where the Customer Imagineers the Place.#Homeatics #affordable #offsite #modularhomes #Modularapartments affordable modular homes The Brand @homeatix #Home@ix,
The Ranges #Loftm@tic #Stylem@tic #Silverm@tic #Ladym@tic #Housem@tic Driven by the Homemakerhttps://t.co/FpZ5Opguxh

— Homeatix (@homeatix) February 17, 2021

https://t.co/KFvyoCDVXt

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/gDuMM8TWg7

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/8g6O2oC1Ql

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/gM3bQQ87Y8

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/Vvs3TgSrP3

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/xSUgFJDlGU

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/Dk7yUStLm6

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/vzxTagsN6C

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/hze7VrMB7R

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/2sUdJY2fsl

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/grVWjRu7HF

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/VtuNOuw2YV

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/ix2p1tRYHm

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/mThnWDy6G8

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

#Home@ix #Loftm@ic #Stylem@tic #Silverm@tic #Housem@tic pic.twitter.com/o149iEcRp6

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/bXSLRdEKFI

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/a1F1abBIaQ

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/woWLyzJSDL

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/IFzGBZx4KM

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/lZujvIz0A1

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/f4HLrASvdi

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/6x5KY5cKGs

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/ep0uqsOQAA

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/DuTYiRwC2L

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/Euhx4cDGmN

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/K9aZuKltVn

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/0WhZIrKN6p
home@tix #Home@tix means - Customer Choice Now! Your Choice of Design - Your Choice of Finance - Options? Your Choice Home@tix Driven by the Homemaker.

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/oVNcW7yxVS

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/YLo7yssIaJ

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/K1dYHDFQ5z

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/fjiL6zNvAe

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

https://t.co/qhAB3TOQHo

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

#Home@tix means - Customer Choice Now! Your Choice of Design - Your Choice of Finance - Options? Your Choice #Moduloft #Housematic #Stylematic #Loftmatic #Housematic pic.twitter.com/a7QjPkOfJL

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) February 10, 2021

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SELECT COMMITTEE Off-site manufacture for construction: Building for change Oral and Written evidence Full Transcript and written evidence Report https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KogcbPMpxjVPCi67wtGAb0TkRQ_XEASD/view?usp=sharing 15:25:13 Witness(es): Professor Jeremy Watson CBE, Vice-Dean of Engineering Sciences and Professor of Engineering Systems, University College London Mr Phil Wilbraham, Expansion Programme Director, Heathrow Airport Professor Jennifer Whyte, Director of the Centre for Systems Engineering and Innovation, Imperial College London

Professor Jeremy Watson: Housing for me is where we have the real gap in capacity against the objectives the Government have, and we are massively underperforming there. There is quite a lot of investment going on in various housebuilding companies and in some of the case studies that we have submitted they have been able to demonstrate benefits. At BRE we have a number of full-scale houses that were built on-site that people live in to try them out. This type of off-site manufacture can be quite small scale. It can be done in pop-up factories or in small local units. I guess that contrasts with, say, Laing O’Rourke which has a factory in Steetley working on very large concrete reinforced structures, which 566 are very specialised and more bespoke. There is a whole spectrum and that is probably less advanced but some countries are leading edge. At the housing end we are probably just a procurement gap away from doing much more of it because it is not that difficult to set up. There are some other interesting points you raised about the Government’s interventions, and those of you who have looked at building information modelling—BIM—which of course was mandated as of April last year or the year before, will know that government procurement above £5 million-worth has to use building information modelling, which is an essential ingredient for what we are talking about today. It is an essential ingredient but it does not specify off-site manufacture in itself. The point there is that the procurement rules can be very effective. The residual question around procurement when I started thinking about it—it sounds great, the Government procures against certain requirements—is: will the private sector follow, will shareholders of public companies say, “The Government are doing this so why are we not?” I do not see much evidence of that at the moment and that deserves some research and understanding.15.45

