Where does all the money go?
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
Does the free housing need to be in the U.K.? For those who don't like Ruanda, China looks to have entire cities available: https://www.atlasobscura.com/things-to-do/china/gh...
Having just spent a week in the UK I'm pretty sure all those missing Chinese are there!The slightly bigger issue may be that you can't build houses for free, does not matter how hard you try they will cost money to build. Therefore if you build everyone a free house, everyone will have to pay the cost of that house in their taxes. The builders of these houses will still want to make a living, or they won't build them, if you ask builders to work for free they will just stay in bed as everyone would if you didn't pay them. Yep sounds great building free houses but they just won't be free.
One key to getting more comfortable as you get older and progress to earn more is to resist the temptation to move house. I saw my parents do this and learned from their mistakes they were always chasing the next big thing but didn't have the financial muscle they wished for. At almost 45 I've only lived in three houses. Where we live now is mega for me we have a very large garage which is the most important thing (it is PH!) and I have resisted the temptation to move again as the next level up would not just be the mortgage your looking at help to upkeep the garden and house and all the other costs that come into play which can be considerable.
All this stuff is relative so if a couple earning 60k combined hit a bit of a 10k pay rise they will feel better off but then they might be tempted to go for that detached house and move out of the semi.
A combined income of 110k is a lot you should be able to live a pretty comfortable life off that. If you aren't you need to look at where you live and consider if the house is really worth not having a vast amount of disposable income. Each to their own but having a top heavy set of outgoings each month would definitely not be for me. Having money to go on holiday and treat the kids etc would always be a top priority for me. Easier as we not in the south east granted!
All this stuff is relative so if a couple earning 60k combined hit a bit of a 10k pay rise they will feel better off but then they might be tempted to go for that detached house and move out of the semi.
A combined income of 110k is a lot you should be able to live a pretty comfortable life off that. If you aren't you need to look at where you live and consider if the house is really worth not having a vast amount of disposable income. Each to their own but having a top heavy set of outgoings each month would definitely not be for me. Having money to go on holiday and treat the kids etc would always be a top priority for me. Easier as we not in the south east granted!
ARHarh said:
The slightly bigger issue may be that you can't build houses for free, does not matter how hard you try they will cost money to build. Therefore if you build everyone a free house, everyone will have to pay the cost of that house in their taxes. The builders of these houses will still want to make a living, or they won't build them, if you ask builders to work for free they will just stay in bed as everyone would if you didn't pay them. Yep sounds great building free houses but they just won't be free.
And when you work how much tax needs to be paid for these "free" houses then you realise it comes to something silly like 150% of income.So no one will go to work because the tax is ridiculously high and then we get to the spiralling downhill where there is no productivity and the nation is bankrupt.
So yes, this doesn't work.
https://masterremovers.co.uk/how-frequently-do-peo...
I wondered how often we in the uk move house. Not that often going by this.
I wondered how often we in the uk move house. Not that often going by this.
borcy said:
https://masterremovers.co.uk/how-frequently-do-peo...
I wondered how often we in the uk move house. Not that often going by this.
I am on my 3rd house, and been here 12 years. I am 60 right now and have no intention of moving again until I am unable to look after this house any more. most people I know, my age are on their 3rd or 4th house. My neighbour who is 70 has lived in his house for 45 years. it's the only house he has owned.I wondered how often we in the uk move house. Not that often going by this.
Interesting article in the Guardian about the privatisation of child care, and the associated costs to tax payer - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/...
George Monbiot said:
This month, two Northamptonshire councils revealed they are paying an average of £281,000 a year for each residential placement, or £5,400 a week.
leef44 said:
ARHarh said:
The slightly bigger issue may be that you can't build houses for free, does not matter how hard you try they will cost money to build. Therefore if you build everyone a free house, everyone will have to pay the cost of that house in their taxes. The builders of these houses will still want to make a living, or they won't build them, if you ask builders to work for free they will just stay in bed as everyone would if you didn't pay them. Yep sounds great building free houses but they just won't be free.
And when you work how much tax needs to be paid for these "free" houses then you realise it comes to something silly like 150% of income.So no one will go to work because the tax is ridiculously high and then we get to the spiralling downhill where there is no productivity and the nation is bankrupt.
So yes, this doesn't work.
Right now we have a proportion of new houses on devs over 10k sq.ft needing social housing.
That then makes the private units cost more, and ultimately is a tax on new home buyers to subsidise cheaper societal homes… but again if we think pragmatically these new home buyers aren’t doing anything wrong… they just want to get a home and crack on.
