FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > When your stupid idea actually turn out to be a stupid idea
When your stupid idea actually turn out to be a stupid idea
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"Interesting that the article didn’t talk to any locals who are struggling to find a place to live in the area. If you write an article where you only talk to people who have a second home or they are selling services that specifically target those people then of course it is going to sound bad. Personally I think higher tax on second homes and places run for airbnb is a good thing. The housing stock has got out of balance in too many of these “idyllic” places and the lives of the locals are being ignored." It did mention locals when it said that the wages in the area are low, so most cannot afford to buy the houses anyway. | |||
"Interesting that the article didn’t talk to any locals who are struggling to find a place to live in the area. If you write an article where you only talk to people who have a second home or they are selling services that specifically target those people then of course it is going to sound bad. Personally I think higher tax on second homes and places run for airbnb is a good thing. The housing stock has got out of balance in too many of these “idyllic” places and the lives of the locals are being ignored." But those who already own a home or a business or have a job financed through the holiday let market have another view! The actual solution nobody seems to want to tackle is…build more council homes | |||
"Interesting that the article didn’t talk to any locals who are struggling to find a place to live in the area. If you write an article where you only talk to people who have a second home or they are selling services that specifically target those people then of course it is going to sound bad. Personally I think higher tax on second homes and places run for airbnb is a good thing. The housing stock has got out of balance in too many of these “idyllic” places and the lives of the locals are being ignored. It did mention locals when it said that the wages in the area are low, so most cannot afford to buy the houses anyway." Of course they can’t afford it. The prices have been bid up by people with the money. There are no long term jobs in the area because all that is focussed on is tourism which is incredibly seasonal. That’s the whole point - their local economy is highly distorted. | |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310 "Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families. Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned. | |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310
Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families.
Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned."That is a good point and of course you can look at it from both sides. But where are the jobs coming from? If house prices drop, the local people still need jobs to buy the cheaper houses. If the jobs in the area are mostly linked to seasonal tourist trade, then what? I say build more council houses! | |||
| |||
| |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310
Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families.
Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned.
That is a good point and of course you can look at it from both sides.
But where are the jobs coming from? If house prices drop, the local people still need jobs to buy the cheaper houses. If the jobs in the area are mostly linked to seasonal tourist trade, then what?
I say build more council houses!"I'd go further and remove the council tax exemption for second homes which are for sale. This would achieve the aims of reducing prices more quickly. As for jobs, I would like to live in Wales as that's where my family are from (and I speak the language) but I can't afford it. As such, we will have to emigrate. As a knowledge worker I can work from anywhere with a good Internet connection. Increase remote knowledge work to provide jobs. Going into an office is never necessary. | |||
"Evil second home buyers… 1) Push up prices of homes making home owners already living in the village asset richer. 2) Spend money with local trades doing up the property. 3) If rent out then bring tourists and their money into local area. 4) Spend their own money in local shops and restaurants when they visit. 5) For the privilege get whacked by CGT if they sell and much higher council tax despite. Bastards! Build more council homes then have best of both worlds!" Most of the above jobs are low quality hospitality and tourism posts. The economy needs to be moved away from this to be more diverse and better paid. Knowledge workers never need to go into an office so can work from anywhere. Full fibre gigabit broadband to every property should be the aim. | |||
| |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310
Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families.
Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned.
That is a good point and of course you can look at it from both sides.
But where are the jobs coming from? If house prices drop, the local people still need jobs to buy the cheaper houses. If the jobs in the area are mostly linked to seasonal tourist trade, then what?
I say build more council houses!
I'd go further and remove the council tax exemption for second homes which are for sale. This would achieve the aims of reducing prices more quickly.
As for jobs, I would like to live in Wales as that's where my family are from (and I speak the language) but I can't afford it. As such, we will have to emigrate.
As a knowledge worker I can work from anywhere with a good Internet connection. Increase remote knowledge work to provide jobs. Going into an office is never necessary."100% this. The remoter parts of this country need to use their beauty to attract workers like this who will be in the locality _all_ the time rather than transient tourists/second homers. The local environment is a huge asset for these areas but they have been “selling” it to the wrong type of customer. Technology means the local authorities can monetise it in different ways to different people. Building council houses does nothing to alter the business conditions of the local economy. | |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310
Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families.
Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned.
That is a good point and of course you can look at it from both sides.
But where are the jobs coming from? If house prices drop, the local people still need jobs to buy the cheaper houses. If the jobs in the area are mostly linked to seasonal tourist trade, then what?
I say build more council houses!
I'd go further and remove the council tax exemption for second homes which are for sale. This would achieve the aims of reducing prices more quickly.
As for jobs, I would like to live in Wales as that's where my family are from (and I speak the language) but I can't afford it. As such, we will have to emigrate.
As a knowledge worker I can work from anywhere with a good Internet connection. Increase remote knowledge work to provide jobs. Going into an office is never necessary."Yes build more council homes and ensure fast broadband in all communities  | |||
"Evil second home buyers… 1) Push up prices of homes making home owners already living in the village asset richer. 2) Spend money with local trades doing up the property. 3) If rent out then bring tourists and their money into local area. 4) Spend their own money in local shops and restaurants when they visit. 5) For the privilege get whacked by CGT if they sell and much higher council tax despite. Bastards! Build more council homes then have best of both worlds! Most of the above jobs are low quality hospitality and tourism posts. The economy needs to be moved away from this to be more diverse and better paid. Knowledge workers never need to go into an office so can work from anywhere. Full fibre gigabit broadband to every property should be the aim." Yes | |||
"and so many people said before it happened can now say: 'I told you so!' https://news.sky.com/story/council-tax-hike-on-second-homes-triggers-surge-in-sell-offs-and-mixed-emotions-13215310
Sorry? The whole policy is designed to deflate the housing market so there's more affordable housing for locals, and guess what? If people can affford to live there again they may even be able to afford to go to restaurants. Want to talk, as someone else does in this thread about the wider economy? People living there and brining up their families there has an economic impact too, with more teachers needed in schools and more services needed for families.
Seems to me the whole policy is proceeding as planned.
That is a good point and of course you can look at it from both sides.
But where are the jobs coming from? If house prices drop, the local people still need jobs to buy the cheaper houses. If the jobs in the area are mostly linked to seasonal tourist trade, then what?
I say build more council houses!
I'd go further and remove the council tax exemption for second homes which are for sale. This would achieve the aims of reducing prices more quickly.
As for jobs, I would like to live in Wales as that's where my family are from (and I speak the language) but I can't afford it. As such, we will have to emigrate.
As a knowledge worker I can work from anywhere with a good Internet connection. Increase remote knowledge work to provide jobs. Going into an office is never necessary.
100% this. The remoter parts of this country need to use their beauty to attract workers like this who will be in the locality _all_ the time rather than transient tourists/second homers. The local environment is a huge asset for these areas but they have been “selling” it to the wrong type of customer. Technology means the local authorities can monetise it in different ways to different people.
Building council houses does nothing to alter the business conditions of the local economy. "Disagree on last point. The rest agree in principle BUT… Anyone watching the media over past year or so will have seen that a lot of bigger companies, and public sector, are increasingly expecting a return to the office. That means, for many office type roles, that being commutable will remain an issue. It is a real shame IMO because many companies realised that WFH opened up lots of efficiencies both for the company and the worker. Sadly it seems too many companies are still wedded to their expensive commercial landlords, or don’t trust their staff (or employ good ones) to WFH! Since Covid I have staff across the whole of the UK. It has hugely widened the recruitment pool. Staff are happy and productive with a good work life balance. Just needs some good procedures in place and meeting etiquette etc. Saying that, if the idyllic village in Wales has super fast broadband installed and house prices were attractive you will see demand surge and prices start inflating again. So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know). | |||
" So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know)." 31,000 social housing homes were completed in 2023, after demolitions and right to buy, a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) How is Rayner going to build 300,000 in five years. | |||
" So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know). 31,000 social housing homes were completed in 2023, after demolitions and right to buy, a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) How is Rayner going to build 300,000 in five years. " Lego? | |||
" So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know). 31,000 social housing homes were completed in 2023, after demolitions and right to buy, a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) How is Rayner going to build 300,000 in five years. " she's not its just something thrown out there to make them look good to there supporters bit like Boris and rawanda with tory voters the bellend knew it was never gona happen | |||
