The New Deal (UK version)

[JohnL]

It's either a huge investment commensurate with Franklin Rhoosevelt (if you believe Boris) or it's not much in comparison to total spend and has been double announced (if you believe Kier). Ian Blackford said Scotland gets nothing.

We are also losing EU investment in the very communities this is happening so I'm not sure how those to levels of investment compare.

[SpringTime]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-a-new-deal-for-britain

There's actually loads of good stuff in here (even some "shovel-ready" stuff whatever that means... we've had already the oven, now it's the shovel) but even so it's just nowhere near enough cash. Not saying the government should be a tap of liquid money or anything, but it's just not enough money at all.

Sadly some people will be impressed with the figures but spread this around for a few seconds and it's peanuts.

On the other side, it's better than nothing.

[Blah Blah]

Yes, it is smoke and mirrors, to enable Boris to sound like he is delivering on manifesto pledges, when in reality he is not. Most of the investment is staggered over 12 years too, so it waters down pretty fast. And nowhere in any of that is a pledge to maintain what formerly were EU grants to the poorest regions (worth around ?4bn a year). In addition, most of the investment is set up to directly benefit government cronies who will profit from the contracts. Housing especially is worth scrutinising. No effort to address the real issue of affordability. Once again, setting up the market for yet more homes for sale at market prices. When are we going to have a government that builds the homes we actually need, over investment opportunities for the private sector.

[Effra]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>When are we going to have a government

> that builds the homes we actually need, over

> investment opportunities for the private sector.

@BB

Really admire your posts on Covid and your analytical ability on related issues but I think you have blown it here.

Tell me of a government that builds homes for its population.

It is possible if you want to live in a 1945 type prefab. They were really good and some still exist after 75 years. These would be really affordable, depending on the cost of acquiring the land.

Would you be happy with that?

Nowadays, building regs and health and welfare issues would not permit that approach. Would you abolish all these controls?

For government to spend money on building homes, it would have to borrow it. But just like using a credit card, govt has to pay it back. Where do they get the money to pay it back?

They get it from taxes. Do you want higher taxes or do you want your children and grand children to pay it back, with interest on top?

[johnie]

I'd support higher taxes for me, and I've paid close on 50k taxes last year. Having said that I would prefer a muchmuch higher proportion went locally.

[Blah Blah]

Effra Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blah Blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >When are we going to have a government

> > that builds the homes we actually need, over

> > investment opportunities for the private

> sector.

> They get it from taxes. Do you want higher taxes

> or do you want your children and grand children to

> pay it back, with interest on top?

Yes I would support higher taxes so that families don't have to live in a single room in bed and breakfast. I would pay higher taxes so that people don't have to burn to death in tower blocks clad with unsafe materials (so much for the building regs you cite btw).

There have (I believe) been three meaningful waves of social and council home building that all addressed housing crisis at the time. In the 70's, most households lived in council housing, until they could afford to buy. We have become too reliant on a private rental sector that makes saving a deposit impossible for most working people. There should be a balance and government can deliver that with the right investment and regulation. We have had it that way before after all.

[SpringTime]

I'm also for higher taxes. Stuck with me for the better part of 30 years when a teacher told me "this country needs the f****** sh** taxed out of it" - sounded extreme at the time but keeps making more and more sense. Happy to be schooled by anyone in the know but as I remember things the French were taxed proper from the early 1980s and look at the difference now between France and the UK. It's embarrassing. There's so much scorn for public services here, and at the same time some people seem to want Scandinavian levels of provision on US levels of tax. Doesn't work, sorry.

[JohnL]

There's rumours Boris is up for scrapping building 'red tape'

?In 2018 we built 2.25 homes per 1,000 people, Germany managed 3.6, the Netherlands 3.8, France 6.8. Time is money, and the newt-counting delays in our system are a massive drag on the productivity and the prosperity of this country.?

https://inews.co.uk/news/analysis/boris-johnson-analysis-housing-crisis-newt-counting-red-tape-explained-459536

He has angered the Newt lovers though

[Blah Blah]

SpringTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm also for higher taxes. Stuck with me for the

> better part of 30 years when a teacher told me

> "this country needs the f****** sh** taxed out of

> it" - sounded extreme at the time but keeps making

> more and more sense. Happy to be schooled by

> anyone in the know but as I remember things the

> French were taxed proper from the early 1980s and

> look at the difference now between France and the

> UK. It's embarrassing. There's so much scorn for

> public services here, and at the same time some

> people seem to want Scandinavian levels of

> provision on US levels of tax. Doesn't work,

> sorry.

An even better comparison is with the Nordic countries. Sweden has very high tax but Finland has an income tax rate that comes in at about 32%. It has the lowest tax gap in Europe (people actually pay more tax than they need to) and its standard of living is much better for everyone. It also has much better unemployment support and has eradicated homelessness. It can be done.