearly without objection. But to this day, the government offers discounts of up to 70% on social housing. It is a direct transfer of public wealth into private ownership and it has invariably led to worse outcomes where it has occurred. Social housing, royal mail, and water infrastructure are the obvious examples but less obviously there's PFIs, energy, and the nhs.
- ClumsyPilot 3y agowater companies have build Zero new water reservoirs in the entire 50 years of their existance. In 10 yeats London will start running out of water and we will have to bail them out like we bailed out the banks.
- robertlagrant 3y ago> It is a direct transfer of public wealth into private ownership and it has invariably led to worse outcomes where it has occurred. Social housing, royal mail, and water infrastructure are the obvious examples but less obviously there's PFIs, energy, and the nhs. This is too broad a category. You can't criticise people owning homes by using examples of private(ish) ownership of infrastructure.