24th April House of Lords evidence Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn: Is not transportation sometimes a problem? Professor Jeremy Watson: Indeed. Going back to BRE, one particular building was put up that required 60-tonne loads which were too large for some of the motorways so we had to choose the route. Again, that is a case of systems design, how you break it down and what granularity of the modularity you are seeking. The smaller you get it—think of Lego blocks—the more flexible you can be with the solution. Also, manufacturing close to the point of consumption, as was said by Phil, is absolutely key. We do not want one big factory off-site in the middle of the country and an overloaded infrastructure. There are some so-called pop-up factories these days. For some domestic buildings, for example from Bill Dunster’s ZEDfactory, they will put up a temporary

manufacturing unit and take it down again when they have finished. @15.39.47 16:38:21 Witness(es): Ms Rosie Toogood, CEO, Legal and General Modular Homes Mr Jamie Ratcliff, Assistant Director, Greater London Authority Mr Tim Carey, National Product Director, Willmott Dixon Witnesses: Dr Mark Bew MBE, Chair, PCSG, and Mr Mark Enzer, Chief Technical Officer, Mott MacDonald 16:31:59 Witnesses: Mr Mark Farmer, CEO, Cast, Mr Steve Radley, Director of Policy, Construction Industry Training Board, Mr Mark Reynolds, Chief Executive, Mace, and Mr Dick Elsy, CEO, High Value Manufacturing Catapult Witness(es): Mr Andrew Morris, Partner, Rogers Stirk Harbour Ms Jane Richards, Director, Building structures, WSP Mr Jamie Johnston, Director, Bryden Wood Witness(es): Dr Sarah Williamson, Technical Director, Laing O'Rourke Mr Martin Kelly, Strategic Business Development Director, Severfield Mr David Hurcomb, Chief Executive, NG Bailey 15:31:38 Witness(es): Ms Suzannah Nichol MBE, Chief Executive, Build UK Mr Simon Rawlinson, Construction Industry Council Dr Diana Montgomery, Chief Executive, Construction Products Association 16:35:14 Witness(es): Mr Andrew Wolstenholme OBE, Co-Chair, Construction Leadership Council 15:25:19 Witnesses: Mr Tony Meggs, Chief Executive, Infrastructure and Projects Authority, Ms Ann Bentley, Global Practice Director, Rider Levett Bucknall, Mr Matin Chown, Infrastructure Client Group 16:32:11 Witnesses: Mr Richard Harrington MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Infrastructure and Construction), Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Q74 Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach: The Chancellor said that five government departments are going to adopt a “presumption in favour” of modern methods of construction, including off-site, next year. When I first read that expression, I felt that it could have been lifted from a script of “Yes Minister”, because it can mean almost anything. Richard Harrington MP: It probably was. Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach: I am sure that was not on your mind, as you have a very practical understanding of what it means. Will you spell that out for us? When I worked in No. 10 I found that co-operation between two government departments was difficult, so to get to five, and to add in the Treasury if it is one of them, will be very complex. Richard Harrington MP: The Treasury is not directly involved in this. Let me explain which departments are. I have not had the pleasure of working in No. 10 as Lord Griffiths and Baroness Morgan have. I cannot speak for other members, but Baroness Neville-Jones has worked in buildings adjacent to No. 10, I know. Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach: Sounds sinister. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-construction-playbook The Construction Playbook captures commercial best practices and specific sector reforms outlining the government’s expectations of how contracting authorities and suppliers, including the supply chain, should engage with each other. These are set out in 14 key policies for how the government should assess, procure and deliver public works projects and programmes which all central government departments and their arms length bodies are expected to follow on a ‘comply or explain’ basis.

Use of frameworks Frameworks are an efficient method for government to procure public works, goods and services and can provide an opportunity for contracting authorities to access economies of scale. However, using frameworks inappropriately can have negative consequences for contracting authorities, markets and suppliers, and can unintentionally inflate prices.

#Moduloft

Guten Tag, here is your unroll: @rld_real_CPR: In the manner of the Hymn numbers posted for the order of service. The Perfect Storm and Dr Tim Morgans… https://t.co/khjuMaqgxm Share this if you think it's interesting. ?

— Thread Reader App (@threadreaderapp) December 18, 2020

In the manner of the Hymn numbers posted for the order of service. The Perfect Storm and Dr Tim Morgans Surplus Energy Economics Blog. #155 #GrubStreetJournal @Wiki_Ballot https://t.co/Jf6buX3LZD via @rld_real_CPR

