...increase in migrants across the Channel. (58 Viewers)

[Astute]

I'm more concerned with why we keep getting involved in disastrous wars in the middle East.
Stop that and a large part of the immigration issue would be solved.

They will always be at war with each other. It is a very religious area of the world. But they would prefer to keep killing each other than have others try and stop it.

It would have been the same with the UK problems with Ireland. What would we have done if someone would have invaded us so they could poke their noses into our business?


But my point still stands. If you had risked your family to get them to safety would you risk them again once they are safe? What makes them do it?

 

---

[clint van damme]

They will always be at war with each other. It is a very religious area of the world. But they would prefer to keep killing each other than have others try and stop it.

It would have been the same with the UK problems with Ireland. What would we have done if someone would have invaded us so they could poke their noses into our business?


But my point still stands. If you had risked your family to get them to safety would you risk them again once they are safe? What makes them do it?

Like I said, I can't answer what makes them do it, I can hazard a few guesses but it's not the primary issue for me.
And the scale of conflict in the region hasn't been as it is now for a long time.

6 million people have been displaced in Syria, There are different estimates as to how many have come here but the highest number I can find is 120,000.

Now it's not the 120,000 figure that are here that I find staggering it's the figure of 6 million that have fled, that is both incredible and outrageous and until we stop jumping to the tune of the Saudis, the oil companies and the arms dealers nothing will change.

As for them wanting to keep killing each other, look at what sort of county Iraq was before the West overthrew Qasim or Iran was before the West installed the mad Mullahs in our pursuit of oil.

No one can claim to be fleeing a war zone if there are no war zones to flee.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It isn't about looking at pictures. It is trying to get my head around risking their lives to leave what is a safe country.

Probably the flawed assumption that everybody here is tolerant, welcoming, has a sense of fair play, and looks out for their fellow man.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Probably the flawed assumption that everybody here is tolerant, welcoming, has a sense of fair play, and looks out for their fellow man.

Enough do. We are still a wonderful country at heart. Wouldn’t want to ask earlsdon or western thingy for help though

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Enough do. We are still a wonderful country at heart. Wouldn’t want to ask earlsdon or western thingy for help though

It's the best thing about this country growing up, the acceptance of people no matter what they look like. It makes me proud to be British when I hear people speak of how they have been helped... and want to give back in turn.

It's the thing we should fight hardest to preserve, it's the national identity.

 

[The Lurker]

It's the best thing about this country growing up, the acceptance of people no matter what they look like. It makes me proud to be British when I hear people speak of how they have been helped... and want to give back in turn.

It's the thing we should fight hardest to preserve, it's the national identity.

Fuck off bob geldof.

this country is overcrowded as it is. we have 1000 of homeless people who we should be looking after first. why Britain? because we give out freebies. no one cares about colour of skin we care about the future of the country. not enough houses, not enough school places, hospitals overcrowded. the reason the current generation can’t buy houses is because it’s too expensive due to the high influx of immigration with rent too high too.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Fuck off bob geldof.

You're not British, you're a disgrace.

 

[Nick]

Can we just clear up that Bob Geldof isn't British either?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Can we just clear up that Bob Geldof isn't British either?

Coming over here, stealing our women...

 

[skybluetony176]

Coming over here, stealing our women...

 

[Nick]

Coming over here, stealing our women...

Turning them into junkies as well. Like a plague.

 

[chiefdave]

the reason the current generation can’t buy houses is because it’s too expensive due to the high influx of immigration with rent too high too.

Nothing to do with building houses at the slowest rate since the second world war?

 

[The Lurker]

You're not British, you're a disgrace.

do fuck off. you gonna reply to what I said or not?

 

[The Lurker]

Nothing to do with building houses at the slowest rate since the second world war?

where’s the space to build houses? anywhere possible there being built? old pubs demolished for houses everywhere in Cov. you name a space in Cov where houses can be built?

 

[Nick]

where’s the space to build houses? anywhere possible there being built? old pubs demolished for houses everywhere in Cov. you name a space in Cov where houses can be built?

Depends what sort you want to build. Whether it's high rise blocks or detached.

 

[The Lurker]

Depends what sort you want to build. Whether it's high rise blocks or detached.

high rise blocks? take a step back to the 1950’s? you name me plots of land to build on? hardly any left.

