I think I shall have to call this one a score-draw after extra-time. After one week and 114 votes, there are 57 "Yes" and 57 "No" responses to the question "Would you vote for a party which has the manifesto aim of making house prices affordable again?"
As to how I would do it, that's quite simple - I'd go back to what we were doing until 1963. Tried and tested. Can't fail.
More to the point, most of the major parties have policies which would tend to prop up house prices, as they think that most voters see high and rising house prices as an unalloyed good. But the "Yes" vote is being split three or four ways. If one party had the nerve to swim against the tide, it would probably be able to garner most of the "No" vote for itself, so would tend to romp home in elections. Ah well.
-------------------------------------------------
On a more light-hearted note, do you like UKIP's new slogan 'Sod the lot' which will (hopefully) appear on billboards round the country in the next few weeks (see top of this sidebar)?
Vote here or use the widget in the sidebar.
A small change of theme
3 hours ago
9 comments:
"Would you vote for a party which has the manifesto aim of making house prices affordable again?"
I suspect those who mostly voted yes where not home owners as I believe home owners would fight tooth and nail to maintain price at least but preferably keep house prices rising.
The main reason house prices keep accelerating upwards is because of land values, government policy has been geared to encourage land speculation.
The cost of housing continually fuels a bubble which like all bubbles ultimately burst. We have the effects of such a burst all around us today with our economic woes.
Keeping house prices affordable would go a long way in avoiding boom and bust. Labour has no incentive to do this as it is the only way that they can keep the populace happy (inflating people out of debt, keeping the buy now pay later culture going)while pursuing their socialist ideology.
I'd have preferred "Sod the lot and Hang Blair".
Sod the whole f---ing lot and hang Blair and Brown?
A, "Keeping house prices affordable would go a long way in avoiding boom and bust." Exactly. That's advantage of land value taxation number 27.
D, JH, slogans like that are probably illegal for incitement or something.
MW, I must admit I did not understand your stance on land value taxation, so I did a little research of my own and am now in complete agreement with you on this it has many virtues.
I think that house prices have to stay artificially propped up now, using my tax money of course, to prevent a catastrophic economic collapse, so no party can do anything about it even if they wanted to, so the question is irrelevant to me.
However, thanks for your continued attention to this area which, being somebody permanently priced out of the market, is of significant interest to me.
A, ta.
TM, why do house prices have to stay propped up? That's like saying that the US government should have bailed out Madoff.
PS, don't worry about the banks, they can be fixed via debt-for-equity swaps, the cash machines will NOT suddenly run out of (your own) money.
I voted yes even though I am a home owner. This is my last house before I toddle off to Incontinence Acres so I thought it fair to let others have a shot at buying a house.
I have always been disgusted with the price of bricks and mortar.
Anyway, you don't actually buy a house, do you? You just bribe the present occupiers enough to vacate.
CR.
CR, thanks.
"... you don't actually buy a house, do you? You just bribe the present occupiers enough to vacate." Music to my ears :-)
Post a Comment