But they’re being singled out by what is in essence a ‘new entrant’ tax to the housing market, which just pushes prices higher for everyone, including land prices etc.
Instead why not have society as a whole subsidise these social new builds, so new house prices aren’t increased as the cost is covered.
Or are we saying society doesn’t see value in housing its people?
Or that we should artificially stimulate pricing and punish new entrants for the act of needing a home?
We can’t even get the basics right, nor the basic fundamental societal ethics, so it’s no surprise everything else falls apart under that broken paradigm.
Our future is bleak while humans are happy to see their kids and grandkids generations struggling to even get a roof over the heads (even if they’re not buying the rents are worse!) because they’d rather have their material wealth.
Chris Type R said:
Interesting article in the Guardian about the privatisation of child care, and the associated costs to tax payer - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/...
I like George. He raises excellent points and considers important issues. He seems like a good egg. George Monbiot said:
This month, two Northamptonshire councils revealed they are paying an average of £281,000 a year for each residential placement, or £5,400 a week.
The problem is that he always, after all that hard work and intelligent thought, blames the wrong party.
In this case he is trying to blame the private enterprises that are raping the crap out of councils. Yet very clearly the blame lies with the utterly negligent and incompetent councils who likes at the deal offered and incredulously thought they represented fair value for the people they exist to protect.
These councils have been utterly profligate with other people's money that was entrusted to them to create and protect the community and instead they've hurled it in the bin, lost it all and then come crawling back with a begging bowl and whinging about how it's all so unfair. Local councils have ruined tens of thousands of lives and put hundreds of thousands unnecessarily at risk and still people seek to be apologists for this disgraceful, if not criminal, behaviour.
Sure, chastise the corporates ripping them a new a
hole but let's do that after we've put the real villains up against the wall and made an example of them. DonkeyApple said:
I like George. He raises excellent points and considers important issues. He seems like a good egg.
The problem is that he always, after all that hard work and intelligent thought, blames the wrong party.
In this case he is trying to blame the private enterprises that are raping the crap out of councils. Yet very clearly the blame lies with the utterly negligent and incompetent councils who likes at the deal offered and incredulously thought they represented fair value for the people they exist to protect.
These councils have been utterly profligate with other people's money that was entrusted to them to create and protect the community and instead they've hurled it in the bin, lost it all and then come crawling back with a begging bowl and whinging about how it's all so unfair. Local councils have ruined tens of thousands of lives and put hundreds of thousands unnecessarily at risk and still people seek to be apologists for this disgraceful, if not criminal, behaviour.
Sure, chastise the corporates ripping them a new ahole but let's do that after we've put the real villains up against the wall and made an example of them.
Councils just became intermediaries for private contracting and seem to actually do nothing themselves these days except hand out money like sweets to god knows who.The problem is that he always, after all that hard work and intelligent thought, blames the wrong party.
In this case he is trying to blame the private enterprises that are raping the crap out of councils. Yet very clearly the blame lies with the utterly negligent and incompetent councils who likes at the deal offered and incredulously thought they represented fair value for the people they exist to protect.
These councils have been utterly profligate with other people's money that was entrusted to them to create and protect the community and instead they've hurled it in the bin, lost it all and then come crawling back with a begging bowl and whinging about how it's all so unfair. Local councils have ruined tens of thousands of lives and put hundreds of thousands unnecessarily at risk and still people seek to be apologists for this disgraceful, if not criminal, behaviour.
Sure, chastise the corporates ripping them a new a
hole but let's do that after we've put the real villains up against the wall and made an example of them. Fine, but they councils are still full of bloat and waste rather than lean machines sourcing vfm.
Around me most roads are now fixed up with men in a small van patting tarmac into pot holes with shovels… but I’m betting they’re getting £1,000 a day or something utterly bonkers to do it.
Then they’ll let developers have roads shut or traffic lit for months on end just to add in tapers for a junction, causing huge disruption.
Then when a utility digs it up and patch it, it’ll be lit for weeks, then full of pot holes the subsequent winter… and yet the utility is off the hook.
Then you have strategic balls ups like kex gill bypass in Yorkshire where the official diversion is about 20 miles and several towns now rammed with traffic/delays… and why? The latest closure was because of excessive tree removal causing subsidence… why excessive? Likely because it’s easier to just get planning to remove all the trees and crack on, than just be pragmatic and remove only what’s needed as you go…
It’s just layers of utter incompetence and no one willing to fall on their sword or call idiots out.
Even as a 15yo kid doing work experience there in the 90s the stupidity was palpable from half the people working there.