 

[Nick]

high rise blocks? take a step back to the 1950’s? you name me plots of land to build on? hardly any left.

It depends on the sort of accommodation you are on about. Not everybody is going to be able to afford a nice semi detached house so would get an apartment / flat.

How many houses do you want on the plot and what sort? There is land if private developers want to build houses.

Bannerbrook Park for example

 

[The Lurker]

It depends on the sort of accommodation you are on about. Not everybody is going to be able to afford a nice semi detached house so would get an apartment / flat.

How many houses do you want on the plot and what sort? There is land if private developers want to build houses.

what are you going on about? If there is land available it would be built on already. like I said where in Cov is a good plot of land avaliable build on?

 

[Nick]

what are you going on about? If there is land available it would be built on already. like I said where in Cov is a good plot of land avaliable build on?

As I said, what do you want to build on it?

 

[The Lurker]

As I said, what do you want to build on it?

well Dave said houses. Cov population in 2001 was 300k now is 360k it’s growing at a high rate. it’s impossible to manage and shows how much more houses have been built since the millennium

 

[skybluetony176]

where’s the space to build houses? anywhere possible there being built? old pubs demolished for houses everywhere in Cov. you name a space in Cov where houses can be built?

They’re building an entire new town on the outskirts of Rugby at the moment on the site of the old radio station. There’s space. What there isn’t is an appetite by developers to develop the land that they have in their land banks. The government has changed the law to make it easier to develop these land banks but they’re still reluctant to do so. The reason! Over inflated house prices because of a housing shortage increases their profits and pleases their share holders. I was reading a report the other day and if the government invested in social housing through local authorities rather than housing developers so it pulled people on housing benefits out of private rental and into social housing the savings in housing benefits would be £11B a year. It would also reduce the demand for private landlords releasing housing to people wanting to buy and drive down high house prices.

Still. It’s probably easier to blame immigrants so let’s do that instead.

 

[The Lurker]

They’re building an entire new town on the outskirts of Rugby at the moment on the site of the old radio station. There’s space. What there isn’t is an appetite by developers to develop the land that they have in their land banks. The government has changed the law to make it easier to develop these land banks but they’re still reluctant to do so. The reason! Over inflated house prices because of a housing shortage increases their profits and pleases their share holders. I was reading a report the other day and if the government invested in social housing through local authorities rather than housing developers so it pulled people on housing benefits out of private rental and into social housing the savings in housing benefits would be £11B a year. It would also reduce the demand for private landlords releasing housing to people wanting to buy and drive down high house prices.

Still. It’s probably easier to blame immigrants so let’s do that instead.

easier to blame immigrants? As stated further up, asylum seekers get FREE housing! who pays for that? with the amount of houses given to immigrants no wonder there is shortage. like I said, homeless levels are at an all time high. houses to rent are due to supply and demand due to over population. what part can’t you figure out?

 

[skybluetony176]

easier to blame immigrants? As stated further up, asylum seekers get FREE housing! who pays for that? with the amount of houses given to immigrants no wonder there is shortage. like I said, homeless levels are at an all time high. houses to rent are due to supply and demand due to over population. what part can’t you figure out?

The scenario I’ve just described to you is not recent history. It’s been going on for decades under successive governments. Send them all back will change nothing. If every immigrant, illegal or otherwise, every asylum seeker, successful or otherwise go back tomorrow nothing will change. We’ll still have a chronic housing shortage, the private landlords will still be cashing in, housing benefit payouts will not reduce by £11B a year. Successive governments over decades have put the responsibility of social housing on housing developers who have the land but don’t want to develop it to keep housing prices skyrocketing so the percentage of houses that have to be social houses aren’t getting built. The government should either have powers to take the land of them if they’re sitting on it unnecessarily or penalise them financially. That will get the house builders moving. Off course we don’t have the skilled workforce on our own so we’re going to have to import that. As we have been for a good couple of decades now. Bloody Poles coming over here with their house building skills helping develop land, OUR LAND, for much needed housing.

 

[Marty]

The scenario I’ve just described to you is not recent history. It’s been going on for decades under successive governments. Send them all back will change nothing. If every immigrant, illegal or otherwise, every asylum seeker, successful or otherwise go back tomorrow nothing will change. We’ll still have a chronic housing shortage, the private landlords will still be cashing in, housing benefit payouts will not reduce by £11B a year. Successive governments over decades have put the responsibility of social housing on housing developers who have the land but don’t want to develop it to keep housing prices skyrocketing so the percentage of houses that have to be social houses aren’t getting built. The government should either have powers to take the land of them if they’re sitting on it unnecessarily or penalise them financially. That will get the house builders moving. Off course we don’t have the skilled workforce on our own so we’re going to have to import that. As we have been for a good couple of decades now. Bloody Poles coming over here with their house building skills helping develop land, OUR LAND, for much needed housing.

I like to think of us as providing a service to the local community, or am I expected to run at a loss? Don't forget most of us are doing it as our pensions will be worth fuck all, so need to supplement it elsewhere.

Everyone demonises BTL landlords, we take all the risk for little reward. Now that they've changed the tax laws on it, it's just not worth getting into any more.

 

[skybluetony176]

I like to think of us as providing a service to the local community, or am I expected to run at a loss? Don't forget most of us are doing it as our pensions will be worth fuck all, so need to supplement it elsewhere.

Everyone demonises BTL landlords, we take all the risk for little reward. Now that they've changed the tax laws on it, it's just not worth getting into any more.

Been a private landlord myself although I got out a couple of years ago to move the money into something else. Have to add that I rented to a professional couple who were paying below the going rate because they were good tenants and we wanted to retain their business and they wasn’t a burden on the taxpayer because they didn’t qualify for housing benefits. Still doesn’t change the facts though regarding the housing shortage.

There will always be a place for private landlords and I don’t begrudge you the opportunity. But the quantity of private landlords is a consequence of successive governments policy and failure to address the social housing shortage. Who knows, if they weren’t spanking £11B a year on housing benefits because of failed policies regarding social housing that money could contribute to the pension system, the NHS ect.

 

[Ian1779]

easier to blame immigrants? As stated further up, asylum seekers get FREE housing! who pays for that? with the amount of houses given to immigrants no wonder there is shortage. like I said, homeless levels are at an all time high. houses to rent are due to supply and demand due to over population. what part can’t you figure out?

Homeless levels are at an all time high due to the cruel welfare system and 8 years of unnecessary austerity. It has also been fuelled by the disgraceful way in which ex-service men and women have been treated by the government that sent them off to unnecessary wars in the first place.

 

[Liquid Gold]

I like to think of us as providing a service to the local community, or am I expected to run at a loss? Don't forget most of us are doing it as our pensions will be worth fuck all, so need to supplement it elsewhere.

Everyone demonises BTL landlords, we take all the risk for little reward. Now that they've changed the tax laws on it, it's just not worth getting into any more.

Good, people might actually be able to buy a house to live in then.

 

[covcity4life]

Good, people might actually be able to buy a house to live in then.

dont be silly. people will always need to rent. its not like they are all of a sudden gonna learn to stop spending their cash on going out every weekend and learn to sensibly save

 

[clint van damme]

Good, people might actually be able to buy a house to live in then.

the problem is if you own the house outright the new laws don't make a jot of difference so the investor with a couple of house with a mortgage on them isn't going to bother but for the big letting agencies it's business as usual.
And guess who's snapping up the properties the small investor is getting rid of? Nothing will change.

 

[skybluetony176]

All the government help to buy schemes as well. I don’t begrudge anyone using them to get on the housing ladder and indeed if my own children are looking to get on the housing ladder in the future along with bank of mum and dad they’ll undoubtedly have to use them but again isn’t this systemic of the failed policies of successive governments over decades? The same report I referred to earlier suggested that the government should look at diverting money from help to buy schemes to councils to build social housing. It’s pretty typical of the government to try and sort an issue from the top lining the pockets of shareholders in developers in the process rather than tackle the issue from the bottom. Help to buy is now widely reported as being a factor in the continuation of the growth in house prices. The only sensible way forward is to invest in social housing through the council and housing authorities that don’t rely on housing developers for their housing stock and a scaling back/phasing out of help to buy.

 

[chiefdave]

where’s the space to build houses? anywhere possible there being built? old pubs demolished for houses everywhere in Cov. you name a space in Cov where houses can be built?