" So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know). 31,000 social housing homes were completed in 2023, after demolitions and right to buy, a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) How is Rayner going to build 300,000 in five years. she's not its just something thrown out there to make them look good to there supporters bit like Boris and rawanda with tory voters the bellend knew it was never gona happen" I agree. Especially on the bellend bit 🍆 | |||
" So build more council houses! The act of building them creates jobs (short term I know). 31,000 social housing homes were completed in 2023, after demolitions and right to buy, a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) How is Rayner going to build 300,000 in five years. she's not its just something thrown out there to make them look good to there supporters bit like Boris and rawanda with tory voters the bellend knew it was never gona happen I agree. Especially on the bellend bit 🍆" During Covid, we had a local businessman rename a pub of his the Three Bellends and had tge signage painted with Boris, Hancock and Sunak. Even gained national press coverage, just saying.... and now back to the thread Mrs x | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. " Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. " I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x" Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council!" It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x | |||
| |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x" 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive! | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!" As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x" I can acknowledge something needs to be done but I don’t agree punishing 2nd home owners is the way to go. Of course infrastructure and jobs are key and if they do not materialise then making 2nd homes come back in the market is irrelevant as the local people still won’t be able to afford then AND you will have also damaged the seasonal industry and income. Local councils need to attract businesses to create jobs and “wealth”. If that happens alongside affordable housing (and infrastructure) then locals start to benefit AND the village has the income from 2nd home owners and tourists and the industry they support. | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x I can acknowledge something needs to be done but I don’t agree punishing 2nd home owners is the way to go. Of course infrastructure and jobs are key and if they do not materialise then making 2nd homes come back in the market is irrelevant as the local people still won’t be able to afford then AND you will have also damaged the seasonal industry and income. Local councils need to attract businesses to create jobs and “wealth”. If that happens alongside affordable housing (and infrastructure) then locals start to benefit AND the village has the income from 2nd home owners and tourists and the industry they support." The income from 2nd homes, unless these are constantly rented out, to a village is negligible. At best the village may be able to sell half a dozen take aways and the local pub, if it still exists, will be able to sell a few more pints, on the occasional weekends these 2nd home owners decide to make use of their properties. The rest of the time they will remain empty not contributing a penny to the local economy. At worst the 2nd home owners will stock up at Waitrose and Majestic, because the local oiks don't serve the right food and drink and will then contribute fuck all to the local community. Like you said before about the WFH benefits. If anyone can work from anywhere now then sell up, move perfectly to your 2nd home and make that your permanent residency, that would help the local community. Otherwise sell the 2nd home but then booked a local b&b for the occasional weekends, boutique obviously, standards and all that, and that too would benefit the local community ity and it's economy. But leaving a property empty for the majority of the year does next to fuck all for a local community, pushes up house prices by creating a scarcity of local housing stock, causes schism in families that have lived there for generations and increases these problems on such a scale that there's now protests worldwide. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Let's all join together, hold hands and chant for a better world....ohm, ohm, ohm.... feeling better already. Mrs x | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x I can acknowledge something needs to be done but I don’t agree punishing 2nd home owners is the way to go. Of course infrastructure and jobs are key and if they do not materialise then making 2nd homes come back in the market is irrelevant as the local people still won’t be able to afford then AND you will have also damaged the seasonal industry and income. Local councils need to attract businesses to create jobs and “wealth”. If that happens alongside affordable housing (and infrastructure) then locals start to benefit AND the village has the income from 2nd home owners and tourists and the industry they support. The income from 2nd homes, unless these are constantly rented out, to a village is negligible. At best the village may be able to sell half a dozen take aways and the local pub, if it still exists, will be able to sell a few more pints, on the occasional weekends these 2nd home owners decide to make use of their properties. The rest of the time they will remain empty not contributing a penny to the local economy. At worst the 2nd home owners will stock up at Waitrose and Majestic, because the local oiks don't serve the right food and drink and will then contribute fuck all to the local community. Like you said before about the WFH benefits. If anyone can work from anywhere now then sell up, move perfectly to your 2nd home and make that your permanent residency, that would help the local community. Otherwise sell the 2nd home but then booked a local b&b for the occasional weekends, boutique obviously, standards and all that, and that too would benefit the local community ity and it's economy. But leaving a property empty for the majority of the year does next to fuck all for a local community, pushes up house prices by creating a scarcity of local housing stock, causes schism in families that have lived there for generations and increases these problems on such a scale that there's now protests worldwide. