One House At a Time

[HagiaSophia]

With the age-old battle between town and country heating up once again, the British government moved closer this month towards banning ownership of second homes in popular rural areas.

Replying to a question in the House of Commons, Housing Minister Yvette Cooper said last week the government recognized that there was a “high level of concern” over rich outsiders buying second homes in scenic but impoverished parts of the countryside.

With reports that young people are being priced out of their own home towns in destinations such as the fabled Lake District, Cooper said a rural housing commission would begin next month to consider whether or not to impose sweeping controls.

“It is anticipated that the commission will consider whether there is any case for government intervention, through planning control or otherwise, on second homes,” she said.

Speaking to the media this week, Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, Conservative Party chairman of the Local Government Association, said that the idea of outlawing second homes in the countryside was ridiculous…"

cnsnews.com//ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=\ForeignBureaus\archive00506\FOR20050624c.html

 

[David_Paul]

Socialist economics 101. Limiting and regulating supply always makes things better and more affordable.

 

[HagiaSophia]

Another twist to the story of housing and property rights:

"…A similar program is under way in the United States, but proponents are careful to deny that the U.N. has any influence or involvement. The facts tell a different story.

In 1976, the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) was held in Vancouver, British Columbia.

Among the recommendations endorsed by the U.S., and adopted, are these:

A (1) (b) All countries should establish as a matter of urgency a national policy on human settlements, embodying the distribution of population … over the national territory.

(c) (v) Such a policy should be devised to facilitate population redistribution to accord with the availability of resources.

D (1) (a) Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means of … achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits of development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.

(b) Land is a scarce resource whose management should be subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation.

(d) Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements. …

In 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development adopted Agenda 21, also endorsed by the U.S. Chapter seven, on human settlements, says:

7.4. The overall human settlement objective is to improve the social, economic and environmental quality of human settlements and the living and working environments of all people, in particular the urban and rural poor. These approaches should form the core principles of national settlement strategies…"

wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44972

 

[puzzleannie]

they will have to get 5th wheels like we do here, or start building trailer parks

 

[David_Paul]

In the 50s, 60s and 70s the goal was to ethnically cleanse pesky Irish, Italian and Polish catholics from the cities by means of “urban renewal”.

Today the goal is to move everyone back into urban areas where they will be chewed up by the social service/ government union/bureaucrat/big business complex.

 

[Cradle]

During the Sandinista government, if you were out of the country for more than six months your houses/property would be taken away. If you remained in the country but had more than a certain amount of houses/property they would be taken away and redistributed by the government. If you remained in the country but had a tenant that had lived in one of your houses for more than 20 years the house would be taken away and given to him. If you had land without a house or building in it, it was open to “invasion” by whomever deigned to set up shack in it (actually, this can still happen, although only if you’re out of the country and have no one to watch over it…).

Is this what Britain and the U.S. are heading towards? Canada too, maybe? I can just see it. My parents leave that mess just to face the same mess here.

The absurdity of backwards “progress”… :nope:

Or maybe I’m just overreacting. But it’s not too far-fetched…

 

[HagiaSophia]

Cradle:

The absurdity of backwards “progress”… :nope:

Or maybe I’m just overreacting. But it’s not too far-fetched…

I don’t think you are over reacting at all – everywhere in every field letters, articles and commentaries on this decision are all over the place. Apparently the “elite” who knows what’s best for “everyone” exists everywhere and when they get into law or government, God help us all.