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

December 2015 The Bank of England’s approach to setting a minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) Consultation on a proposed Statement of Policy Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England said: “The implementation of MREL is a crucial step forward in ensuring that any bank, large or small, carries sufficient resources to be resolved in an orderly way, without recourse to public subsidy and without disruption to the wider financial system.” MREL can be satisfied by a combination of regulatory capital and certain long term unsecured debt resources. For firms that have a bail-in strategy, resources satisfying MREL requirements must be subordinate to operating liabilities of the firm. MREL is the sum of two components: a loss absorption amount: to cover losses up to and in resolution; and a recapitalisation amount: to enable the firm (or parts of it) to continue to meet conditions for authorisation and maintain market confidence as necessary following resolution. The Bank will base the loss absorption component of MREL on the minimum going-concern capital requirement set by the PRA (or FCA for firms regulated solely by the FCA). Currently, this comprises Pillar 1 (the minimum capital requirement that firms must meet at all times to comply with the Capital Requirements Regulation) plus Pillar 2A, which covers risks not captured or not adequately captured in Pillar 1, or any applicable leverage ratio if that is higher. The recapitalisation component will be based on a firm’s recapitalisation needs post resolution as determined by the PRA as the supervisory authority and any additional requirements necessary to maintain market confidence. The recapitalisation component can be satisfied with capital maintained in excess of the loss absorption amount or qualifying unsecured debt instruments with a maturity of above 1 year. The Bank will set MREL on a firm-specific basis, depending on the resolution strategy for the firm. The Bank intends to take a proportionate approach, with the strategy driven by a range of factors, including a firm’s size, the scale of its critical economic functions and the complexity of transferring these activities in resolution. For firms which need a bail-in strategy to continue operating, the recapitalisation amount is likely to be at least equal to existing Pillar 1 plus Pillar 2A capital requirements. For firms for which part of the business could be transferred to a private sector purchaser or temporarily to a bridge bank in resolution, the Bank proposes to set a recapitalisation amount that may be lower than existing Pillar 1 plus Pillar 2A capital requirements. For firms which can be placed into insolvency their recapitalisation needs will be zero. Actual and indicative minimum requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) Notes 1. Total Capital Requirements (TCRs) in the Tables are as at December 2018. For firms whose binding minimum TCR is based on risk-weighted assets (RWAs), the Table contains each firm's Pillar 1 and Pillar 2A requirements expressed as a percentage of the firm's RWAs. Where otherwise specified, for firms with a leverage-based binding minimum TCR, the Table contains each firm's Requirement expressed as a percentage of the total value of the firm's leverage exposures (LEs). 2. Individual external ‘Minimum Requirements for own funds and Eligible Liabilities’ (MRELs) are based on balance sheet data as at December 2018. For firms whose binding MREL is based on RWAs, the Table shows each firm's MRELs expressed as a percentage of the firm's RWAs. For firms with a leverage-based binding MREL, the Table contain each firm's MREL expressed as a percentage of the total value of the firm's leverage exposures. MRELs expressed as a percentage of LEs are given to the nearest 0.05% to align the number of decimal places with the leverage- based TCR. 3. The buffers included in the Table comprise: a. A capital conservation buffer of 2.5%; b. Financial Stability Board (FSB) global systemically important bank (G-SIB) buffers based on the FSB’s 2018 list of G-SIBs1 ; c. A firm-specific countercyclical capital buffer, estimated by assuming that a 1% countercyclical capital buffer applies in the UK and a 0% countercyclical capital buffer applies in all other jurisdictions (to avoid disclosing where other jurisdictions have positive countercyclical buffer values); and d. The systemic risk buffer, in line with the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA)’s published approach2 and rates3 . The buffers in the Table do not include the PRA buffer, the size of which is firm-specific and confidential. Firms whose binding TCRs are leverage-based are not subject to the capital conservation buffer. The calculation of firms’ combined buffers above MREL is in line with PRA Supervisory Statement 16/16(4)4, where appropriate. 4. The indicative MRELs for 2020-2022 set out in the Tables should not be construed as binding, nor are they a definitive indication of future MRELs. The MREL set for a specific firm in any given year will ultimately depend on a number of factors including, but not limited to: a. Changes to the firm and its balance sheet; b. The Bank’s preferred resolution strategy for the firm (which must be reviewed annually); c. An assessment of the concerns regarding the resolvability of the firm, including the progress of the firm in achieving resolvability; d. Decisions made by resolution colleges and crisis management groups; and e. Future changes in Bank, PRA or international policy, or in the applicable legal regime, which change the way MREL or capital requirements are calculated. Actual MRELs will require consultation with competent authorities and relevant European Union resolution authorities. 