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Let's all join together, hold hands and chant for a better world....ohm, ohm, ohm.... feeling better already. Mrs x" So make it forward facing, ie from this point forward these new taxes apply but if you already own the property then it is punitive. On your “move to 2nd home” I know people who have done that very thing | |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x I can acknowledge something needs to be done but I don’t agree punishing 2nd home owners is the way to go. Of course infrastructure and jobs are key and if they do not materialise then making 2nd homes come back in the market is irrelevant as the local people still won’t be able to afford then AND you will have also damaged the seasonal industry and income. Local councils need to attract businesses to create jobs and “wealth”. If that happens alongside affordable housing (and infrastructure) then locals start to benefit AND the village has the income from 2nd home owners and tourists and the industry they support. The income from 2nd homes, unless these are constantly rented out, to a village is negligible. At best the village may be able to sell half a dozen take aways and the local pub, if it still exists, will be able to sell a few more pints, on the occasional weekends these 2nd home owners decide to make use of their properties. The rest of the time they will remain empty not contributing a penny to the local economy. At worst the 2nd home owners will stock up at Waitrose and Majestic, because the local oiks don't serve the right food and drink and will then contribute fuck all to the local community. Like you said before about the WFH benefits. If anyone can work from anywhere now then sell up, move perfectly to your 2nd home and make that your permanent residency, that would help the local community. Otherwise sell the 2nd home but then booked a local b&b for the occasional weekends, boutique obviously, standards and all that, and that too would benefit the local community ity and it's economy. But leaving a property empty for the majority of the year does next to fuck all for a local community, pushes up house prices by creating a scarcity of local housing stock, causes schism in families that have lived there for generations and increases these problems on such a scale that there's now protests worldwide. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Let's all join together, hold hands and chant for a better world....ohm, ohm, ohm.... feeling better already. Mrs x So make it forward facing, ie from this point forward these new taxes apply but if you already own the property then it is punitive. On your “move to 2nd home” I know people who have done that very thing "Oooh I can sense a 'softening', not always a good thing on a site such as thus but very welcome here. Was it the chanting? Anyway thanks for recognising the 'thicko' I am and explaining what you meant be 'forward facing'. Anyway just because it's you, I'll pretend that's ok for now. Moving to a beautiful spot, if it all works for you, makes sense to me, so long as you fully integrate yourself into the local community. It's just marvelous that you have seen the light and expect you to be on the phone to your estate agent first thing in the morning to market your 2nd home immediately. We got rid of our 2nd home earlier this year and feel so much better realising we have done the right thing and can do plenty of other things to benefit the beautiful place we now love to visit instead. We are feeling a little more stressed about letting go of our 3rd, 4th and 5th though, it's a nightmare... think more chanting is called for... cone on join in.... ohm, ohm, ohm... louder... Mrs x | |||
| |||
"The self catering holiday industry is part of the UK’s £257bn tourism industry England only: Self catering total visitor spend £1.4bn Accommodation spend £722m Travel to location £96m Food and drink spend £179m Local shop spend £69m Outdoor recreation spend £26m Supports 39,000 jobs directly Can’t see how doubling council tax, ending the FHL (furnished Hol let) tax system creates any growth in this sectors part of the economy. It will put some city air bnb flats back into housing rental stock/supply but at the cost of jobs of cleaners, booking agents, decorators and wider home improvement industry Source Economic Impact of Self-Catering Sector to the English Economy. (Frontline 2021) " But in the off season nothing like this wull be generated. And any income is only generated from properties that are let out, 2nd homes used by families won't contribute much at all, if anything, to their communities. Mrs x | |||
