Just how stupid do the Tories think we are?

I think that’s only five.

How many were you expecting GrannyRose? You asked for help; I offered what I knew. You are not paying for a service so how come you get to dictate?

You say "And two of them are definitely real" but don't elucidate. Sunak said he was scrapping "taxes". I guess, from what you go on to say, that your first attempt to show something is "real" is the suggestion that there was at least an intention for this goverment to over-ride what would normally be a counsel decision. If you had bothered to do any research yourself you would know that The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) later said it was "never the case that seven bins would be needed by household", and Tory MP Sir Simon Clarke, accused the PM of offering up "straw men" which "simply weren't policy".

I don't think your view, on leaving houses less insulated than needed, deserves a reply. I had put a generally held view in my last post.

With so many in the Conservative Party coming out to point out no such laws were ever on the statute book and with the little Princeling rushing towards his first anniversary on 25 October, (after which his Party can bring a vote of no confidence) I have a feeling that he may well have to promise his enemies on the Conservative side a Spring election. Silly man.

GrannyRose15

DaisyAnneReturns

GrannyRose

* Stop taxes on eating meat.
* Stop taxes to discourage flying
* Stop us being forced to sort rubbish into seven bins.
* Stop compulsory car sharing.
* Stop expensive insulation upgrades

Only one of these, which he says he is cancelling, even exists or has been suggested. By stopping the last one, which will only be "expensive" relative to the neglect of the property so far, he will simply make the poorest poorer.

I think that’s only five. And two of them are definitely real. At least in terms of being considered. The bins one has sparked alot of debate at local authority level. And the insulation one was threatening to make many people homeless when their landlords had to stop renting out their houses because it was impossible for them to reach the required standard.

So it's OK for tenants to live in a house without an EPC C? And pay for the privilege of doing so? Meanwhile, Landlords make money from the rent and capital appreciation. They should be spending about 15% of the rent on maintenance anyway.

GrannyRose15

Whitewavemark2

So are you telling me that landlords should never have been worried about achieving a EPC of C for their properties? Well that’s a relief! How silly of them to think that might be necessary if it wasn’t government policy.

Of course it damned well should be government policy. If landlords can't do that, they have no right to be letting out properties and should leave it to the professionals.

So you don’t think my comment deserves a reply. Just showing your ignorance if you think it is only about leaving houses less well insulated. Many many houses in this country cannot be insulated to the degree that has been suggested. It is simply another way to get at landlords and has meant that many have already left the sector. Where are people going to live if they cannot live in the available housing because it doesn’t meet some unrealistic standard. A standard incidentally that doesn’t apply to local authority or housing association properties - they can be as cold and as damp as you like. It’s only private landlords that are supposed to pay for the deterioration of the housing stock in this country over many years.

And where have you been while communities have been discussing recycling. Lincolnshire households already have 4 bins each. It’s not a big leap to think we might be expected to have more. Glad to have some reassurance that it won’t reach as many as 7.

Private landlords are the professionals. It is local authorities that are playing at it.

I wouldn’t think many would spend anything
Iike 15% of their money on maintenance and if they had to they would be putting up the For Sale signs quick smart. Many here are putting rental properties on the market because of the rules and taxes. The result is even less available rentals so it has reached crisis levels. You need some sort of balance for both tenants and landlords and at the moment it is favouring tenants so the rents are going up and up because the houses are being removed from the rent pool.

GrannyRose15

Private landlords are the professionals. It is local authorities that are playing at it.

That's nonsense! Some private landlords are cowboys (and girls), who see renting property as an opportunity to earn a quick buck with no consideration for their tenants.

GrannyRose15

So you don’t think my comment deserves a reply. Just showing your ignorance if you think it is only about leaving houses less well insulated. Many many houses in this country cannot be insulated to the degree that has been suggested. It is simply another way to get at landlords and has meant that many have already left the sector. Where are people going to live if they cannot live in the available housing because it doesn’t meet some unrealistic standard. A standard incidentally that doesn’t apply to local authority or housing association properties - they can be as cold and as damp as you like. It’s only private landlords that are supposed to pay for the deterioration of the housing stock in this country over many years.

And where have you been while communities have been discussing recycling. Lincolnshire households already have 4 bins each. It’s not a big leap to think we might be expected to have more. Glad to have some reassurance that it won’t reach as many as 7.

I'm not the one who is ignorant about the housing stock, especially the rental stock, of the UK.

Nor am I ignorant about the way investing money in property has distorted the economy in the UK for decafes.

growstuff

Nor am I ignorant about the way investing money in property has distorted the economy in the UK for decafes.

Yes far too much is invested in property, especially residential, the proportion of income that has to be spent on rent or mortgage is just ridiculous. Its home occupiers that are driving the market, developers are just responding to that demand, if more rental properties were available prices would be lower. Allowing a couple to pass on £1m without taxation is just grossly unfair

Commercial property is in balance because businesses occupying them are paying a reasonable proportion of their total costs

Remind me never to offer information when you ask GrannyRose. Wasn't that where the "ignorance" you accuse me of, started?

What you see as a childish aim of "getting at" Landlords I see as people being properly regulated. Houses are simply not commodities in the same way as following other latest trends may be. Homes should be no more treated in this way than health or education.

