I don't think you got the memo on this one, Lola, old chap. "Making homes more affordable" is an alchemical process similar to the creating the philosopher's stone whereby houses become cheaper to buy, but the value of houses not for sale remains completely unchanged, except to increase, if at all possible. Like making the philosopher's stone, there are rules about doing this, the first step is always to build all over any bit of unbuilt-up land anywhere near any centre of population. Simply leaving the EU isn't in the rule book and is not going to work.
L, their projections suffer from spurious accuracy, just like their projections of likely GDP in 2030.
I wish it were true and it's another reason to vote for Brexit, but it's not true, the likes of Osbrown will just do more Help To Buy to keep prices up.
B, although, re-reading your comment, you make one mistake.
"build all over any bit of unbuilt-up land anywhere near any centre of population."
True, but similarly, they may not be built on 'the hallowed greenbelt' or 'areas of natural beauty' (which is any non-developed land not already included in 'the hallowed greenbelt'), which narrows down available space to… er…
8 comments:
"Making homes more affordable."
I don't think you got the memo on this one, Lola, old chap. "Making homes more affordable" is an alchemical process similar to the creating the philosopher's stone whereby houses become cheaper to buy, but the value of houses not for sale remains completely unchanged, except to increase, if at all possible. Like making the philosopher's stone, there are rules about doing this, the first step is always to build all over any bit of unbuilt-up land anywhere near any centre of population. Simply leaving the EU isn't in the rule book and is not going to work.
L, their projections suffer from spurious accuracy, just like their projections of likely GDP in 2030.
I wish it were true and it's another reason to vote for Brexit, but it's not true, the likes of Osbrown will just do more Help To Buy to keep prices up.
B, yes.
B.sorry. I must try and keep up.
M. Yes. That 91BN claimed by the is just a made up number.
B, although, re-reading your comment, you make one mistake.
"build all over any bit of unbuilt-up land anywhere near any centre of population."
True, but similarly, they may not be built on 'the hallowed greenbelt' or 'areas of natural beauty' (which is any non-developed land not already included in 'the hallowed greenbelt'), which narrows down available space to… er…
"which narrows down available space to… er…"
the land already owned by the landbankers. Kerching! as they say in Private Eye.
I think the modern reply is "and that's a problem because...?" (works better in real life when you can raise your tone at the end)
Post a Comment