Not me, or anyone I know, you need to find some new friends, or maybe just avoid Twitter That old Virtue-Signalling chestnut? No one can say anything nice then?
It is interesting, I don't have time to read it in detail today did check this:- There's a claim in the article " In London, as the Conservative Home blog notes, there is a terrible housing crisis “even though its population is roughly the same as it was 70 years ago”, when the city was still extensively bomb-damaged by the second world war. The numbers: 1954 - 8,294,000 and in 2024 9,748,000. I wouldn't call that roughly the same also not surprised that the blog got it wrong, mistakenly I'm sure
The argument is that it is caused by too many people owning multiple properties for renting which if changed like in the seventies would free up housing. Letting developers trash the environment and control supply is not going to benefit society.
Reading a bit more of the article I found this interesting. "Conservatives in the 1970s merely sought to retain a handful of petty landlords, who ought to be entitled to a “fair return” if they let out a spare room or two, but they recognised that private renting tends to be an expensive, poor-quality and economically wasteful way of accommodating the population. The near-death of landlordism was one of the good news stories of the last century. But the task that Thatcher and her successors set themselves was to undo that progress. The present system was designed, as the supreme court noted in a tenant’s 2016 human rights challenge, to ensure that “the letting of private property will again become an economic proposition”. It should have been obvious to everyone that a market that had achieved such positive effects by its collapse would produce equal and opposite consequences as it was reinflated. We now find ourselves in a situation where one in every 21 adults in the UK is a landlord. We have four times as many landlords as teachers. As a consequence, virtually everyone struggles to afford a home that meets their needs despite a net gain in housing stock. Landlords are entitled to ask for whatever rent they think they can get, and insecure contracts drive a coach and horses through the concept of tenants’ rights. This is the market that Leigh, landlords and developers want to “free up”. Instead of confronting the horror of our situation and its causes, they pretend that there is an extraordinary shortage of homes. This is simply untrue, as the international and historical data shows." And this, the final paragraph. It appears that Homes Under The Hammer has a lot to answer for. "Where Adam Smith and Karl Marx found common ground was in the idea that everyone’s interests are aligned against landlords: they are an economic deadweight. Even if we leave aside the appalling conditions and precarity that private renters face, anyone with an interest in lower taxes, lower wage bills and increasing the number of first-time buyers must equally be interested in smashing the private rented sector to bits. Homebuyers are now forced to compete with landlords, who chase sensational yields in our unregulated rental market, and £85.6bn a year (which comes, of course, from wages and taxes) is wasted on rent. A renewed collapse of landlordism would represent not just the tenants’ revenge for the housing crisis, but a much broader and more valuable moment of social progress."
Its quite apparent that you value your viewpoint as the correct and most viable option. You haven't really offered anything other than the often trotted out tropes of burn the house down and start again. Evolution, not revolution would be the most viable way to structurally change things for the better. Revolutionary changes often have unconsidered consequences. As I understand from your previous reponses, you have a very high quality of life and can afford some transitionary turmoil, like many with your viewpoint on here.. That is not something most people have the benefit of.
Of course I stand by my long held convictions of the need for reform, nothing you've posted does anything to change that. Exactly what turmoil do you envisage? There's all you need to know about PR on the ERS website. I believe that a refined STV wouldn't do anything but improve voter representation. You make unfounded assumptions about my circumstances in order to attempt to denigrate my views. That detracts from your argument. I'm a retired overseas voter living in the Netherlands you may well know that. I expect you're aware of the change in mayoral elections to FPTP from PR? Have a read of this https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk...ections-means-less-choice-and-a-weaker-voice/ . In my view, along with voter ID to combat non existing voter fraud, it's tory gerrymandering. Enjoying the rest Easter. I think we're finished with this one here.
I am also in favour of proportional representation. I fully understand you point, @EasyBreezer, but stability is a double-edged sword. Our stability is built on a two-party state offering very little political choice to the electorate. It has also fostered an aggressive adversarial system. We could do with a change to consensus politics. Several parties sharing power is the ideal - if you can get genuine cooperation from them. We need a little idealism in politics. The current set up is so depressingly broken.
I have been reading that their shareholders are prepared to re-invest in Thames Water, BUT ONLY IF THEY CAN INCREASE CUSTOMER BILLS BY 40%. I say **** them, renationalise and then launch hard hitting tax investigations into the major parties involved. The most recent government figures show that the “tax gap”, the difference between what is owed and what is paid, stood at £35.8 billion in 2021/22. Tax avoidance is costing all countries so much money but because the rules are invariably made by rich people, or people who want to cosy up to them, I doubt if things will change much. But if you are accidentally overpaid a benefit then they come for you with everything they’ve got, recouping the money at rates that push the benefit claimer into serious risk of debt, even when it’s their mistake that caused the problem. We live in a sick society.
I'm a 2 out of 10 socialist as "I hate Trump" and "Hate Brexit." As for number 3, it is not being Pro-Palestinian to be critical of what Israel is doing to Gaza.Even the great Chomsky is very scathing in what Israel is doing to Gaza. Regarding number 7, isn't it right to question what went on during all the days of Empire, don't you think? I think everyone on here right across the board respects Remembrance Sunday. As for the Monarch and flags, I am indifferent to both.
I have ignored this until now as I am convinced you are on the wind-up, but I do believe your opening gambit of “posted without any sense of irony” is intended as a warning of what is to come rather than a comment on the quoted post. You have taken all socialist viewpoints and reduced them to a few hackneyed stereotypes in an attempt to prove all socialists are not worth listening to, and then you end with point 10: an attack on people who ‘don’t tolerate an opposite view’. This is a masterwork in irony - highlighted from the first line and carried through with the angry fervour only reserved for truly great satire. Bravo, sir! Bravo!
Turmoil regarding a transition to an elected upper chamber, which is where we started. As I've said the whole time FPTP has many issues and I'm not defending it. I just don't believe any other electoral system is some kind of magic bullet that is immune from it's own, differing issues. Mayoral elections are very different from GEs... Again, like the Netherlands, PR will routinely return more extreme politicians which I think will be problematic when compared to the rather moderate state of British politics. That alone I see as extremely problematic in this increasingly polarised world.
I think the turmoil you expect would be far less and possibly tempered by transitioning over time. That the HoL needs reform is in no doubt in my mind. A limit on numbers certainly needed, the honours system should be abolished it's been abused for as long as the place has existed I'm not advocating the Dutch electoral system. There's been some extreme politicians elected in the last GE here none of their policies get anywhere near being enacted. Please see the ERS description of Single Transferable and Supplementary voting systems compared to FPTP.
"incessantly harp on about them" You're right it is tiring reading the same old stuff day after day. Except when you're a part of it, then it's interesting debate. These people should be made to post what every other c..t and their dog thinks is interesting on here.
