Martin Sewell: Printing money Quantitative Easing may sound harmless, but it has evil consequences

Martin Sewell is a family Solicitor from Kent.  He is also an Anglican Reader.

You can often tell that the truth about something has become uncomfortable for its proponents when they re-brand it with a subtle change of terminology. In the military field, “civilian deaths” morphed into “collateral damage” and “abortion” has become the eminently reasonable “Woman’s Right to Choose.”  In the relatively recent past, we have seen that old villain “inflation”, which used to dominate the news headlines on a monthly basis in the 1960s and 70s, receive its long-overdue makeover.

Today nobody is much bothered about “Quantitative Easing” and many, outside of the financial services industry or the coterie of political junkies, could not easily explain its meaning, though when it is put in the simplest of terms most readily know they dislike it - which is why its true meaning is kept below the radar.  Each month, the Governor of the Bank of England adds a few zeroes to the government balance sheet, the printing presses produce more banknotes and your cost of living rises.

Quietly stealing the value of our money is not entirely unpopular. It lets governments off the hook, so that the consequences of their economic policies are deferred. Likewise, the spendthrift, the speculator, and those with industrial muscle, who can ride the wave, keep ahead of the curve, but the latest analyses of the phenomenon has demonstrated that there is not, in fact, a single rate of inflation as we have commonly been led to believe.

Martin Joyce: How to reform the system of "social housing" which traps people in poverty, reduces mobilit and kills aspiration

Martin Joyce is a Conservative supporter from Surrey.

The terms ‘Social Housing’ or ‘Affordable Housing’ are just euphemisms for State subsidised housing (SSH).  SSH is socially divisive, traps people in poverty, reduces mobility, kills aspiration, leads to dependency and creates a massive bureaucracy of Housing Associations, Government and Council Departments. 

In addition SSH cripples housing supply as developers have to gift 25% - 40% of all their output to the State.  Hardly surprising that even pre-crash, house building was at an all time low.  Indeed, what industry would not collapse if supplying 25% - 40% of all its output at cost? 

Astonishingly, all politicians still love SSH and want yet more.  Labour because it creates a voting base and Tories because it makes them look caring.  The fact the true cost to the State is totally hidden from the taxpayer is an extra bonus. 

As a society we recognise soup kitchens are a degrading and inefficient way to help the needy so instead we give needy people the subsidy they need to buy food. That is precisely the way we should do with housing.  Except for special needs housing, Government should entirely withdraw from subsiding property and switch to subsidising people.