"The self catering holiday industry is part of the UK’s £257bn tourism industry England only: Self catering total visitor spend £1.4bn Accommodation spend £722m Travel to location £96m Food and drink spend £179m Local shop spend £69m Outdoor recreation spend £26m Supports 39,000 jobs directly Can’t see how doubling council tax, ending the FHL (furnished Hol let) tax system creates any growth in this sectors part of the economy. It will put some city air bnb flats back into housing rental stock/supply but at the cost of jobs of cleaners, booking agents, decorators and wider home improvement industry Source Economic Impact of Self-Catering Sector to the English Economy. (Frontline 2021) But in the off season nothing like this wull be generated. And any income is only generated from properties that are let out, 2nd homes used by families won't contribute much at all, if anything, to their communities. Mrs x" I presume those figures are annual, including off season, like Christmas and new year breaks. I would not know how many of the English Housing Survey estimate of 495,000 second homes located in the UK - are not rented out / tourism related, as opposed to some use by owner. Council tax data for this is unreliable as all second homes are classified as such, whether they are holiday lets or not. | |||
| |||
"Selling off 2.3 million council houses at one time discounts to tenants and not rebuilding them is the root cause. And obstructive planning. All the housing problems start and end at Westminster. Second home owners, many of them holiday let’s providing local employment and significant home improvements/building industry contribution to the economy, and rents taxed. Labours policing will penalise a few but not solve the housing problems. No first time buyers are going to Rock or Falmouth to buy a £1M ex holiday home. Exactly. Running the rich 2nd home owners out of town will only make things worse. Local Le won’t be able to buy those homes, and big spenders will have been taken out of the community. If Cornwall, for example, were successful in getting rid of all the tourists, the arse would fall out of the local economy. I think this is wrong. It's not about running anyone out of town, rich or not. It's tge exact opposite, it's keeping people in the town but fir longer. Second homes are only used periodically if owned and used by one family and that's the problem. Because they are not used during the week or out of season, each of these properties are not contributing to tge community. They are almost ensuring such places are seasonal with no trade for the local businesses off season. This needs looking at, as does buying second homes just to rent out as holiday let's, they too bring nothing to the community in the off season and in the UK that's a long period of the year. It's locals, or those committed to living there throughout the year that contribute positively to these communities, not wealthy out of towners who only show up a couple of times a year. This is what's happening in Europe, particularly Spain right now and it needs addressing. But that's just my tuppence worth. Mrs x Ao build more council houses then! Why is it ALWAYS punitive. How dare someone spend their net income on a holiday property. How day they give the previous owner a good price. How dare they use local trades to upgrade and maintain their properties! And when they are in town how very dare they spend in shops, pubs and restaurants. The selfish bastards! I know, let’s tax the fuck out of them! Or you know, build more homes for rent from the council! It's not punitive. But to only spend a limited time in a second home will not contribute substantially to the local community. It needs a thriving, year round economy. As for just building council estates how is that going to help, other than help with homelessness. What about the infrastructure needed to allow people in these homes to live a nice, comfortable lives. Where are the jobs coming from? Or are you inadvertently creating a ghetto for the locals. If the infrastructure could be built to provide wealth for the locals, then why not just build that. Have some sort of ban on 2nd homes and maybe this would allow a balancing of the housing stock so that the locals could reclaim the local housing and there would be a year round economy. You and I have not lived in council housing, I did as a small child but not for the last few years anyway, don't want to say how long I feel old enough already. But I know what council housing looks like and the problems associated with it, it's not the answer in of itself. There has to be a holistic approach to this. Just because we are lucky enough to be able to buy something doesn't necessarily mean we should be allowed to. Our wants may be legitimate but at what cost and I don't mean the price of the house you want to buy. Imagine families torn apart because they cannot live within the same communities that they have for generations. Kids ripped away from parents, grandkids from grandparents just so we can have a nice Roast over the Easter weekend or over the long weekend at Whit. Something needs to be done, we all need to think a bit differently, Mrs x 1. I asked about jobs further up. The locals still won’t be able to buy the houses if they have no jobs no matter what price they are. 2. I grew up on a council estate through my teens and school years. Things may be different now but I experienced life on an estate. 3. I say build more council housing because: A) It solves the housing crisis by providing affordable homes. B) It will in reach for more people even if there are no local jobs. C) Building housing creates jobs. D) You can do this without punishing 2nd home owners. 