building-1080592_1920
Image: © jarmoluk via Pixabay

Britain’s Tory government is spending £2 billion on social housing

The party seems to be moving away from its recent commitment to a ‘property-owning democracy’. But it is enough to solve Britain’s housing crisis?

What it means: Pretty much everyone thinks that Britain doesn’t have enough houses and that the houses we do have are too expensive to both buy and rent. Luckily, the government has come up with a solution: spend £2 billion on new social housing. (Social housing, FYI, is homes that are rented cheaply to the people who need it most. You might call them council houses).

This sounds like a lovely idea. But (there’s always a but) not everyone is convinced it’s actually going to do much to fix the problem. The opposing Labour party says £2 billion is nowhere near enough money and the government should copy Labour’s plan to build a million affordable homes (there were 1.2 million families on the waiting list for social housing in 2017).

The government’s plan also doesn’t do much for people who don’t qualify for social housing but are still spending most of their income on rent and/or struggling to get on the housing ladder because house prices are so high. Lots of studies say that house prices won’t come down until we build 300,000 new houses a year (the government managed 200,000 in 2016-2017). That’s because of something called supply and demand, which means when more people want to rent or buy a home than there are homes available, they’ll end up bidding up the price as they compete to get a home.

Recent articles

Reader Comments

  • RW

    Your right to a degree. You mentioned “the wandering Jew”.

    I elaborate that the Jewish people, historically have tended to migrate almost exclusively to locations that are economically and culturally vibrant already. I would speculate that Jews have thrived in these places and have often improved the bounds of their economies and knowledge base.

    You can also ask; how many massive entertainment conglomerates, Nobel winners or billionaires has Isreal developed? If Jews are so capable, why isn’t Tel Aviv the Rome of our time?

    Jews are successful because they value education, maintain a strong social cohesive, they actively monitor and have a good sense for Zeitgeist wherever they are and they carefully choose the places they settle and congregate themselves heavily in these choice locations.

    But most importantly (haulocaust increased the importance of this aspect), they actually designed their culture for success. They not only attend Harvard, they use what they learned to better the group as a whole. With as much, they studied intricate networking systems, adapted to it and in many cases improved upon them. (See how Japan acquired Aegis warships and made them better).

    Of course there is nothing wrong with any of this. It’s when you elaborately gain disproportionate power in any society where you would stand out, you must take care when attempting to make a society better (Civil Rights movement) and rewriting that society all together (mass immigration). Ask blacks in China, Mexico, Philippines or India how much opportunity they have? Go to businesses owned by their American diaspora and see how many blacks they hire. Go to Silicon Valley and see how many East or South Asian tech workers wish they could work with more black people. California might work as a state, but as a nation, I think your rolling the nuclear dice here. I hope we can succeed as a tolerant pluralistic superpower but at this stage in human societal development, it’s a pipe dream.

    And if Jews really are the icon for success, they would see that fundamental human successes happen over generations. Just look at the rest of the planet? Are we ready?