5. Since 1 January 2019, UK resolution entities that are G-SIBs5 have been required to meet the minimum requirements set out in the FSB’s Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) Standard6 , as implemented through the Bank’s Statement of Policy on MREL7 (the MREL SoP) in the UK, being the higher of 16% of RWAs on a consolidated basis or 6% leverage exposures on a consolidated basis. The FSB’s TLAC requirements, as implemented in the EU by the amended Capital Requirements Regulation (CRRII)8 came into force on 27 June 2019. These set different calculations of leverage requirements for G-SIBs than those set out in the MREL SoP. G-SIBs are required to meet both requirements and will be bound by the higher of either requirement. Where the binding MREL is the leverage-based requirement under the MREL SoP, it is calculated based on the Financial Policy Committee’s (FPC’s) definition of the total exposure measure as set out in the Bank’s Policy Statement on the FPC’s powers over leverage ratio tools, as updated in October 20179 . Where the binding MREL is the leverage-based requirement under CRRII, it is calculated based on the total exposure measure set out in Article 429(4) of the Capital Requirements Regulation, as amended by CRRII. While this publication includes the CRRII requirements specifically referred to above, it does not include assumptions about the future application of other changes that may result from the revision of the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and CRR. The Bank is committed to, before the end of 2020, reviewing the calibration of MREL, and the final compliance date, prior to setting end-state MRELs. In doing so, the Bank will have regard to any intervening changes in the UK regulatory Prudential Regulation Authority (United Kingdom) SONIA (interest rate) History SONIA was launched in March 1997 by WMBA Limited, and is endorsed by the British Bankers Association (BBA).[2] The Bank of England took on administration of rate in April 2016. Two years later, in April 2018, the rate underwent a number of reforms.[1] In the same year efforts to promote SONIA as the standard Sterling interest rate benchmark for loans, derivatives and bonds were stepped up.[3][4] In July 2019, UK transport group National Express obtained the first corporate loan referencing SONIA. The loan was drawn from NatWest as part of a pilot scheme before launch into the wider market.[5] Technical details On each London business day, SONIA is measured as the trimmed mean, rounded to four decimal places, of interest rates paid on eligible sterling denominated deposit transactions. The trimmed mean is calculated as the volume-weighted mean rate, based on the central 50% of the volume-weighted distribution of rates.[6] Eligible transactions are[6]: reported to the Bank’s Sterling Money Market daily data collection, in accordance with the effective version of the ‘Reporting Instructions for Form SMMD’; unsecured and of one business day maturity; executed between 00:00 hours and 18:00 hours UK time and settled that same-day; and greater than or equal to £25 million in value. The rate conventions are: annualised rate, act/365, four decimal places.[7] In 2018, SONIA (floating rate) bonds accounted for 20.7 per cent share of UK issuance compared to 48.1 per cent share of Interbank Offered Rate (floating rate) bonds.[citation needed] Libor The London Inter-bank Offered Rate For the Libor manipulation scandal, see Libor scandal. For the personal name, see Libor (name). Libor gets its name from the City of London. The London Inter-bank Offered Rate is an interest-rate average calculated from estimates submitted by the leading banks in London. Each bank estimates what it would be charged were it to borrow from other banks.[1][a] The resulting rate is usually abbreviated to Libor (/ˈlaɪbɔːr/) or LIBOR, or more officially to ICE LIBOR (for Intercontinental Exchange Libor). It was formerly known as BBA Libor (for British Bankers' Association Libor or the trademark bba libor) before the responsibility for the administration was transferred to Intercontinental Exchange. It is the primary benchmark, along with the Euribor, for short-term interest rates around the world.[2][3] However, Libor will not be published any more after end-2021, and market participants are strongly encouraged to transition to other risk-free rates.[4][5] Libor rates are calculated for five currencies and seven borrowing periods ranging from overnight to one year and are published each business day by Thomson Reuters.[6] Many financial institutions, mortgage lenders, and credit card agencies set their own rates relative to it. At least $350 trillion in derivatives and other financial products are tied to Libor.[7] Market transition from LIBOR to SONIA Interbank lending market From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search The interbank lending market is a market in which banks lend funds to one another for a specified term. Most interbank loans are for maturities of one week or less, the majority being over day. Such loans are made at the interbank rate (also called the overnight rate if the term of the loan is overnight). A sharp decline in transaction volume in this market was a major contributing factor to the collapse of several financial institutions during the financial crisis of 2007–2008. Banks are required to hold an adequate amount of liquid assets, such as cash, to manage any potential bank runs by customers. If a bank cannot meet these liquidity requirements, it will borrow money in the interbank market to cover the shortfall. Some banks, on the other hand, have excess liquid assets above and beyond the liquidity requirements, and will lend money in the interbank market, receiving interest on such loans. The interbank rate is the rate of interest charged on short-term loans between banks. Banks borrow and lend money in the interbank lending market in order to manage liquidity and satisfy regulations such as reserve requirements. The interest rate charged depends on the availability of money in the market, on prevailing rates and on the specific terms of the contract, such as term length. There is a wide range of published interbank rates, including the federal funds rate (USA), the LIBOR (UK) and the Euribor (Eurozone). https://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/tenprinciples.pdf http://teawithft.blogspot.com/ Stylized fact In social sciences, especially economics, a stylized fact is a simplified presentation of an empirical finding.[1] A stylized fact is often a broad generalization that summarizes data, which although essentially true may have inaccuracies in the detail. A prominent example of a stylized fact is: "Education significantly raises lifetime income." Another stylized fact in economics is: "In advanced economies, real GDP growth fluctuates in a recurrent but irregular fashion". However, scrutiny to detail will often produce counterexamples. In the case given above, holding a PhD may lower lifetime income, because of the years of lost earnings it implies and because many PhD holders enter academia instead of higher-paid fields. Nonetheless, broadly speaking, people with more education tend to earn more, so the above example is true in the sense of a stylized fact. List of acronyms associated with the eurozone crisis https://whenthecrisishitthefan.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/the-irony-of-reading-plutarch/

