A house or a home?

We are in the midst of a Crisis like we have never seen before. There is a gap between those who own homes and those who do not. Those who own homes are able to secure loans on those houses, have a retirement fund and may one day be able to help their own children get onto the housing ladder. Those who rent are priced out of the housing market, forced to use pay day loan sharks or; and pay far more money every month to live in their home than those who own.

Is there a Crisis:

1) Home ownership has fallen for the first time since the census began:



2) Many of the people on the housing ladder did so by taking out risky mortgage loans that stretched them to their financial limit. Now that the economy is struggling, people are finding it harder to meet their monthly repayments, often with dire consequences: 28,900 Homes where repossessed across the UK in 2013



3) How we live is changing. In England, nine million people now rent privately.
It’s not just students and young professionals anymore: more than a third of renting households are families with children, and half are older than 35.
With home ownership out of reach and social housing waiting lists ever-growing, private renting has become the only choice for millions of families. But with soaring costs, poor conditions and a lack of stability, renting has fast become the worst of all worlds.













Since 2001, the proportion of homes rented privately has rocketed by 69%. But this surge in demand hasn’t been supported by the necessary changes to make renting safe, stable and affordable.

• Over a third of private rented homes fail to meet the Decent Homes Standard.
• Rents are likely to rise by 20% in the next two years to 2016 making average rent in London £1,800 per month, On that basis, you will need an income of £4,500 a month after tax - which works out meaning you would need to earn £80,000 a year to rent.
• There were more than 85,000 about rogue landlords in 2012 around 27% increase; of those complaints, 62% were about serious and life-threatening hazards and there was a 77% increase in successful prosecutions

As the demand for rented accommodation grows, many people are priced out of decent homes and forced to accept properties in terrible conditions – just to keep a roof over their heads. Making private renting better is crucial to ensure everyone has a safe and affordable home to live in.






 4) Homelessness is rising. The number of homeless households are rising by more than 50,000 a year.

Households found to be homeless, by region

Region	Number of Households 2012/13	Number of Households 2011/12	% change since 2011/12
East Midlands	4,974	5,540	-10%
East of England	7,410	7,270	2%
London	22,279	18,660	19%
North East	3,351	3,290	2%
North West	7,908	7,960	-1%
South East	9,054	8,350	8%
South West	5,004	5,180	-3%
West Midlands	12,395	12,830	-3%
Yorkshire and the Humber	9,056	8,900	2%
England	81,770	77,900	5%

Source: DCLG Homelessness Statistics

"But I don't see any homeless people near me", I hear many people say

 

 If you still think there is no housing crisis; then you really need to wake up and smell the rotting stench of the carcass of  your own common sense in the presence of the facts...

What can we do?

Build more homes;  At the moment, as a country we are building around 100,000 homes a year. But to solve the housing shortage we should be building 250,000 homes a year. These seem like big numbers, but a failure to reach it will mean rents and house prices will just keep on rising. The government needs to invest more money into house building to get the ball rolling. Not only will this help us to deliver more homes, but every £1 invested in house-building leads to £3.51 going back into the economy.

 

How many homes did Boris Johnson build 16,800... pitiful. The Mayors own research shows he needs to build 62,000 homes a year; he set HIMSELF a target of 42,000 he's not even close to that. Why is he so far from meeting his target? Why is a Tory government again selling off desperately needed council homes?

Here's the answer they don't want you to hear:

Simply put. The Tories don't want to build more homes. It goes against all there interests to build more homes. The Tories have a core vote; that core vote is the elderly, who tend to own their own homes? The elderly; who are more likely to be landlords? The elderly. Who is most likely to have the finds to buy property as an investment? The elderly. 

By increasing house building to 200,000 a year the housing market would not be overcrowded. House prices would therefore fall due to more being on the market. This would be great news for those without houses who would get cheaper rent and mighty even (god forbid be able to buy a house). For those with a house it would lower the value of their house creating negative equity, which actually isn't a problem if you buy a home to live in; it's only a problem if it was bought as an investment. But it would cause outrage mostly in those who buy to let; in other words mostly the elderly; who are the Tories core vote.

To Sum up to build more houses would lose the Tories a massive amount of supporters and logically votes; something they just will not risk. Add to that the fact that politicians are almost exclusively home owners and landlords and therefore would not want the value of there own  properties to fall... and you can see why they will absolutely not increase house building.

 

We need to decide as a country if homes should be an investment or somewhere to live? I for what it is worth, I believe we need homes for people to live in; and if those using them to make a quick buck lose out  in the battle to help the homeless get a roof over their head so be it...

