| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: A Scottish government funded mortgage. |
 |
|
A Scottish government funded mortgage.
The capitalist brainwashed, the Thatcher was right mob and the usual naysayers will say :
"That's not government business, that's private business".
I say, the Scottish government should build good quality, decent housing and make it available for sale to the occupants at COST price.
The details are important but not as important as producing people with an investment in society.
The money paid back will then go on to fund another house.
Yes, this will cost money but people need to live in houses and we build council housing anyway (reasonably crap on the whole).
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| can i as a tax payer get one of these 'at cost' mortages for my own mortgage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nope.
Just those who are entering the housing market via a government funded home.
The government is there to provide good quality homes but not finance the mortgage market.
It's a tough life...
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| will it be means tested this new system? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nope.
If you have to live in a council house then the means justifies the ends.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
am i getting this right, and i maybe i'm not reading this properly. current council occupants get a new house built which they can BUY at COST price. a few questions, that is if i've got it right.
i as a taxpayer fund the council occupant's homebuying?
if the property goes into negative equity and then sold who makes the shortfall? me?
where are these new houses being built?
i certainly don't want some of the trashy folk that live in easterhouse getting a new house built for them where i live.
it does'nt seem to be a very good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
True, the taxpayer will fund some part of it but ultimately a far smaller part than would otherwise be. The system should be largely self funded after an initial taxpayer investment to get things going.
E.G. You give money to build a house, this house is sold to the tenant at cost price. The money thus repaid goes to build another house and so on and so forth.
Of course if one doesn't mind one's fellow Scot living in slum housing then that's a different issue.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie wrote: | True, the taxpayer will fund some part of it but ultimately a far smaller part than would otherwise be. The system should be largely self funded after an initial taxpayer investment to get things going.
E.G. You give money to build a house, this house is sold to the tenant at cost price. The money thus repaid goes to build another house and so on and so forth.
Of course if one doesn't mind one's fellow Scot living in slum housing then that's a different issue. |
negative equity?
i as a taxpayer fund an unfaur system where council tenants get new houses at reduced rates, yet a young sibgle person or newly married couple looking to move up the property ladder just have to get on with it.AND fund the council tenants new shiny house.good grief. it's like a socialist garden of eden.
make your point about scots living in slum housing to............................
the many,many thousands of scots who turn their homes and schemes in slum houses and ghettos. not me, i'm responsible and take pride in my home estate.your pointing the finger at the wrong demographic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not pointing my finger at any particular demographic. Yes a new shiny house rather than the awful grubby looking affairs that litter the place at the moment.
These people will pay for the house but with a O% (or 1%) mortgage and that money paid back is then used only for building new homes. The housing market is inherently unfair.
You are responsible, okay, but give the other guy a chance and you might end up with a responsible family.
You create a bigger middle class and you begin to solve some of the social problems that plague us all.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fidget
Standing in a Council Ward
Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 556
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trouble is that people will just stay put - happy where they are,they like their neighbours and whatever. Communities can't be built on a "move on as soon as you can afford something else" basis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I hope they are happy enough in their new homes to stay put, that's the point really.
The mortgage money still goes to make a new home.
Yes, it costs money but a fraction of the money it would cost.
It's an idea that people have talked about before.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ultra
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie wrote: | I hope they are happy enough in their new homes to stay put, that's the point really.
The mortgage money still goes to make a new home.
Yes, it costs money but a fraction of the money it would cost.
It's an idea that people have talked about before. |
Do you even know what at Cost means?
So if you build a house for say £60k and sell it for £60k, where does the additional profit come from to build more houses?
The housing associations already do this and turn a profit. It's called shared ownership.
If you buy a house off the plans, by the time it's build and you move in you have already made a profit.
Also, the new housing association houses being build were from places like Stuart Milne and other expensive builders. It's just that they get built in crap areas and the same crap people put back into them to carry on the same crap they always did until the houses need bulldozed and re-built.
The only other difference is that the councils have shifted responsibilities to housing associations ran by inexperienced locals who will only have themselves to blame in a few decades time.
So why should tax payers fund houses for people who wreck them time and again? Decent people don't want to stay in crap areas and would strive to move away to somewhere better. You can buy a decent house for less than it costs to rent housing association properties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie wrote: |
It's an idea that people have talked about before. |
i know.
thats why it has not happened, it's a stupid idea.
negative eqity? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ultra
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| landg wrote: | | Stevie wrote: |
It's an idea that people have talked about before. |
i know.
thats why it has not happened, it's a stupid idea.
negative eqity? |
Yes very stupid idea indeed.
