Millions of people are living in Britain without a secure, decent home. Plans to sell-off social and affordable homes risk making things worse for some of our country's most vulnerable people. Join us in calling for urgent action to tackle our housing crisis.92 signatures
Government plans to sell-off social and affordable homes will enable the lucky few to own a home at the expense of some of the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. If passed, Britain's housing crisis would quickly become a national emergency.
A secure, decent home would bring dignity, hope and protection for people who suffer a life of fear and uncertainty. Join us as we show the human face of the housing crisis and call our government to action. Here's how...
1. Share stories - Head here to read some stories of folk impacted by our housing crisis and share them on social media with #ourhousingcrisis. Keep an eye on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook for new stories to share each day!
3. Sign the petition - As plans to reduce Britain's stock of social and affordable homes continue to go through Parliament, sign the petition below to join our calls for secure, decent homes for all.
I will take use of this space to specify what I mean by supporting/adding my signature to the solving the Housing crisis campaign:
The root causes need to be addressed (i.e. obviously the root cause is NOT supply & demand), both the root causes of supply & the root causes of demand needs to be addressed:
The main root cause of demand is that existing landlords are always in position to outbid any 1st time buyer at any level; the root cause of this is the treatment of Land in the economy, and in particular the under-taxation of wealth & value created by the nation collectively and that have been channeled in Land values & Land rental value, these rental values should, by right, belong 100% to the whole of the nation at large, they have been collected by the Landlords from all tenants, this advantage alone put the landlord in receipt of as much as the tenant's can afford to pay from their income (tenants outbid each other in a quite scarce market), this income & wealth put the existing landlords (collectively) to always be in a position to outbid the 1st-time buyers, the value are pushed until the justice gives the back to all residents their share of the value (the whole annual rental value of the land) that is ready to be collected from the landlords, leaving to the landlord only the rental value of the buildings (whole property-Land), which is the appropriate total of the normal maintenance costs + normal profits (above the normal total costs of doing business).
As long as the Landlords exploit the rest of the nation, they will always in a position to buy any house for sale, and to charge a tenant as much as any other tenant will be able to afford from their income (tenants income push the rents up; gentrification = local residents bid more and more, pushing out the least wealthy = the 'nouveau rich' comes from outside, and push out the least wealthy), the obvious solution is to collect from the landlord(s), the part of the annual rental value that by right belong to the others, the rest of the nation (i.e. 100% of the annual rental value of the Land - the share of a resident of the country if that landlord is a UK permanent resident). Otherwise, the problem will come back continuing as when a new house is built, the landlords can buy it & there are always many tenants with fairly good income to outbid each other long long before they can start to be even in a position to buy a house, even 10, 15, 20% cheaper than the one they rent. Not dealing fully with the issue of the landlord profiting from the value that does not come from them(landlords), can only lead to the housing crisis to continue, however many houses are built (as demonstrated in Spain, which has built many more times as many houses as they actually needed, just times as many as the UK built, which has about 3 to 4 times as few as needed, and will take to correct, about the same amount of money as the net amount value of Land rental value to collect from all the land/property owners, i.e. there are about £12 trillions in the UK of Land & property, about £6.5 trillions in Land alone, annual rental value: £320 billions, of which about 60% of that(~£190 billions), Land owners have had above their resident share), all that value taken from the tenants. The majority of taxpayers are either tenants (or owners-occupiers of Land so cheap, that their Land value received is less their equal share as resident), so it is very important not to charge all the tax payers, the general state expenses for the cost of the solution, for the value that the landlords (& accessorily the owners of more valuable pieces of Land) have kept for themselves.
This is the main crucial part, and solving the unnaturally high capital price of homes, also requires changing from fractional reserve banking (money does not exist before it is lent) to full reserve banking & sovereign money (money exists before, as it is created in appropriate quantity to represent the real wealth/physical wealth creation in the real/physical economy [not land values & not other form of speculations, such as derivatives & packaged debts & other options on foreign currencies] ), this obviously benefit the whole of the real economy (everyone except the finance speculators).
& bringing the crisis to an end, also requires to control & cap demand (= control immigration + control birth rates (child benefit/child tax credits need to be reduced at least from 3rd child, for each next child, probably by about 20%)(& also needs to be clawed back by income tax) + control/measure the rate of new net households (marriages-divorces), & bridge build the (affordable) houses in number to bridge the gap between supply & demand (1 and 3/4 millions per 5 years for the next 12 years)(present gap maybe 'only' a million and half). [& this is the actual trick: collecting the actual annual rent of Land, is the very condition that allow obtaining enough Land available in an affordable way, so the houses built will actually be affordable & also in the required quantities, because if don't collect enough of the rent of Land, the Land will be more expensive, and so the houses built will be more expensive than the amount of money that can be earned from the rest of the economy to pay for them, and it will not be affordable to built enough of them in numbers, however long it is tried (i.e. continues to get worse until it cannot get worse any more[= all civilization has fully collapsed]). The point is to know that it is a crisis, for which the nation cannot afford to let the landlords or the bankers(finance speculators/land speculators) have the last word about, but requires to apply the solution that is known to work (every time it has been fully used). Since 1996, the ratio of real economy incomes to Land & housings costs has fallen by at least two third, of getting so low as to cause a sudden scramble & toppling/reset of the systems of our society, we certainly are less than five years from the point of no return (but about 12 years before the point of no return towards very high multi-degrees global warming) (the largest cause of greenhouse gas emissions is a combination of huge growth in population, and of the share of population using increasingly polluting technologies, with economic injustices [that prevents sustainable technologies becoming both affordable and more affordable than high GHG density technologies] anyway), i.e. the poor pollutes more because they are becoming relatively poorer, and hence, can't afford yet sustainability in the short term vs the rich pollutes even more because they think they can just afford to pay that energy in the short term (they don't want to use a large part of their wealth to invest in sustainable technologies, while carbon emissions are not just still available around, but even still used not just by the poor, but by most of the energy sector [low carbon represents a small minority of the world's energy], & the most scalable low-carbon energy production, the nuclear, is not favored by most in pressure groups promoting sustainability who actually very dangerously under-estimate a lot the required time to scale up, even each 1% of renewables[=time much too long (by about 35 to 55 years) to avoid global warming catastrophe without pushing the world's share of nuclear, up to at least 40 to 45%, as soon as physically possible, over the coming 9 years]) & haven't made a full costs-benefits analysis for the next 60 to 75 years anyway.