Thermal Nuclear Penguin

@offaltrades @ClarkeMicah @cjsnowdon The upkeep would be absolutely massive and no extra tax revenue to cover this. It's not just public services. Are you going to get the train to several ports and farms to collect all your food without deliverys to shops?

@anukewithouttac @ClarkeMicah @cjsnowdon If the roads had fewer cars on them then the bin lorries and fire engines would be significantly more efficient and the roads would be in better shape.

.@cjsnowdon. No, the two are quite unconnected. The nation would benefit greatly, especially in energy consumption, if we switched from road to rail. The government spends on roads rather than rail because it is the prisoner of the road lobby.

@philmck74 @salford_mayor @JohnDSocialist Probably the decision to waiver the pre conditions on their newest venture and that the construction costs may have increased by £800k

@salford_mayor @JohnDSocialist Ok so is there an investigation or not? And if so what is the council investigating?

Salford council is investigating its own housing company - but Mayor Paul Dennett doesn't want councillors to talk about it manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-m…

Land value is determined by the cost of development. Its called residual valuation. Land Value = GDV less (build cost + abnormals+ S106 + 20% builder profit). Its the costs of development and the house values (GDV) that effect the land price. Not the other way round. Nowadays the land costs are insignificant compared to the development costs and regulatory expenses. Take Hartshead View, Ashton done by TW recently. Houses - 195 House values = £300k average x 195 units £58,500,000 less 15% affordable homes= £49,725,000 GDV Build ft² = 191,278ft² x £200/ft² =£38,255,600 build costs (not inc abnormal/planning fees/engineering) other S106 contributions = £200,000 Land - £9.4m Net Profit = £1,896,400 All in all the land value they paid here was only 16% of the GDV and 19% of the dev costs. If the land was cheaper the build costs wouldn't change, the regulatory costs would increase and the house values wouldn't change as its the market that decides the sale prices.

@shortthought @bbcquestiontime We could afford to build all houses we need. Could afford the cost or the rent What makes them unaffordable is the cost of the land. One way or another vast areas are owned by state or public bodies. Much underused. Write off its notional value and build council houses. #bbcqt

Ah, yes, profit is the problem in housing 🤦‍♂️. What a total nonsense by the Greens, who think they could build homes for £55k! #bbcqt Councils say viability is the greatest challenge to delivering social homes, councils with free land who control planning! @bbcquestiontime

Developers aren't the freeholder managers. LAs do have powers to audit the developers books on any JV or strategic partner development scheme to check their reported costs/profits/revenues etc... They do this under the contract and actually have the ability to do this under a S106 agreement on 100% private developments where the council were not landowners. This inquiry is regarding service charges that are the freeholders/managers responsibility, not necessarily the original developer. And under the current law on private leasehold you are entitled to be provided the service charge breakdown budget when you request it from the freeholder. There are extra provisions like this under S20 for major works.

What a shame that the Mayor of London doesn’t have full powers to force developers who have built residential towers on GLA land to hand over their books. But good for the overdue effort to finally try. archive.ph/2026.04.30-183…

Low income earners council tax support is banded on their income as below. But its still a % discount. Therefore if you live in a higher valued home you still pay more than a smaller home on say 50% support. So the amount you pay is relative to the value of the asset. The council tax support is also relative to your personal wealth, as if you have more than say £3,000 in assets you will not be eligible for a discount - sounds like wealth tax. Tenants who are more wealthy can afford a higher valued house to live in. Do the tenants of this £55k pcm 2 bed flat have to pay no ctax because they aren't considered wealthy due to them renting? rightmove.co.uk/properties/174… The current value differences to the majority of the Band A and Band H doesn't really matter regards exact £xs its just the housing stock seperated into groups of ish values then the council budget spread across them. I agree super expensive properties should have another band but theres going to be little difference if we went to the cost vs benefit of valuing properties individually every year. bolton.gov.uk/benefits/counc…

@anukewithouttac @iealondon Low income earners get an exemption regardless of property value. Tenants pay regardless of their wealth. The difference between Band A & the most expensive properties in Band H is tiny relatively speaking. It's a REGRESSIVE tax within bands. The opposite of a real wealth tax

🇬🇧 Britain has no wealth tax. Yet it raises more tax from wealth than every country that does - Spain, Switzerland and Norway - and every other OECD nation. We shouldn't be looking for more ways to tax wealth. We should be looking at more ways to create it.👇️

@ClarkeMicah @RO8s Be alot more dead if the ambulances couldn't drive to the accident and provide urgent medical care to those involved.