Ariadnes Ball of String. Back to Golem. To Whom do we owe this Money? StrudyBlog, Golem, The Slog, Robin Smith. Dr Adrian Wriggley #RichardWerner https://t.co/1kcxdcHxUh via @rld_real_CPR

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

To Whom Do We Owe This Money, Exactly? My Debt to Sturdy Blog and Golem XIV. Motley Fool, Cliff Darcy- The Spirit Level. Golem XIV, Positive Money- The Grub Street Journal and #Conquestof Dough https://t.co/5dqi7uaws8 via @rld_real_CPR

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

https://issuu.com/corporatewatch/docs/corporate_watch_false_dilemmas_guid

Bricks Without Straw. Pharoh Merkel https://t.co/DlQEvIg47Q via @rld_real_CPR

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

Meet The Fuggers, Brexit, The Euro and Clueless Elites. https://t.co/NuWR4tBaQD via @rld_real_CPR

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

#Tautology #CircularReasoning #RobbingPetertoPayPaul #MoneyisanAbstractRatio #CentralBankCoup #COP26 #ReithLectures #BraveNewWorldofCarbonTrading #SPASH #WrongKindofGreen #MODULOFT #AffordableHomes #CreditMisallocation #EphorsofDebt #EuroCrisis #Brexit #CronyCapitalistVirus

Government Bond Markets Aren't "Free" Markets https://t.co/sKnDTGbHSV via @cullenroche

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

The Biggest Myths in Economics https://t.co/qTx5DpD2sU via @cullenroche

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 18, 2020

To Be Continued this is a Notebook Post , as have so many of my posts been this past two months.

Brian Rose's Real Deal - London's Housing Crisis Is Threatening Our Capital's Future - Our Mayor Has Failed In His Promises To Build Affordable Homes For Our Citizens - London Real https://t.co/3uLxLqmsyb

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 17, 2020

Hello Brian, I have watched the Modular Housing and Affordable Housing Video downloads. #Moduloft is a Company I have started to tackle this problem. The Solution is one of Ownership versus Tenancy both related to disposable income and also Finance. Finance for Build to Rent has not been a problem, Finance for Owner occupation Mortgages (somewhat of a problem). The Delivery Path for housing is also one of several bureaucratic Layers. The GLE / Mayoral Level being but one. If you would like to discuss the Policy framework affecting this question at all levels feel free to call me. https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2020/12/16/moduloft-the-affordable-housing-manufacturers-defining-the-terms-of-and-boundary-conditions-of-our-domain-2/ Sadiq Khan is shining a light in all the wrong areas, Don't make the same mistake. The problem remains unsolved, This is absurd, its not rocket science. When something such as the current problem emerges across several decades and actually gets worse it is not because policy makers are stupid , it is that other less popular policies are given precedence. Believe it or not to see what the Policy areas are for this , One has to look at the Covered Bond markets, and the concepts of Land Value Capture ( Community Infrastructure Levy) . Good luck with your campaign, you are very much in danger of Over promising here on Timescales, I question how wise that is. I have published a series of Primer/Readers on the areas effecting these questions. Mine are Free Market solutions and for profit I achieve this by placing my Customers First Time Buyers and Starter Home purchasers first.

https://t.co/lrgUd5ZAgB via @yumpu_com

— RealRLD (@rld_real_CPR) December 15, 2020