ANDREW Martin (Letters, July 3) blames Mrs Thatcher for the loss of social housing and makes some very good points as he does so – although he might have mentioned that Right to Buy was first introduced in the 1954 Labour manifesto and council houses were sold off under them.

However, let’s take his theme and look at some later problems.

Buy to Let mortgages did not exist prior to 1996 but grew exponentially under Blair and Brown. Brown’s introduction of National Minimum Wage, topped up by tax credits, was simply a subsidy to large businesses and the creation of a “moral ceiling” at which companies could pay the minimum they could get away with, with the government ensuring the workforce didn’t starve.

In 2015, NIESR estimated that 30 per cent of tax credits ended up in the employers pockets, and it’s been widely reported that our top four supermarkets effectively receive subsidies of £1bn per year. An individual could not count tax credits on a mortgage application, but a buy to let landlord, dependent only on the rent charged, effectively could (since rent is your wages!).

That landlord also had the advantage of being able to offset his interest-only mortgage payments against his tax bill. A house price bubble ensued. Accounting rules meant that this was reflected in GDP figures but not in inflation, so interest rates remained low - a bad thing for savers and employees (when money is cheap, it’s easier to invest in replacing you with a machine!).

At the low end, landlords also received a subsidy in the form of housing benefit, which, being based on average rents, also caused the housing benefit bill to rise as new landlords entered an area and charged higher rents. It was estimated, as long ago as 2005, that Buy to Let had pushed house prices up by seven per cent. Yes, folks, Labour made you all poorer.

In 2008, prices began to fall as credit dried up.

Now it was Osborne’s turn to break his promises. A whole raft of schemes were dreamt up, supposedly to help working families. But here’s the thing: when you help a buyer to pay more, you help a seller to hold out for more. And we all saw what came next.

So now, thanks to Labour and Tory alike we have a new class of haves and have nots. The haves have seen the collective value of their homes increase by £4 trillion without paying a single penny in tax (let the buyers pay the stamp duty!). The have nots can barely afford to rent. But just listen to the uproar from Labour, Greens and Tories when it was suggested that the haves should use some of that untaxed wealth to pay their own care bills.

Given that access to capital is the biggest predictor of success in life, surely it is time for house price wealth gains to be taxed on realisation, in the same way as salaries, or share portfolios? Do we want all our kids to be displaced by capital-rich Londoners moving to the country?

Or am I the only homeowner who doesn’t think other people should pay my bills for me?

James Young St Annes Road Weymouth