How bad will the Budget be?

Sometimes I miss the trades and the jokes, mostly not though. 

I still get involved in the building works as we expand my business, hauling 40 sheets of MDF up 3 flights of stairs is somehow very satisfying. 
Designing and building gameplay the best part of my job. 
When I made it to Managing Director I had a year in a nice office doing Mats reports etc. Hated every minute, soon employed someone else to do that shit. 

No.

The value of a service you offer is what people will pay to get it, not your credit rating  

YES! According to him and the other lefty shit stirring trolls I am a hard right racists..

Sorry, lost you.

This doesn't make sense. The word service doesn't fit.

Got it thanks. 
Yes I agree. The land value reflects the amount someone is prepared to pay to live in the UK. That value is increased/decreased by the society the government creates. 

But I believe there is a far larger determinant on the price of that land and that is how much of it is for sale to build on. 

We know very many people would be happy to pay the taxes in this country and move here (God knows how much we have to spend keeping them out) But our government has invited millions of them to join us but without freeing up the land for them to live on.

It is my view that the landowners are influencing our government to artificially keep the value of land high. 

On your first paragraph
This was my point here. I feel relieved you have taken my words as an attempt to communicate an idea rather than attempt to make you look wrong (ie a debate). My point was very limited

On your second paragraph
This is what i call (or can be called) the monopoly dimension of land price. It's the explanation for the price of land that comes from the fact that, unlike other services and goods, you can't add or move land where it is wanted. The only circumstances in which land doesn't have this as a significant explanation of price is a frontier situation in which there is a lot of available land and very little infrastructure. In fact, to put it in a simpler way, the only circumstances in which land doesn't hold this monopoly dimension of price is where the price is zero. Think about it - the only reason you would pay a high price to be near a school and public transport is because there is no way for an alternative provider to move extra land in to that situation for a lower price. The people holding land in the situation have a kind of monopoly in that you logically can't replace these people with anyone else. This is why i think the planning angle is a bit true but not very true. If you were to release greenbelt land into development, the 'new land' would take on a value reflective of government and the surrounding infrastructure (ie the price of surrounding land), rather than bring the price of surrounding land down. It may be a bit of both, but far more the former than the latter. The net result would be an absolute bonanza for the rich, Landon being surrounded by migrant flats full of Africans / Asians and everyone's standard of living falling (except the landowners who would buy their own islands).

On your third paragraph.
The way to solve this without corruption would be to set a democratically decided quota and allow potential immigrants to bid against each other for those positions and for the resulting revenues to be put into government services. This would stop the corruption because all the value of UK society that is currently being collected privately would be pre-collected publicly and so there is no part of the price people are willing to pay left to collect privately

On your last paragraph - I agree. However, this is a giant corrupt beast that extends into government itself.