.@ro8s . Of course I am right. And the road transport system costs far more than it produces. Leaving aside its mad waste of energy and its appalling congestion, pollution and noise, half a million people have died on British roads in the last 100 years.

Dear The Police Please continue to kick stabbers in the head. Thanks Lots of love The non stabbers

Second home ownership shouldn't have those ctax surcharges, at standard rates they are essentially contributing to local services but only draining the resources a fraction of main residences. But its a similar argument with single occupancy rates. If one person is living in a house that can fit 2 people then they are costing the local services half of what 2 people pay the same amount for. Single occupants are theoretically subsidising others by 25% even with discount. Your also not incentivising anything other than pressure on the single occupants cost of living by removing the discount - having a partner live with you makes things more affordable - food, water rates and help towards the bills are cheaper with two vs one; it still costs the same to heat the house irrelevant of 1 or 2 people living their. Make life even more expensive for these singles and they aren't going to have the disposable income to go out and meet someone they could eventually move in with.

If owning a second home is so evil it needs punitive rates of Council tax - 200% or more - why do we incentivise under occupancy with a 25% discount for single occupancy?

Installing an EV charger on a terrace house that I cannot always get a parking spot in front of. The government applying an EV mileage tax come 2028. The fact that if I don't drive it for a day the range loses 100 miles - must be having a nice drive on its own somewhere. No benefit of VED exemption any more. Unable to tow anything substantial if I need to. Not able to do a trip away without having to plan a route round an interim charge stop, that there are none on the rural route I am taking and have to go out of my way to be able to get to my destination. Then if everybody has one having to wait my turn for an EV charger at this stop to come free. Doing all that again on the way back.

Apart from the rubbish you read in the Daily Mail, what's stopping you from getting an EV?

If your monthly income decreased your council tax wouldn't decrease relative to your income - the tax is based on the value of an asset not income. A wealth tax would have to be paid out of your income also but would not change dependent on income it is levied against your asset wealth which is not always liquid cash and easily acccessible. Low earners wouldn't be paying on a wealth tax either. Tenants do pay council tax on homes they occupy as they are benefitting from the services provided by paying the ctax the landlord paying twice doesn't mean his bins get picked up twice as much. Although the tenant doesn't own the property, they are still living in a higher valued asset that they have legal rights and exclusive use of. If they went to a cheaper rental they would pay less ctax. The retrospective value caps are a red herring, yes they could arguably add a few extra bands but irrelevant of the value range its set at its just simply banded by say the cheapest 10% housing stock pay the least (A) and the most expensive 10% pay the most ctax (G). In between is just a varying level of grouped housing values.

@anukewithouttac @iealondon Disagree. Although it's notionally based on historic property values, it essentially acts as a form of monthly tax on income. Low earners don't pay (like income tax), tenants pay council tax without owning the asset, it's CAPPED for wealthiest (1991 £320k values)

Roads are essential for services we all need whether we drive or not. Be very difficult for the fire engine to get to your burning house on foot, nevermind the lads running you to hospital on a stretcher. How about walking down to the landfill every week with your wheelie bin? It maybe subsidised by other non-vehicle related taxes (I don't think it will be with VED, Fuel Duty, VAT, S278, eVED, EV mileage levy), but its something we all benefit from, those who choose to use their private vehicle on it pay extra for the privilege to contribute to their share of upkeep. But other road users do not pay their share for using it, e.g. bikes; I am not saying they should be paying massive amounts but its fair to contribute something.

.@RO8s They're not paying for it. they are paying taxes, under threat of prison, which the government chooses to use to pay for it, but might equally well choose to use to pay for something else. Should taxes on adult clothes be used to subsidise Marks and Spencer?