When I grow up I am going to destroy London

Thanks to the Tory government country wide; Full-time equivalent (FTE) police officers in the 43 forces stood at 134,101 at the end of March - a fall of 5,009 officers (3.6%) compared to a year earlier.

In London Boris Johnson admitted he had broken an election pledge. Officer numbers were on the up when Boris took over in 2008, thanks to the last budget set by Boris’s predecessor Ken Livingstone. There were as many as 33,404 in November 2009,  but then the numbers began to fall.

So even if Boris had hit his target of 32,398 officers on the books in May 2012, that would still mean that he had cut more than 1,000 from that high point  30 months earlier.
Boris said  “Making our streets and homes safer with 1,000 more police on the beat.” during the mayoral election.

In other words Boris is a LIAR





As well as Andrew Mitchell, George Osborne also let the Tory 'we are all in this together' mask slip yesterday after refusing to move from first class to a second hand carriage and sit with the 'plebs' who voted him into office; his aide also initially refused to pay for an upgrade. A clear example of, "one rule for him, and one rule for the rest of us". I know if it were a 'pleb' like me, I would be prosecuted for fair evasion. I have seen this happen on trains, on a couple of occasions.

Mr. Osborne said "We are all in this together". In other words Mr. Osborne is a LIAR

We are all in this together; Pull the other one

Here's why George Osborne's 2012 Party conference speech is full of holes and untruths; Mr. Osborne says:

1) "There are one million more private sector jobs"

Is this true? I wonder what the real numbers are...?

It's true there are 1,070,000 more people in private-sector jobs than there were before the election.

However, 209,000 of these consist of further-education and 6th-form employees formerly classified as public-sector, newly classified as private sector: a sleight of hand even Mr Houdini would have envied.

That leaves us with 861,000. Except we can break this down further.

Over the exact same period, the UK LOST 628,000 public-sector jobs - quite apart from the transfer mentioned above. That leaves 233,000 jobs. Far cry from Mr Osborne's "1 million", isn't it?

It gets worse! Since July 2010 the UK has gained 165,000 part-time jobs - and lost 85,000 full-time jobs.

So the question is; what kinds of jobs are have been created?- full-time, living-wage positions - that people need, or  'Make do' low paid, part-time Jobs? I think the figures speak for themselves.

The employers laugh all the way to the bank, created lots of cost efficient, money saving part-time positions, whilst the low paid are forced to suffer whilst taking part time, low paid jobs.

 

2) "we're all in this together" - " That everyone was going to have to play their part"

Lets look at he figures estimated for 2012 by the 'Institute for Fiscal Studies':

Under Mr Osborne in the year 2012-13 Those with an annual income of :

£15,600 will lose an average of £44.75 per year.
£18,200 will be worse off by £36 per year.
£45,300 will get £98 more
£76,100 will gain around £105

The IFS calculates that those in the bottom 10% of earners will see their annual incomes decline by £168 in 2012-13.
Those in the second to last 10% of earners will see their incomes go down by £265.

The incomes of the top 10% of earners will decline by £300 and those of the second-highest 10 per cent will fall by £102.

Although similar in cash terms to the sums lost by those at the bottom end of the income distribution, these losses represent a much smaller share of the total incomes of the wealthy.

In layman's terms; for the bottom 10% Losing £265 means not being able to afford food or heating. For the top 10% losing £300 is not buying an extra bottle of champagne.

So clearly we are not in this 'all together!

3)"That the cost of paying our debts cannot possibly be borne by one section of society alone."

Correct Mr. Osborne, the poor cannot bare the cost of the recession alone, time for the rich to pay there fair share?

4)"Each one of my Budgets has increased taxes overall on the very richest." - "And we've achieved that while getting rid of a cripplingly uncompetitive 50p rate that raised no money and cost jobs."

A lie that the rich are worse off; see earlier comment under  "we're all in this together" - " That everyone was going to have to play their part". 

Osborne has increased taxes on the rich, yet in the same sentence he mentions reducing tax for the richest by 5% from 50p to 45p. The man makes a statement and then proves it is untrue himself and all in one sentence!

5)"But just as we should never balance the budget on the backs of the poor;

So it's an economic delusion to think you can balance it only on the wallets of the rich."

He clearly is balancing the budget on the backs of the poor. Notice how Osborne never says how he will tax the rich; but he is very, very certain about how he will hit the poorest. He is clear about massive wealfare cuts to the poorest in society yet he is against:

Raising Income taxes for the top earners.
Raising capital gains taxes on the wealthy.
Implementing a mansion tax on the super wealthy.
Implementing wealth taxes in general on the rich.

So how exactly are the rich paying their fair share?

6) "That's why I insisted on a cap on benefits, so no family can earn more out of work than the average family earns in work."

