A Quote by John Turner

The most common objection to changes in public policy which would increase a user's control of housing at the expense of centralized institutions is that standards would be lowered as a result. The standards the objectors have in mind, however, are not something that cam be achieved with available resources, but, rather, represent the objector's own notion of what housing ought to be.
Regulators around the world have achieved an unprecedented level of collaboration since the financial crisis to create global standards for financial institutions. American regulators have largely viewed these international standards as a floor, and imposed higher standards on U.S. institutions.
The challenges of delivering more housing so people can enjoy the benefits of home ownership and improving standards and choice in public services can also be met with a strong Conservative policy agenda.
Politically, sometimes you get situations where rent control will go through. It is especially true in an emergency, where there is a sudden, sharp increase in demand for housing or a cut back in supply. People will simply not allow the marketplace to allocate housing resources and so you get pressures for rent control. Once you have it, it is hard to eliminate.
If the Government put people before markets, it would build more council housing - a form of public investment in housing that pays for itself while offering refuge to those who most need it.
The folly and hubris of the policy makers who heedlessly thrust the nation into an ill-defined and open-ended 'global war on terror' without the foggiest notion of what victory would look like, how it would be won, and what it might cost approached standards hitherto achieved only by slightly mad German warlords.
The government ought to be in the business of delivering health, education, housing, and basic services to people without a lot of game playing. There ought to be comprehensive childcare, a comprehensive approach to housing, a sane, rational way to finance education. But I also strongly believe in the notion of fundamental individual freedom.
Public housing is off-limits to you if you have been convicted of a felony. For a minimum of five years, you are deemed ineligible for public housing once you've been branded a felon. Discrimination in private housing market's perfectly legal.
A strong economy causes an increase in the demand for housing; the increased demand for housing drives real-estate prices and rentals through the roof. And then affordable housing becomes completely inaccessible.
The bottom line for housing is that the concerns we used to hear about the possibility of a devastating collapse—one that might be big enough to cause a recession in the U.S. economy—while not fully allayed have diminished. Moreover, while the future for housing activity remains uncertain, I think there is a reasonable chance that housing is in the process of stabilizing, which would mean that it would put a considerably smaller drag on the economy going forward.
I think housing is not a simple commodity because we are so in short supply of land. So the government has a role to play in providing housing - decent housing and affordable housing - for the people of Hong Kong.
Public housing projects as well as private landlords are free to deny housing to people with criminal records. In fact, you don't even have to be convicted. You can be denied housing - or your family evicted - just based on an arrest.
States are free to modify the Common Core State Standards or adopt their own individual standards, because academic standards are the prerogative of the states.
We can start with housing, the sturdiest of footholds for economic mobility. A national affordable housing program would be an anti-poverty effort, human capital investment, community improvement plan, and public health initiative all rolled into one.
Every thinking man, when he thinks, realizes that the teachings of the Bible are so interwoven and intertwined with our whole civic and social life that it would be literally, I do not mean figuratively, but literally impossible for us to figure what the loss would be if these teachings were removed. We would lose all the standards by which we now judge both public and private morals; all the standards toward which we, with more or less resolution, strive to raise ourselves.
Most Americans think that the typical low - income family lives in public housing or gets housing assistance. The opposite is true.
We've given more resources. On housing, we are now establishing a regional housing pot.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!