Yeah, I removed that for civility. You haven't said anything that dehaga, hasn't said, and look where that got them, poor thing. Honestly, go check, they tried the exact same line of argument.

Now for your acusation of bluster:

Do you have no idea how homes work? Do you think that every time a home is sold or re-rented, that the new occupants can just move in the day the old occupants leave? I think you’ve just never rented or sold any kind of home or real estate before. Your attitudes make more sense for someone who still lives with their parents and who has never done anything with real estate of any kind.

You're wrong on all counts, that's what is called bluster. Be better.

I think we're at an impasse, I see a staggering number of unoccupied homes, even just included long-term unoccupied. Then add holiday lets, then add holiday homes. I also see a staggering number of people I would like housed. I then see a start of a solution.

Go away until you can be the slightest bit more respectful. You complaining that anyone who disagrees with you, because of the data mind, lives at home with their parents (like that would make them wrong, that's called an Ad Hominem), is embarrassing.

Under second homes:

Some may be used as Airbnb type short lets, although many of these now pay business rates and do not appear on the Council Taxbase at all. As at October 2025, there were over 268,000 of these so-called ‘second homes’.

Am I understanding that right as a minimum of 268k in this category? As ther rest are in Holiday Let's and

NONE of these are included in our total vacancy figure of 1,022,433 for 2025.

That's a good source, thank you for that. I just used the top one of my search.

I don't consider a home that is used Mon to Fri to be unoccupied.

That's nice. I asked you why you chose to cherry pick the article and take partial quotes. Could you answer that please? Do you consider a house that's abandoned as unoccupied? Stop cherry picking please.

Here's what you're doing, knowingly or not: Reverse Gish gallop

We need to build houses. It's the best way to get broad based growth. Lots of trades.

Are you under the impression that I'm against building houses?

Here's me:

Sure build more homes, also fill the ones we have.

We agree: build more homes. Do we agree to fill the ones we have?

Had you read the article though:

Even if the Government meets its target of 1.5 million homes over the course of the parliament, analysis from the Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that under current government policy, increasing rents will cancel out all average wage growth until at least the end of the decade — meaning no improvement in affordability.