Exchequer Chancellor Gordon Brown proposed a new welfare state measure apparently aimed at: 1. Buying votes from the grateful recipients of a new government spending initiative (aspiring home owners and construction companies), and 2. Propping up a sagging market in UK residential properties, thus.... 3. Propping up the collateral value of properties securing loans made by possibly nervous lenders. Chancellor Brown described his proposal as "'making affordable housing available to young people and increasing support for hardworking families'." If Chancellor Brown ever reflected that more people would be able to afford more and better homes if the government didn't confiscate so much of their incomes he has given no recent evidence of it. He proposed that the government would make up the difference where the purchasers could only afford 75% of the purchase price. "The remaining 25% will be bought by their lender and the Government, who will become silent partners." "More Families To Own Homes" by Joe Murphy. 5 December 2005 http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=405483&in_page_id=2&ct=5 The thought of having the national government as a super-co-tenant in common in my home would not give me thrills of joy. I'd feel that way about any government. Particularly the UK government under the leadership of New Labor. The article says "silent partner." I get the impression that the government proposing this measure hasn't the desire or the self-restraint ever to be silent or to mind its own business, or even the conception that there is some point at which its own business ends and other peoples' affairs begin. Here's a "thought experiment" for you: How safe would you feel criticizing or defying a government that was a co-owner of your home?