DonkeyApple said:
In this case he is trying to blame the private enterprises that are raping the crap out of councils. Yet very clearly the blame lies with the utterly negligent and incompetent councils who likes at the deal offered and incredulously thought they represented fair value for the people they exist to protect.
Totally agree. If you think council don’t know there are better more efficient ways to do things you are delusional. Of course they know. But they are hamstrung by so much red tape. Most would love to bring all the services back in house. But funding and red tape keep them stuck just being able to do the bare minimum.
The big issue is adult care. If adult care aspect to the NHS, you would solve the majority of the issues council face.
Chris Type R said:
DonkeyApple said:
In this case he is trying to blame the private enterprises that are raping the crap out of councils. Yet very clearly the blame lies with the utterly negligent and incompetent councils who likes at the deal offered and incredulously thought they represented fair value for the people they exist to protect.
Totally agree. This is of course possible/helped by only 30% of the local population having the vote (we Swiss are surrounded by far too many foreigners!), so even those of us who are against corruption and nepotism, we are easily outvoted by the local mafia.
Disclaimer: this message is typed from my Burgundian bolthole in neighbouring France where it’s even worse… but the local mayor is a personal friend, head of the local wild boar hunt and did me a great deal on a gravel driveway
Michael_B said:
It happens everywhere, even in places with supposedly the highest standards of democracy and governance. In my Swiss village in the Genevan countryside a local communal representative owns a construction/engineering company. Guess who gets to renovate any new building the parish council buys for communal use?
This is of course possible/helped by only 30% of the local population having the vote (we Swiss are surrounded by far too many foreigners!), so even those of us who are against corruption and nepotism, we are easily outvoted by the local mafia.
Disclaimer: this message is typed from my Burgundian bolthole in neighbouring France where it’s even worse… but the local mayor is a personal friend, head of the local wild boar hunt and did me a great deal on a gravel driveway
Local government is wonderful if you happen to serve good wines at the supper table. This is of course possible/helped by only 30% of the local population having the vote (we Swiss are surrounded by far too many foreigners!), so even those of us who are against corruption and nepotism, we are easily outvoted by the local mafia.
Disclaimer: this message is typed from my Burgundian bolthole in neighbouring France where it’s even worse… but the local mayor is a personal friend, head of the local wild boar hunt and did me a great deal on a gravel driveway
DonkeyApple said:
Local councils have ruined tens of thousands of lives and put hundreds of thousands unnecessarily at risk and still people seek to be apologists for this disgraceful, if not criminal, behaviour.
Sure, chastise the corporates ripping them a new ahole but let's do that after we've put the real villains up against the wall and made an example of them.
They're not evil, just utterly incompetent.Sure, chastise the corporates ripping them a new a
hole but let's do that after we've put the real villains up against the wall and made an example of them. Generally speaking, Local Authorities employ the lowest calibre management and execs. The exceptions are some of the bigger urban ones which can attract better people, but the challenges are huge.
Tigerj said:
If you think council don’t know there are better more efficient ways to do things you are delusional. Of course they know. But they are hamstrung by so much red tape. Most would love to bring all the services back in house. But funding and red tape keep them stuck just being able to do the bare minimum.
The big issue is adult care. If adult care aspect to the NHS, you would solve the majority of the issues council face.
This is the issue, too many layers of bureaucracy and party politics.The big issue is adult care. If adult care aspect to the NHS, you would solve the majority of the issues council face.
I think a few smart people could probably determine the fix for most of our ills but someone is always upset about something or it’s ‘against the rules’ or some other nonsense.
Pragmatism and progress has been replaced by a bureaucratic straight jacket and yet seemingly many of those who represent us revel in this situation of being paid to sound important and clever and this we can’t live without their ‘expertise’ but to the layman they just appear noisy, incompetent and ineffective.
Slowboathome said:
They're not evil, just utterly incompetent.
Generally speaking, Local Authorities employ the lowest calibre management and execs. The exceptions are some of the bigger urban ones which can attract better people, but the challenges are huge.
It's certainly an overt dichotomy. You can't have low salaries and expect to attract brilliant minds but you can't have low calibre employees in charge of such vast sums. Generally speaking, Local Authorities employ the lowest calibre management and execs. The exceptions are some of the bigger urban ones which can attract better people, but the challenges are huge.
It's just depressing how many farcically bad deals these people have done over the last 30 years. They've signed off comedically bad terms that few corporates would have been hoodwinked by and when they are they can be left to go to the wall. Where is the professional oversight?
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff