Universal Credit

[JohnD]

.

 

[transam]

I think a lobotomy would improve your intelligence.

Has'nt done u much good has it

 

[Notch7]

It constitutes less than 1 per cent of the NHS budget at that. As to specific health tourism the estimates are between £100-£300m.

The problems with the NHS are solely with the Government bad policies, be it constant reorganisations, PFI or contracting out.

Solely? An aging population and rapid rise in obesity related diseases such as diabetes, are also major factors.

 

[Notch7]

The two statements are contradictory
A building programme would include the reduction of land banking.
No-one (I assume) is suggesting that a reduction in land banking alone would resolve the housing crisis, but it is an important contribution to that resolution.

Why does land banking occur?
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/...g-crisis-developers-not-building-land-banking

The two statements are only made to appear contradictory if just the out of context highlighted section is read.

The important thing is to see that the business model of speculative building cant solve the house price or supply issue.

It is easy to accuse housebuilders of land banking and restricting supply, although to some extent its true, that isnt the crux of the problem.

It may seem obvious that to restrict house price growth we need to build more homes. But the overall level of housebuilding rises and falls with overall sales and is determined by the rate of transactions in the second hand market.

In a local area, a housebuilder will look at secondhand pricing to calculate selling price and therefore provide a basis to know how much to bid for land. If the costing doesnt work out with a profit they cant build. And thats the problem, housebuilders want to build as many houses as they can, but they cant if increased supply suppresses pricing.

It therefore means the speculative pricing model cant create the number of new homes needed. Its going to require a different model.

Housebuilders need a constant supply of land to build, if they ran out, they would have no business. Hence why they build up quite a few years worth of land. The other reason is the slow and complucated planning system. Although plenty of consents are issued each year, the cost is high and on a major development there could easily be 50 or so conditions to be discharged.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

The two statements are only made to appear contradictory if just the out of context highlighted section is read.

So if I type something like: "Red Riding Hood was called that because she wore a red hat.
blah, blah, blah, blah
Red Riding Hood's hat was blue."

The two statements are not inherently contradictory?

The important thing is to see that the business model of speculative building cant solve the house price or supply issue.

Land banking is not 'speculative building'. It is speculatively not building!

It is easy to accuse housebuilders of land banking and restricting supply, although to some extent its true, that isnt the crux of the problem.

It is a contributory factor.

It may seem obvious that to restrict house price growth we need to build more homes. But the overall level of housebuilding rises and falls with overall sales and is determined by the rate of transactions in the second hand market.

If the availability of houses for sale is restricted it drives up the price and reduces the amount of transactions.

In a local area, a housebuilder will look at secondhand pricing to calculate selling price and therefore provide a basis to know how much to bid for land. If the costing doesnt work out with a profit they cant build. And thats the problem, housebuilders want to build as many houses as they can, but they cant if increased supply suppresses pricing.

Land banking is not done by local area house builders.

It therefore means the speculative pricing model cant create the number of new homes needed. Its going to require a different model.

What is this speculative pricing model?
I know what a "A Speculative Asset Pricing Model" is but I am not familiar with this Speculative Pricing Model.

Housebuilders need a constant supply of land to build, if they ran out, they would have no business. Hence why they build up quite a few years worth of land. The other reason is the slow and complucated planning system. Although plenty of consents are issued each year, the cost is high and on a major development there could easily be 50 or so conditions to be discharged.

This has nothing to do with land banking.

 

[SirGalahad]

Solely? An aging population and rapid rise in obesity related diseases such as diabetes, are also major factors.

That is on the demand side.

The government controls the supply side.

 

[SirGalahad]

I think that if you cannot debate a topic like an adult (I assume you are an adult) without having to resort to insults, you should refrain from taking part in the first place. It speaks volumes about a person who cannot do this.

Well if the person doesn't understand facts then that's not my problem. Also I don't see you criticise woody when he makes disparaging and insulting remarks about foreigners or people on benefits Seems like he's not much of an adult.

 

[Bodgitnscarper]

“if five people bake a pie for dinner, but then another ten people turn up and want to be fed, then there is less to go around, and they all wait a bit longer to get their piece, and the table is a bit cramped to boot.”

It’s good to share your pie but what happens when the pies run out?

 

[SirGalahad]

“if five people bake a pie for dinner, but then another ten people turn up and want to be fed, then there is less to go around, and they all wait a bit longer to get their piece, and the table is a bit cramped to boot.”

It’s good to share your pie but what happens when the pies run out?

Go shopping. Eat something else.

 

[Bodgitnscarper]

The two statements are only made to appear contradictory if just the out of context highlighted section is read.

So if I type something like: "Red Riding Hood was called that because she wore a red hat.
blah, blah, blah, blah
Red Riding Hood's hat was blue."

The two statements are not inherently contradictory?

The important thing is to see that the business model of speculative building cant solve the house price or supply issue.

Land banking is not 'speculative building'. It is speculatively not building!

It is easy to accuse housebuilders of land banking and restricting supply, although to some extent its true, that isnt the crux of the problem.

It is a contributory factor.

It may seem obvious that to restrict house price growth we need to build more homes. But the overall level of housebuilding rises and falls with overall sales and is determined by the rate of transactions in the second hand market.

If the availability of houses for sale is restricted it drives up the price and reduces the amount of transactions.

In a local area, a housebuilder will look at secondhand pricing to calculate selling price and therefore provide a basis to know how much to bid for land. If the costing doesnt work out with a profit they cant build. And thats the problem, housebuilders want to build as many houses as they can, but they cant if increased supply suppresses pricing.

Land banking is not done by local area house builders.

It therefore means the speculative pricing model cant create the number of new homes needed. Its going to require a different model.

What is this speculative pricing model?
I know what a "A Speculative Asset Pricing Model" is but I am not familiar with this Speculative Pricing Model.

Housebuilders need a constant supply of land to build, if they ran out, they would have no business. Hence why they build up quite a few years worth of land. The other reason is the slow and complucated planning system. Although plenty of consents are issued each year, the cost is high and on a major development there could easily be 50 or so conditions to be discharged.

This has nothing to do with land banking.

“So if I type something like: "Red Riding Hood was called that because she wore a red hat.”

And here’s me thinking it was because she was a communist.

 

[IWalkLikeHimaMartian]

“So if I type something like: "Red Riding Hood was called that because she wore a red hat.”

And here’s me thinking it was because she was a communist.

It was because she had an alcoholic's nose and her horse was called 'Hood'.
So she explained to me in one of her drunken stupors, if I understood her properly.

 

[Notch7]

That is on the demand side.

The government controls the supply side.

Please explain, I dont understand your point.

 

[HawkEye244]

It constitutes less than 1 per cent of the NHS budget at that. As to specific health tourism the estimates are between £100-£300m.

The problems with the NHS are solely with the Government bad policies, be it constant reorganisations, PFI or contracting out.

Where did you pull that statistic? Your anus as usual? How can there be a viable statistic for an illegal and therfore covert practice? It's like that ''x % of crimes go unreported every year'' nonsense - how do you fuking know if they go unreported?

I would estimate health tourism is much much higher than 1% based on what I see, waiting rooms crammed full of migrants . Even your own figures ''between 100-300'' so give or take two hundred million, in otherwords no fuking clue.

 

[^woody^]

Seems like he's not much of an adult.

Ageist. Reported

To my teacher.

 

[SirGalahad]

Please explain, I dont understand your point.

You mentioned the rising obesity and aging population which requires more resources to manage - ie demand

The government manages the delivery or supply of public healthcare ie supply side of the issue.