But the planning system herds us all into dense towns and cities. preventing the sales. Nevertheless the large landowners will not sell up, or very little of the land they own. They never have and never will. They have to be forced in some way, and LVT will dwindle their stranglehold on the land to greater good of us all.
"contrary to popular belief, we are not living on a crowded and urbanised island, but only in crowded and extremely dense cities."
And what it said was that the south east was only dense because dense London distorted the figures. Outside London, the Home Counties are under populated.
It also states there is little Brownfield land, and most is in not in areas suitable for housing. Most brownfield land should be left natural to improve the quality of life of urbanites.
Yep. Look at the all narrow minded Tory Little Middle Englanders on this groups: Matt/Lord Hall who opposes an open free market in land. Anyone who advocates tearing down the current appalling system is labelled a Commie. That is a strange one.
Noble is pure NIMBY. I have no time for these types .
Typo: Should be: Currently idle land incurs no tax.
The message from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:
Wales is stuffed full of little hills which the Welsh name mountain.
The most mountainous hills (in the pointy sense) in Scotland are not as high as the highest hills in England or Wales.
The railway up Snowdon is a very distant cousin to the one you use to commute between the local benefits office and your one bedroom flat. It is a rack railway. And while it is perfectly possible to walk up the railway it is the most boring route up Snowdon and by no means anyone can walk up. It takes a certain amount of effort which is probably beyond many a couch potato, let alone most of the elderly.
The message from "Dave Plowman (News)" contains these words:
For different values of comparative. :-)
England (In 1981) had a population density of 918 head per square mile, Wales 348 and Scotland only 168. The total population of Scotland is a good bit less than that of The Great Wen.
But population density is not the only factor. House prices tell the same story. When council tax was introduced in England and Wales they had to have different bands in Wales because the valuations were so much lower.
"Roger" wrote from near Bradford overt Rogerness in message news: snipped-for-privacy@nospam.zetnet.co.uk...
** snip babbling Rogerness **
Roger that would be nice. Do nothing all day, get paid, go on a little train. Oh the life!!
** snip babbling Rogerness **Roger, do you wear clogs?
"Roger" wrote Rogerness in message news: snipped-for-privacy@nospam.zetnet.co.uk...
Roger, Wales and parts of England are empty because they will not allow anyone to live there. Try and build a house in the middle of the Brecons and see what happens. Those Welsh planning will say to you, get the hell out of here you demented Essex person.
The message from Tony Bryer contains these words:
I have only read what Dribble has posted here. If they really meant the North West of England I would have said they were well out. Depending on what you class as the NW it could be as little as just Cumbria which has a population density little more than Scotland. However Greater Manchester and Merseyside are densely populated (although not as densely as the West Midlands, let alone Greater London) and Lancashire is above the average for England as well.
The message from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:
Under populated compared to what pray? Not Holland (903 head per square mile) or Belgium (837) for sure.
Essex 1037 Kent 1016 Surrey 1542 Berkshire 1381 Hertfordshire 1513
The message from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:
As it happens I know of an instance where a house is being built (may be completed by now) in the Brecon Beacons area under the guise of an agricultural dwelling although the holding concerned is too small to support a dog, let alone a farmer and his family.
Should I wish to live in that area rather than visit occasionally I would have no need to build a new house, there are plenty to be had in desirable locations at relatively modest prices and many more for little more than loose change in the former pit villages just to the South.
And unless Nulabour have acted recently it should still be possible under planning law to build in the countryside provided the proposal is grand enough.
"Roger" wrote Rogerness yet again in message news: snipped-for-privacy@nospam.zetnet.co.uk...
Try and build a proper real house anywhere and see what they say. They don't tolerate Rogerness over there you know.
"Roger" wrote shameless Rogerness in message news: snipped-for-privacy@nospam.zetnet.co.uk...
Roger, the South East is only 7.1% settled - Kate Barker. North West about
9%.Roger you can't compare Essex to Holland as Essex is not a country. Your Rogerness is getting worse.
More Rogerness - I can't believe this. Before you comment on a document you have to read it. It is very well written in colour too.
In message , Doctor Drivel writes
Bollocks!
Land tenure, from 2001 copy of farm management researched by Imperial College at Wye.
Total number of holdings 173,728
Total area 10,737,000ha
Wholly or mainly owned 77.9% not including some private or
family arrangements.
These figures are for England and Wales 1996.
The non farming landed gentry may well own 20%
No thanks.
Everyone has an agenda. Land tax does not exist here in the form you describe. Currently the DPM is fiddling around with something related.
regards
In message , Doctor Drivel writes
There are more than 1 million people living within 15 miles of here. What exactly do you consider a suitable rural population density?
Maybe.
regards
>
Nor is Holland. Holland is a province. Nederland is the country.
I believe you.
The message from "Doctor Drivel" contains these words:
Where on earth do you did up your figures? Essex population density is about one tenth that of Greater London. Fully settled on that basis must be getting close to standing room only.
London is an integral part of the South East. Kate Barkers comparison is only valid if you take out Greater London. Take out Merseyside and Greater Manchester from the NW and the remaining 84% of the area (Lancashire and Cumbria) has a population density of 487.
What has independence got to do with it? Population density is a matter of population per unit area but then you never have had a clue about units.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.