speechlesstx
Jan 6, 2011, 09:33 AM
"The issue is surplus housing – the remarkable growth of space that people don't need (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/04/take-housing-fight-wealthy)."
According to George Monbiot, you have more space than you need. That extra room for when the folks come for a visit? Gone. That family room? Wasted space. Your man cave? Unconscionable. Sewing room? No way. Two bathrooms? Don't even think about it.
The government reports that the rise in under-occupation "is entirely due to a large increase within the owner-occupied sector". Nearly half of England's private homeowners are now knocking around in more space than they need..
... "Wealth … is the key factor in whether or not we choose to occupy more housing space than is essential."
See, the problem is we haven't been fair with the "common resource" of housing.
While most houses are privately owned, the total housing stock is a common resource. Either we ensure that it is used wisely and fairly, or we allow its distribution to become the starkest expression of inequality. The UK appears to have chosen the second option. We have allowed the market, and the market alone, to decide who gets what – which means that families in desperate need of bigger homes are crammed together in squalid conditions, while those who have more space than they know what to do with face neither economic nor social pressure to downsize.
The solution? Pay a heavy tax or take in a charity lodger.
Those who use more than their fair share should pay for the privilege, with a big tax penalty for under-occupation. If it prompts them either to take in a lodger or to move into a smaller home in a lower tax band, so much the better.
Anyone know where George lives? I'd like to know if he's using more space than he needs.
According to George Monbiot, you have more space than you need. That extra room for when the folks come for a visit? Gone. That family room? Wasted space. Your man cave? Unconscionable. Sewing room? No way. Two bathrooms? Don't even think about it.
The government reports that the rise in under-occupation "is entirely due to a large increase within the owner-occupied sector". Nearly half of England's private homeowners are now knocking around in more space than they need..
... "Wealth … is the key factor in whether or not we choose to occupy more housing space than is essential."
See, the problem is we haven't been fair with the "common resource" of housing.
While most houses are privately owned, the total housing stock is a common resource. Either we ensure that it is used wisely and fairly, or we allow its distribution to become the starkest expression of inequality. The UK appears to have chosen the second option. We have allowed the market, and the market alone, to decide who gets what – which means that families in desperate need of bigger homes are crammed together in squalid conditions, while those who have more space than they know what to do with face neither economic nor social pressure to downsize.
The solution? Pay a heavy tax or take in a charity lodger.
Those who use more than their fair share should pay for the privilege, with a big tax penalty for under-occupation. If it prompts them either to take in a lodger or to move into a smaller home in a lower tax band, so much the better.
Anyone know where George lives? I'd like to know if he's using more space than he needs.