The council's brownfield register shows 253 hectares of brownfield land available. Regulations require a minimum of 30 new dwellings per hectare but the reality is around 50 so that's 7,590 to 12,650 new dwellings to start off with.

The biggest survey of land usage in England, as far as I'm aware, was the UK National Ecosystem Assessment in 2012. That found the percentage of land in the England which is built on is 2.27%.
​

 

[skybluetony176]

the problem is if you own the house outright the new laws don't make a jot of difference so the investor with a couple of house with a mortgage on them isn't going to bother but for the big letting agencies it's business as usual.
And guess who's snapping up the properties the small investor is getting rid of? Nothing will change.

I think the majority of letting agencies stock is in the ownership of private owners rather than themselves from my experience. They are part of the issue though. When we were a landlord we initially used a letting agent and started at the going rate, after a year they wanted to increase the rent by £50 a month as in their words there had been an adjustment in the market. Following year the same which sounded great for us but we also have a conscience so went and talked to our tenants who to say the least were distraught at the prospect of another £50 a year rent rise. So we dumped the agent and rented direct on the basis that we’d give them a rent freeze at what they were already paying (ie no second rent increase) for two years. Essentially we still got a rent rise because we were no longer paying commission to the agent and the tenants saved for their wedding and honeymoon. Everyone was a winner. Although they did get a shock when we give them their notice, not because we gave them their notice as they knew it was never part of a long term plan, the shock was that they could no longer afford a similar house in the area as they would have to find an extra £150 a month by this time. The house did go back into private ownership though to a family rather than buy to let, much to the annoyance of the estate agent as they had a private landlord they knew with a stockpile of houses lined up to buy it and pushed us to go with him as he was cash buyer and there was no chain. We wasn’t in any immediate rush and wanted to see it return to a family home.

 

[skybluetony176]

The council's brownfield register shows 253 hectares of brownfield land available. Regulations require a minimum of 30 new dwellings per hectare but the reality is around 50 so that's 7,590 to 12,650 new dwellings to start off with.

The biggest survey of land usage in England, as far as I'm aware, was the UK National Ecosystem Assessment in 2012. That found the percentage of land in the England which is built on is 2.27%.
​

That’s just for Coventry presumably Dave?

It does seem to take ages to get these housing developments going on brown field sights. The old college in Rugby sat derelict for years even after the buildings had been levelled, the majority of the site was a car park and green space too. They’re just finishing the final area now and I believe the majority of the site was sold of plan. In Rugby half of the old cattle market sits empty awaiting development and that must be over a decade at least now. Just heard this week that what’s left at the old GEC at Newbold road is relocating so that’s a massive area that’s available for redevelopment in Rugby.

 

[clint van damme]

I think the majority of letting agencies stock is in the ownership of private owners rather than themselves from my experience. They are part of the issue though. When we were a landlord we initially used a letting agent and started at the going rate, after a year they wanted to increase the rent by £50 a month as in their words there had been an adjustment in the market. Following year the same which sounded great for us but we also have a conscience so went and talked to our tenants who to say the least were distraught at the prospect of another £50 a year rent rise. So we dumped the agent and rented direct on the basis that we’d give them a rent freeze at what they were already paying (ie no second rent increase) for two years. Essentially we still got a rent rise because we were no longer paying commission to the agent and the tenants saved for their wedding and honeymoon. Everyone was a winner. Although they did get a shock when we give them their notice, not because we gave them their notice as they knew it was never part of a long term plan, the shock was that they could no longer afford a similar house in the area as they would have to find an extra £150 a month by this time. The house did go back into private ownership though to a family rather than buy to let, much to the annoyance of the estate agent as they had a private landlord they knew with a stockpile of houses lined up to buy it and pushed us to go with him as he was cash buyer and there was no chain. We wasn’t in any immediate rush and wanted to see it return to a family home.

Maybe I've used the wrong term saying letting agencies.
I'm referring to companies with large portfolios of property.
We've had more than one London based company knocking on our door offering to buy our house. The new tax laws won't affect them.

 

[chiefdave]

That’s just for Coventry presumably Dave?

Yes just Cov, well it will be the area Cov Council cover which might not exactly match the city boundaries but will be pretty close.

Problem is developers can sit on the land. That then forces the council to unlock greenfield sites to meet the new housing requirements, land also owned by the developers, who can then build nice new estates that make them a much bigger profit margin.