Right to Housing Referendum

🙄.

A referendum on housing will not solve anything. The answer to the housing crisis is simple - more homes and more social homes in particular.

The first thing we need to get straight is what is a reasonable level of home for someone who cannot provide a home for themselves. We used to have that fairly clear idea of that - council houses. Standard build, standard design and that was social housing. Now we want choice based letting and social tenants in private estates etc. and expectations of what everyone should be receiving is very unclear.

Go back to the councils building social housing estates to provide social housing and leave the private sector work itself out by Supply and Demand without government interference.

we have to accept our whole approach to housing has collapsed, some radical needs to change, but some decisions made along the way to this change will be questionable and problematic....

...ah we re clearly going to move back to a more state run housing model, but an astonishing level of economic and social damage will occur during so, an astonishing level of state borrowing will occur, which will also mean taxes in general will rise, in order to facilitate this, so.....

I think that's where we're going, and that's precisely why this referendum makes me very, very worried.

...tis the only solution, but we cant keep taxing the bollcoks out of the general population for this though, so we re gonna have to hit up wealthy entities more so, in order to do so, and that wont be easy, if even possible!

...its clearly obvious the whole process is completely fcuked, in nearly every possible way, the term 'polycrisis' is the perfect term for this moment in history....

Well it’ll change nothing for those looking for housing, however for those among us who already own houses, our rights could be seriously limited, government could commandeer holiday homes, who knows you could be forced to take people into your house, if you have a large garden it might be easier to CPO it for development.

Wow. That's a really bad picture of Pat Miller...!

ahhh you should have a good look at that again, the majority of the global money supply in fact comes from the global financial system in the form of credit, and its been largely used to (re)inflate the value of assets such as property, central bank created money in the form of qe was ultimately the backbone of all of this, as the reserve accounts of these financial institutions was credited in the process, allowing this significant rise in credit, i.e. private debt, which again, was ultimately used in these financialised activities, including share buy backs etc....

the usual right narrative has again presented itself, i.e. ultimately blaming the public money supply, i.e. such as deficits, and immigration policies etc, when in fact the fault is ultimately with how the money, in both the public and private domains has been (mis)used, i.e. financialisation and financialised activities etc, as explained

all of this has now lead to such outcomes as.....

....i.e. rapidly rising wealth inequalities......

...again, the only way out of this is the introduction of public policies to try move this in the opposite direction, which includes increasing the public money supply, i.e. deficits, but to make sure they are not used to maintain this status quo, i.e. making sure they are not used to (re)inflate the value of pre-existing assets, such as pre-existing property, but in fact used to create new assets, such as new property, and make sure the wealth created is better re-distributed....

...failing that, we re probably fcuked! i.e. our most critical of needs, i.e. property, health care, environmental needs, etc etc, will more than likely keep declining....

....so yea, the only solution....

I won't dispute any claim that the financial system is utterly broken. However, I take umbrage at this line:

"the usual right narrative has again presented itself..."

This left/right paradigm has got to stop. It is not "right wing" or even "left wing" to claim that we have more immigration than what can be accommodated. Immigration is a healthy aspect of any functional society, and I myself and the product of immigrant grand-parents, but tens of thousands of people every year is not sustainable. Indeed, it's already causing upset in a lot of communities, and the branding of people who raise genuine concern as "far-right" is sinister. I'm not saying that that's what you're doing, however.

Regarding the redistribution of wealth, this already happens through taxation. Rather than giving the state more power with an ambiguously worded change to the constitution, I would rather see it use existing laws make the socially deleterious actions of entities like investment funds or NGOs unprofitable.

However...

"...failing that, we re probably fcuked! i.e. our most critical of needs, i.e. property, health care, environmental needs, etc etc, will more than likely keep declining...."

I agree. I honestly think that there is really no going back from this cliff-edge. All we're doing here is arguing over what colour to paint the toilets in the titanic.