4. Of course increasing taxes on one group in society is punitive!As for your first point, I said you'd need infrastructure, you need some sort of wealth generation scheme if you are to house more people in a area. I then said but if you can do this then why not do this and that might allow locals to purchase the existing housing stock. I genuinely believe that locals deserve to live locally rather than 2nd home owners. Your 2nd point, u will apologise now because I meant we don't live in council estates now, I should have said. I didn't mean to say you hadn't or you had no experience of living on such an estate. Your 3rd point and sub points are flawed I think. A- it may solve housing issues but obly if there is employment infrastructure. But if this can be achieved I think this will enable locals to purchase from the existing housing stock if 2nd home ownership is restricted. This will definitely improve the year round economy of tge community as people living somewhere year round will spend more in the local community than this visiting for a couple of weekends and a few weeks during the summer season. B-If there are no local jobs you are almost guaranteeing making such an area into a ghetto. You cannot home more people without a decent employment infrastructure. C-Short term it creates jobs but what about afterwards. You need to build tge community. If there's no one there in the off season, tge majority of the year what happens then? D-Of course you can do anything without punishing 2nd home ownership. But what about the locals? What about the community? Fuck them because they are poorer? I don't agree with this. And as for your last point. Ok it might be punitive against day tripping families, who only use their properties less than a month in total for a whole year but I stand by what I said about this ripping local families apart. If you think that's a fair price to pay then you do it, don't think about the decimation to the local population, community or economy. This is an issue right around the globe in beautiful hotspots. All the locals cannot all be wrong and they are all saying basically the same thing. So if there is this groundswell of opinion against buying 2nd homed in these areas why can't you acknowledge that something else needs to be done? Mrs x I can acknowledge something needs to be done but I don’t agree punishing 2nd home owners is the way to go. Of course infrastructure and jobs are key and if they do not materialise then making 2nd homes come back in the market is irrelevant as the local people still won’t be able to afford then AND you will have also damaged the seasonal industry and income. Local councils need to attract businesses to create jobs and “wealth”. If that happens alongside affordable housing (and infrastructure) then locals start to benefit AND the village has the income from 2nd home owners and tourists and the industry they support. The income from 2nd homes, unless these are constantly rented out, to a village is negligible. At best the village may be able to sell half a dozen take aways and the local pub, if it still exists, will be able to sell a few more pints, on the occasional weekends these 2nd home owners decide to make use of their properties. The rest of the time they will remain empty not contributing a penny to the local economy. At worst the 2nd home owners will stock up at Waitrose and Majestic, because the local oiks don't serve the right food and drink and will then contribute fuck all to the local community. Like you said before about the WFH benefits. If anyone can work from anywhere now then sell up, move perfectly to your 2nd home and make that your permanent residency, that would help the local community. Otherwise sell the 2nd home but then booked a local b&b for the occasional weekends, boutique obviously, standards and all that, and that too would benefit the local community ity and it's economy. But leaving a property empty for the majority of the year does next to fuck all for a local community, pushes up house prices by creating a scarcity of local housing stock, causes schism in families that have lived there for generations and increases these problems on such a scale that there's now protests worldwide. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Let's all join together, hold hands and chant for a better world....ohm, ohm, ohm.... feeling better already. Mrs x So make it forward facing, ie from this point forward these new taxes apply but if you already own the property then it is punitive. On your “move to 2nd home” I know people who have done that very thing Oooh I can sense a 'softening', not always a good thing on a site such as thus but very welcome here. Was it the chanting?
Anyway thanks for recognising the 'thicko' I am and explaining what you meant be 'forward facing'.
Anyway just because it's you, I'll pretend that's ok for now.
Moving to a beautiful spot, if it all works for you, makes sense to me, so long as you fully integrate yourself into the local community.
It's just marvelous that you have seen the light and expect you to be on the phone to your estate agent first thing in the morning to market your 2nd home immediately.
We got rid of our 2nd home earlier this year and feel so much better realising we have done the right thing and can do plenty of other things to benefit the beautiful place we now love to visit instead.
We are feeling a little more stressed about letting go of our 3rd, 4th and 5th though, it's a nightmare... think more chanting is called for... cone on join in.... ohm, ohm, ohm... louder...
Mrs x"Defo the chanting. Gets me every time 
Liquidated property portfolio quite a while back at what turned out to be almost top of the market. Don’t actually own a second home now. Although my offshore family company owns several to avoid IHT as family members are directors…only kidding  or am I 
Anyway, still think my strategy is better. Build more council homes, incentivise businesses to move into area, improve infrastructure, leave 2nd home owners alone! | |||