@moving_charlie Council Housing Waiting lists tend to have a negative correlation with supply though which is a big factor

Have house prices gone down in the past when supply has gone up? No. Have prices come down recently as housebuilding has slowed? Yes. There’s a problem with your assumptions Bobby.

@dense_evi @iealondon Council Tax is a wealth tax? Its based on the value of your asset. If you are wealthy enough to afford a bigger home you have to pay more. The poll tax was a fixed rate irrelevant of wealth that this replaced.

@iealondon MISINFORMATION The IEA includea Council Tax as a 'wealth' tax accounting for 60% of the total. The UK includes local social care (largest budget) which most other countries do not (health taxes/income taxes instead). Strip Council Tax out and the UK falls to mid-table

@stellastafford @tomhfh Construction companies in China, a country that UK developers obviously build in a lot? And are you following the Green Climate Change Fighting Companies like Ethical Forestry that took £70m in their scam? bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh Oh and Thermal! You ARE following what happen to those who run OVERCONSTRUCTION COMPANIES like Evergrande and Country Gardens are you?

It’s such an insane system that we force every housing developer to barter with local authorities about how many properties they have to subsidise in their own development. Fundamentally unserious arbitrary policy. Just tax them. One rate. No silly buggers.

@stellastafford @tomhfh What has come to pass? Also there are bigger fish to fry on the climate change contributors, looks like them farms you like are better off as a development with BNG improvements...

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh AND SO IT HAS COME TO PASS! BUYERS were the GLOBAL EMPTY INVESTMENT PROPERTY BUBBLE &construction emissions&greenfield loss ACCELERATED CLIMATE DISASTER =>uninsurables&destroyed=>PROPERTY BUBBLE HAS BURST. Invest in doomed properties???? Heading for £0 per property Penguin!

The only people who are making things unviable and more unaffordable are those wanting further regulatory burden increasing the construction costs. Again the council are sat on £9bn to spend on council housing go shout at them not private developers who are literally paying for this fund to go unspent.

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh Yes,MUCH WORSE after FIVE LONG YEARS BUILD BUILD BUILDING LUXURIES&A FEW UNAFFORDABLES,MAKING HUGE PROFITS&NEVER BEING VIABLE,DEMOLISHING COUNCIL HOUSING, DESTROYING GREENFIELDS incl HIGH GRADE ARABLE &RICH ECOLOGY,BEING DONATED PUBLIC LAND&GIVEN GRANTS. Don't pretend...WE KNOW.

@stellastafford @tomhfh @LostInSW19 What are you on about? All encompassing what?

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh @LostInSW19 Won't it be LOVELY in future though WITH THIS GOVERNMENT you won't have to pay ANYTHING AT ALL because the number of EXCEPTIONAL SITES is so ALL ENCOMPASSING &the same for BNG. And get TO CPO LAND too. LIBERTY FOR PROPERTY INDUSTRY! DEATH FOR THE PLANET!Not good slogans are they?

Lol thats the unspent contributions they are sat on.. doesn't include what has been spent nor the none commuted sums paid for by onsite provisions. I cannot find an exact up to date figure. But in 2018-19 total CIL and S106 contributions were £7bn in a single year. So circa £41,000 per house. Nevermind looking at the Affordable homes they have contributed of 57,000 that year at a cost to the developer of £81,000 per affordable unit - see whether you could build a home for less than that... Its horrible when statistics get in the way of your gaslighting isn't it. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f2adbda… gov.uk/government/col…

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh @LostInSW19 I know that is claimed and YOU WILL BE WRITING TO THEM ALL WILL YOU NOT? SAYING NO MORE LUXURY PERMISSIONS EVER and please use THAT MONEY to BUY UP houses and make them council houses. It's hardly a DENT in your profit either, TOTAL OVER YEARS&YEARS. 900K houses? £1K per house?

@stellastafford @tomhfh @LostInSW19 Nope thats literally households on the waiting lists not people. You gave me some census 2021 figures. 5 years old?

@anukewithouttac @tomhfh @LostInSW19 NO. I have just given you the CORRECT FIGURES. I am not sure HOW you are counting/labelling things to come out with such gigantic homeless family totals but I can only IMAGINE you are counting homeless individuals as homeless families?