The only people who seem to complain about council house sales are those who missed out or can't afford to buy due to their circumstances.
So you have to cut your cloth to suit 
If an area had a really bad reputation then nobody bought the houses anyways as they were in poor condition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nobody is suggesting the current method is brilliant.
Simple arithmetic for you :
If the house costs 60K to build, leave it for 4 / 5 years then sell it to the tenant, then that probably liberates 70K (the profit helps with the expenses) to build another house because the mortgage is taken over by a specific government body.
I believe this system works well in some or other country but I don't remember which.
Hope the simple arithmetic makes sense to thy mighty intellect.
If not, we'll have to wait till the great 3rd /4th generation Deep thought is constructed for the decrytion of landg's inscrutable posting to explain it to you.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ultra wrote: | | landg wrote: | | Stevie wrote: |
It's an idea that people have talked about before. |
i know.
thats why it has not happened, it's a stupid idea.
negative eqity? |
Yes very stupid idea indeed.
The only people who seem to complain about council house sales are those who missed out or can't afford to buy due to their circumstances.
So you have to cut your cloth to suit
If an area had a really bad reputation then nobody bought the houses anyways as they were in poor condition. |
which goes back to the original problem.
lots of new cooncil schemes have been built and renovated but the same trash gets put back in to ruin the house and the scheme. which leads to a further point nobody can explain how many in these run down ghett's take pride in their homes, have bought them and actively try to improve the area. nah, lets just focus on the ned element and blame the state. and take taxes of decent folk and build them another new house.
it's like a mad socialist plot from the mind of basil brush when he has been insufflating some class a columbian marching powder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| landg wrote: |
it's like a mad socialist plot from the mind of basil brush when he has been insufflating some class a columbian marching powder. |
I liked the Basil Brush thing but just when one thinks it's going along swimmingly for a change, you introduce a new word to the English language, 'insufflating'.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
landg
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 617
Location: awaiting approval by a mod/admin
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie wrote: | | landg wrote: |
it's like a mad socialist plot from the mind of basil brush when he has been insufflating some class a columbian marching powder. |
I liked the Basil Brush thing but just when one thinks it's going along swimmingly for a change, you introduce a new word to the English language, 'insufflating'. |
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/insufflating
sometimes it really is worth making that extra special effort. just for you.
Last edited by landg on Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:54 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ultra
This is Ma' Life!
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 652
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie wrote: | Nobody is suggesting the current method is brilliant.
Simple arithmetic for you :
If the house costs 60K to build, leave it for 4 / 5 years then sell it to the tenant, then that probably liberates 70K (the profit helps with the expenses) to build another house because the mortgage is taken over by a specific government body.
I believe this system works well in some or other country but I don't remember which.
Hope the simple arithmetic makes sense to thy mighty intellect.
If not, we'll have to wait till the great 3rd /4th generation Deep thought is constructed for the decrytion of landg's inscrutable posting to explain it to you. |
I am quite happy with the current method. I bought a new build in a far better area and pay far less than I did in rent in a scummy area. You can also rent far better properties for less money too.
So if you sell the house for 70k then thats not cost price is it?
Even still, you can't build a decent house and buy up land for 10k can you?
So the tax payer has to pay a substantial sum of millions to buy up land and build houses and gets nothing in return? Who pays for the administration costs of such a scheme?
Also, what about the cost of money and inflation over the 4 or 5 years?
Do you not think that the cost of building the house, land, and materials would increase too over that time period?
The reason you can't remember what countries is it probably doesn't exist.
The housing associations in Scotland are usually ran as not for profit and any profits generated are used to upgrade the existing housing stock or build new housing.
The other schemes are a mixture of social rented houses and owner occupiers. You also have shared ownership schemes which allow the tenent to purchase a share in the house and increase the share towards full ownership while paying rent for the un-owned portion.
What you are suggesting simply would not work under any stretch of the imagination on so many levels. The existing arrangement works well for the majority of people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie
Independentist
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1179
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Insufflate is a verb. Jolly good, did you use it correctly or did it just seem to be an inspirational idea at the time.
Everything, you say is currently true, the tax payer forks out for it at the moment, what I'm saying is, fork out much less.
_________________
Every man dies, not every man really lives.
Alba gu brąth! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
