Tuesday 31 July 2007

The law of unintended consequences; proposed co-habitation laws

Our great leader, Gordon Brown, currently lecturing the UN in a fashion more reminiscent of a failing Marxist African overlord (I just watched the highlights on CNN, so maybe I'm underplaying the full event and its true impact in geopolitical terms), has recently been espousing about property when in the UK.

Yes, he wants more homes, maybe even on undeveloped land in Southern England, for all his key workers whom he has been so generous too in extending the government payrolls by several hundred thousand (note how key workers are always government employees).

This building will also help to cool the huge demand in the UK and so bring down prices for everyone and help to make Mr. Brown our greatest ever leader.

However, today the news I see is full of the government's soft peddling of a report into co-habitation. Indeed, ministers have said they are 'minded' (that means 100% behind it for those not knowing the jargon) to put this into law.

So now does the law of unintended consequences come into play. if this very intrusive law is made into peoples' personal affairs, they will be less likely to co-habit (they may marry, but it seems unlikely since they are living together unmarried in the first place). This means living alone for longer. When people live alone the overall need for housing increases dramatically, especially the small, one bed and two bed flats which people in this situation would buy.

This is also the cheaper end of the market and so is the property most likely to be bought by the key workers referred to above. So as usual, this policy, as well as being a massive state interference in a supposedly free country, would also wreck Mr Brown's flagship housing policy.

Brilliant, joined-up thinking by the government as usual.


Vindico said...

Just found your excellent blog and rolled you! I agree about the proposed cohabitation laws. It means it will not be possible for consenting adults to live together without the state sticking their noses in their private affairs. If a couple choose not to get maried then why should be treated as such?

Mark Wadsworth said...

Well spotted! Minor point, but worth mentioning.

My take is that this is abso-fucking-lutely disgusting.

The State should offer couples who want to marry a statutory pre-nup of 50/50 asset split on divorce, no maintenance payable either way, custody of kids to be decided on a toss of a coin and a flat rate of child maintenance, unless the couple agrees otherwise and override this by their own customised pre-nup.

But of course the fucking bastard snoopers and legal profession and control freaks couldn't allow people to sort their own private agreements, could they?

They have made divorce so expensive and unpleasant, esp. for men, that the State now has to "regulate" those who quite clearly do not want the State butting in.

Cunts, the lot of them.

CityUnslicker said...

Vindico, well thanks, I shall come and look you up.

CityUnslicker said...

Mark - I quite like your idea of a coing toss. As much as it would never be used, it does address a central issue of the woman always assuming she will get the kids, except in very rare cases.

Crushed said...

Again, another example of the attempt to re-invent an outmoded concept of human interaction.
Rather than turning c0-habitation into marriage, we should abolish marriage as a legal, concept (that doesn't affect the right of people to carry out a marriage ceremony, but it would stay that- a ceremony.

CityUnslicker said...

Crushed - I diagree on ideological grounds. we should eb free to do as we please in anay way. Not compelled by government intrusion into our private affairs.

M said...

I've always found it rather strange when people demand that other people who don’t want to be married get the same benefits as those who are married, when all they actually need to do is get married if they do want those benefits. Fair enough homosexuals were excluded for a long-time, but now they have civil partnerships. It’s not as if getting married or having a civil partnership needs to be a big deal, it can be done pretty cheaply if that’s the desire of the couple. Just another example of a paternalistic attitude that seeks to shield us from the consequences of our own free choices.

It’s almost as strange as Marxists who parrot the views of Marx and Engels when it comes to sexual relations, completely overlooking the reality that the pair of them were very often hypocritical in their writings.

Anonymous said...

aaaa片, 免費聊天, 咆哮小老鼠影片分享區, 金瓶梅影片, av女優王國, 78論壇, 女同聊天室, 熟女貼圖, 1069壞朋友論壇gay, 淫蕩少女總部, 日本情色派, 平水相逢, 黑澀會美眉無名, 網路小說免費看, 999東洋成人, 免費視訊聊天, 情色電影分享區, 9k躺伯虎聊天室, 傑克論壇, 日本女星杉本彩寫真, 自拍電影免費下載, a片論壇, 情色短片試看, 素人自拍寫真, 免費成人影音, 彩虹自拍, 小魔女貼影片, 自拍裸體寫真, 禿頭俱樂部, 環球av影音城, 學生色情聊天室, 視訊美女, 辣妹情色圖, 性感卡通美女圖片, 影音, 情色照片 做愛, hilive tv , 忘年之交聊天室, 制服美女, 性感辣妹, ut 女同聊天室, 淫蕩自拍, 處女貼圖貼片區, 聊天ukiss tw, 亞亞成人館, 777成人, 秋瓷炫裸體寫真, 淫蕩天使貼圖, 十八禁成人影音, 禁地論壇, 洪爺淫蕩自拍, 秘書自拍圖片,

做愛的漫畫圖片, 情色電影分享區, 做愛ㄉ影片, 丁字褲美女寫真, 色美眉, 自拍俱樂部首頁, 日本偷自拍圖片, 色情做愛影片, 情色貼圖區, 八國聯軍情色網, 免費線上a片, 淫蕩女孩自拍, 美國a片, 都都成人站, 色情自拍, 本土自拍照片, 熊貓貼圖區, 色情影片, 5278影片網, 脫星寫真圖片, 粉喵聊天室, 金瓶梅18, sex888影片分享區, 1007視訊, 雙贏論壇, 爆爆爽a片免費看, 天堂私服論壇, 情色電影下載, 成人短片, 麗的線上情色小遊戲, 情色動畫免費下載, 日本女優, 小說論壇, 777成人區, showlive影音聊天網, 聊天室尋夢園, 義大利女星寫真集, 韓國a片, 熟女人妻援交, 0204成人, 性感內衣模特兒, 影片, 情色卡通, 85cc免費影城85cc, 本土自拍照片, 成人漫畫區, 18禁, 情人節阿性,

Anonymous said...

情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊美女, 視訊交友, ut聊天室, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, a片下載, av片, A漫, av dvd, av成人網, 聊天室, 成人論壇, 本土自拍, 自拍, A片, 愛情公寓, 情色, 舊情人, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 情色交友, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 色情a片, 一夜情, 辣妹視訊, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊, 視訊美女, 美女視訊, 視訊交友, 視訊聊天, 免費視訊聊天室, 情人視訊網, 影音視訊聊天室, 視訊交友90739, 成人影片, 成人交友,

免費A片, 本土自拍, AV女優, 美女視訊, 情色交友, 免費AV, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, A片,H漫, 18成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人電影, 成人, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 情色視訊,