In Hackney, 45% of households are social housing tenants, 40% in Tower Hamlets and 33% in Camden. This means generally to live in Inner London you either have to be incredibly rich or ultra poor, and a squeezed middle class is finding it increasingly hard to afford to live in Inner London. Seeing that there is a lack of space do you think only providing social housing to those in vital public sector jobs and not to those who are unemployed is an option. And the relocation of social tenants from Inner London to Outer London or other urban centres in London's Urban Belt.
I think it would be better to build more in outer London, especially now with the better transport links.
But surely, it would be cheaper and more efficient to make use of property already available in Inner London. Middle class professionals will provide more council tax, will cost the London councils less money as they do not require money to pay for their social housing which is particularly useful seeing that the budgets of our councils are currently being squeezed to their last dropped.
What a terrible idea - essentially entirely pave a 50mile circle in south-east England! And then what, once we run out of room there? Start building on greenbelt outside the M25, until all the home counties and similarly paved?
No. We need to make much better use of brownfield sites, and stop building silly £10m+ luxury flats for the Chinese investment market and start building some affordable homes for our own people.
What a terrible idea - essentially entirely pave a 50mile circle in south-east England! And then what, once we run out of room there? Start building on greenbelt outside the M25, until all the home counties and similarly paved?
No. We need to make much better use of brownfield sites, and stop building silly £10m+ luxury flats for the Chinese investment market and start building some affordable homes for our own people.
1.2% of the land in the country is used for housing we use more than double that for golf courses.
An affordable roof over a families head is far more important and most of that land wouldn't have a house on it either, there's gardens, parks, playing fields etc
A garden is far more biodiverse than a field under the plow
Moving really isn't that simple. Especially when you've got children or a job.
It's not that complicated. I'd say that the overwhelming majority of people who move house have at least one of children or a job, and they manage to accomplish it without too much difficulty.
It's not that complicated. I'd say that the overwhelming majority of people who move house have at least one of children or a job, and they manage to accomplish it without too much difficulty.
I do too. But most people I know (such as the last time my parents moved) only moved a few streets away. Whereas it doesn't seem to be suggested in this thread that people only move a few streets away.
I do too. But most people I know (such as the last time my parents moved) only moved a few streets away. Whereas it doesn't seem to be suggested in this thread that people only move a few streets away.
As the median distance moved is 9 miles, it could said that most people moved 8 or more miles.
There should be some restriction in Inner London on people owning properties that are hardly ever lived in. This could help reduce property prices or the level of price growth.
There should be some restriction in Inner London on people owning properties that are hardly ever lived in. This could help reduce property prices or the level of price growth.
The problem isn't so much the London pied-a-terre but the investment property kept purely as a store of wealth and not let out for rental income. The pied-a-terre is usually used by people who contribute heavily to the economy, either being used for business or (expensive) recreation.
I have long felt that the London property market is so exceptional that we should have a separate property tax regime for London.
In Hackney, 45% of households are social housing tenants, 40% in Tower Hamlets and 33% in Camden. This means generally to live in Inner London you either have to be incredibly rich or ultra poor, and a squeezed middle class is finding it increasingly hard to afford to live in Inner London. Seeing that there is a lack of space do you think only providing social housing to those in vital public sector jobs and not to those who are unemployed is an option. And the relocation of social tenants from Inner London to Outer London or other urban centres in London's Urban Belt.
There should be a good mix of social housing and middle class housing in Inner London to prevent ghettoisation and to provide convenience with a shopping centre, tube station, etc.
In Hackney, 45% of households are social housing tenants, 40% in Tower Hamlets and 33% in Camden. This means generally to live in Inner London you either have to be incredibly rich or ultra poor, and a squeezed middle class is finding it increasingly hard to afford to live in Inner London. Seeing that there is a lack of space do you think only providing social housing to those in vital public sector jobs and not to those who are unemployed is an option. And the relocation of social tenants from Inner London to Outer London or other urban centres in London's Urban Belt.
Yes to social housing. Thats what it was created for to be used for those in need. Yes to those people who live there and have a local connection. No to social cleansing.and dumping people onto other authorities. More control over investment only properties More encouragement to spreading business over the country. London distorts the whole economy.
Yes to social housing. Thats what it was created for to be used for those in need. Yes to those people who live there and have a local connection. No to social cleansing.and dumping people onto other authorities. More control over investment only properties More encouragement to spreading business over the country. London distorts the whole economy.
Social cleansing is not just an Inner London issue. Tory Barnet Council try it too
No, especially if they are in need and have a local connection to the area. Social housing was built to cater for the most vulnerable. Even if you force people to move to make way for you, then there are still plenty of other people on the waiting list.