Average wage: £503.85 per week before tax.
Job seekers allowance: £71 per week before tax.

Is George giving the unemployed a raise? He clearly has no idea what he is talking about.

7)"Where is the fairness, we ask, for the shift-worker, leaving home in the dark hours of the early morning, who looks up at the closed blinds of their next door neighbour sleeping off a life on benefits."

Most unemployed people DREAM of having that shift workers job. The governments own figures for benefit fraud show that 0.5% of claimants are stealing from the state. Less than 1 in 100... The idea that a huge sway of people on benefits are cheats is a MYTH!

Attack and abuse on disabled people has risen by 75% under Mr. Osborne; he should be ashamed of perpetrating such vicious lies.

8)"We leave it to other parties to mark people by their background, to divide, to try to re-order and pre-distribute society by the rules of their favourite sociology textbook."

I put to you Mr. Osborne that is EXACTLY what you are doing.

9)"As I have said, the broadest shoulders will continue to bear the greatest burden."

This is simply not true see "we are all in this together"

10)"It would be sold as a Mansion Tax. But once the tax inspector had his foot in the door you'd soon find most homes in the country labelled a 'mansion'."

Another myth. Most homes in the country would be hit by a mansion tax? The Libdems proposal is that people would start paying a mansion tax at £2million.  This means Mr. Osborne must believe most homes in the country are worth £2million or more... Really is he THAT out of touch?  

11) "You the employee: replace your old rights of unfair dismissal and redundancy with new rights of ownership."

Another shameless attack on employees rights. Be very careful before you allow your employer the right to sack you if they don't like the colour of your hair; and then give you absolutely nothing in your redundancy package, in exchange for a few measly shares.

The Lib Dems blocked the governments previous attempt to allow employers to fire employees at work; so good old George tries to push it through again via the back door.

 12)"And when we fine those bankers involved in scandals like LIBOR"

Fine... FINE; If I stole billions from my boss I would be fired and face years in jail, not so for the bankers. Just a slap on the wrist; a fine for the banker who being worth millions will not feel it at all, not even slightly... Pathetic.

13)"We're not going to get through this as a country if we set one group against another, if we divide, denounce and demonise."

Then stop denouncing and demonising the poor and those on benefits. Stop dividing the country between the rich and the poor, the haves and the have nots, the home owners and those who cannot afford there own homes. This is what Osborne is doing whilst in government; creating more and more resentment between the wealthy and the poorest in society. Such actions can only lead to anger, hate and suffering for all concerned. Way to go George, if you really care about the UK resign and do it now.

 

Lessons from history we just have not learnt

"Prices and profits grow but wages lag behind."

"The rich get richer whilst the poor grow poorer."

"Trade unions are determined to protect their members and there are many strikes."

"Around 2.8 million people are unemployed."

"There is a reduction in government revenue (money flowing into the Treasury from taxation). This has been caused partly by the general falling-off of business during the recession and partly by the enormous expense of unemployment benefits."

"There are drastic cuts made by government,  involving reduced spending on the army, navy, education, health services, and council house building."

"It is minority government lacking overall majority, and dependent on liberal votes to stay in office. They therefore have to pursue moderate polices.

There was a march from Jarrow to London of young unemployed."


Interesting statements?  Very current huh... Well no

All of theses statements were taken from a history book I own(I have only changed the statements from past tense to current).  These are all statements about the UK in the 1930's, after the great depression and just before the second world war. An economic crisis had hit the world, and it was partly responsible for instability and war. Here's the frightening bit want to glimpse the future? This is directly lifted form the book as well:

"Without the economic crisis though, it is doubtful if Hitler would have had much chance of attaining power; it was the widespread unemployment and social misery which gained the Nazis mass support, not only among the working classes but also among the lower-middle classes - office workers, shopkeepers, civil servants, teachers and small-scale farmers"

also:

"Why was Mussolini able to come to power: The government had borrowed heavily and debt's had to be repaid, so the currency declined in value affecting the cost of living and massive unemployment (Euro Crisis anyone?) and growing contempt for the liberal parliamentary system"

 

So how can we stop the rise of some other 'Hitler' or 'Mussolini' from taking place? From the same history book:

"But the government partially defeated its own ends by continually warning local authorities to economise, revealing that it only imperfectly understood the workings of economics."

There is no UK PLC, the UK is a country and not a company, and a country needs stimulation and it needs it now. If the country is to grow and become strong once more we need a Plan B, a plan to encourage growth, create jobs and regulation to end the reckless casino gambling that banks still partake in to stop a repeat of the 2008 recession. 

We need that plan B before its too late. I just hope its not too late already...