There are good and bad landlords in the corporate sector and owned by individuals. However, extreme Capitalism works no better than extreme Socialism. We need a mixed economy and, at the heart of Britishness - to me - there has always been the need to moderate such extremism and value both the Duke and the dustman as equals.

Providing substandard housing to someone not in a position to own their own because of the way the housing market has been manipulated, and using one person's home to provide another person's higher pension does not seem to show any of that moderation. If people chose to own property they must expect regulation in favour of the tenant. I repeat, it is a home first and foremost and, to run our country successfully people need homes.

And where have you been while communities have been discussing recycling. Lincolnshire households already have 4 bins each. It’s not a big leap to think we might be expected to have more. Glad to have some reassurance that it won’t reach as many as 7. GrannyRose

You seem to replace logic with sneering remarks GrannyRose. Enough is enough. I will leave the vast swaths of Sunak's party and the Tory press to tell you why he has got this so wrong.

“If people chose to own property they must expect regulation in favour of the tenant. I repeat, it is a home first and foremost and, to run our country successfully people need homes.”

Banks don’t take any account of loans being peoples homes if you can’t pay the mortgage you are out and you have to maintain the property yourself.

It’s forgotten that landlords pay tax on rent received often at 40% and then get CGT if they sell the property. Whereas most home owners dont pay any tax on their home.

DaisyAnnReturns
^Your asking the wrong person when using the word fearful
That’s not me. Im referring to the people who were scared shitless Re covid. And by edicts given out by the government they saw exactly how people will obey.^

Ditto.

MerylStreep

^Keep people fearful and they’re easier to lead^
They certainly proved they could do that with Covid. Now they know they can more or less do what they want with you.

I half agree with you, MerylStreep.

I don't agree about covid because anyone who saw the carnage covid caused in China, and then in Italy, in the early days of the pandemic was right to be fearful of it.

OTOH The way that folk are happily embracing things like voter ID, which have no evidence to justify their imposition, does make me worried about how easily they can be manipulated.

Katie59

“If people chose to own property they must expect regulation in favour of the tenant. I repeat, it is a home first and foremost and, to run our country successfully people need homes.”

Banks don’t take any account of loans being peoples homes if you can’t pay the mortgage you are out and you have to maintain the property yourself.

It’s forgotten that landlords pay tax on rent received often at 40% and then get CGT if they sell the property. Whereas most home owners dont pay any tax on their home.

They still make a profit, which over the last few years has been higher than investing the money in businesses.

The fact that home owners don't pay taxes on their primary residence is a red herring. Most people don't buy a home primarily to make a profit.

Well said DAR.

Katie59

growstuff

Nor am I ignorant about the way investing money in property has distorted the economy in the UK for decafes.

Yes far too much is invested in property, especially residential, the proportion of income that has to be spent on rent or mortgage is just ridiculous. Its home occupiers that are driving the market, developers are just responding to that demand, if more rental properties were available prices would be lower. Allowing a couple to pass on £1m without taxation is just grossly unfair

Commercial property is in balance because businesses occupying them are paying a reasonable proportion of their total costs

I agree with you Katie59 - and my position is that I'm the ex-wife of someone with quite a substantial property portfolio, who is professional enough to maintain his properties well. I am a tenant myself, my children have been tenants of some appalling properties over the years and my son has just finished an MSc in public policy and wrote his dissertation on property lettings. I can't claim to be an expert, but I probably know more about rented properties than most people.

maddyone

^We disagree…….about the use of false apologies.^

Hmm, I also had one, from Dinahmo.
So we’re in the same boat Iam.

I thought that I was being polite! I could have used an expletive or two as an introduction.

Of course you could Dinahmo. But that would have been extremely rude wouldn’t it?

I’m beginning to wonder if Sunak will see the cancellation if the HS2 project as a done deal. Apart from his party, he is under enormous pressure from business and threats from donors who will withdraw their money. Announcement due on Friday - interesting to see which way Sunak falls.

Of course Sunak is very little invested in the U.K. - he is almost certain to seek USA citizenship once he’s ousted.

I see Phones4you bod has stopped his very lucrative payments to the Tory party over the green issue.

Of course Sunak is very little invested in the UK - he is almost certain to seek USA citizenship once he’s ousted.

I think you’re probably right there.

As far as I can see, the great Sunak reset seems to consist of demonstrating that the government can’t deliver anything properly: climate change policy, essential rail infrastructure, the framework for increased productivity, a fully functioning health and social care system, and more.

Instead they seem to be galloping away from their manifesto, and any pretence at meaningful strategic political agendas, and towards ‘policy’ suggestions based on Sunak’s own likes and dislikes - ‘more maths, I’m good at maths; less smoking, I hate smoking’ - or which substantially increase his own and his wife’s wealth.

“The fact that home owners don't pay taxes on their primary residence is a red herring. Most people don't buy a home primarily to make a profit.”

My point is that Landlords, love them or hate them pay a lot of tax, most home owners pay nothing, they should pay CGT on the capital gain.

Home owners or buyers I should say, pay stamp duty.
In the south it is very difficult to buy a house without paying stamp duty.
You can buy a flat under the level of stamp duty.