Get your head out of the sand. Austerity isn't working.

A hypothetical idea-sorry if it is a bit simplistic...

Currently the rate of interest for the government to borrow on a 15 year loan is 2.43%. Therefore, it would cost the government £24.3 million a year in repayments if it borrowed £1bn.

In the north west, new homes for social housing cost about £120,000 to build. With £1bn you could build 8,330 houses.

If the rent for each house was set at about £5,500 a year (affordable) then the total income would be £45.8m per year, a surplus of £21.5m on the repayments. Over 15 years, this would amount to a surplus of around £322m.

Of course you have to take inflation into account, say 2% a year - the £1bn would devalue by 2% a year meaning after 15 years the original loan of £1bn would actually be worth about 30% less than it is today. So we would repay the equivalent of about £666m.

Of course people are needed to build the houses, this will take people off of benefits, If the average amount of benefits is £100 a week (jsa and housing benefit) it amounts to £5200 a year. If the same person were to earn an average wage of £22k a year building the houses, then they would pay around £3500 Tax and NI a year. So the public purse will make a gain of about £8700 a year from that person who is not receiving benefit and paying taxes.

Multiply this by the number of people taken off benefits to build the houses (say 500 for arguments sake) and you now have £4.35m a year into the public purse. Of course with more money, these people will buy more goods and services which means more tax paid.

Additionally, you would have companies supplying the goods and contracts to build the houses, their profits would increase with additional corporation tax to pay.

So not only do we get people off of benefits and into work, we save on benefits and generate more tax but we also go some way to solving the housing crisis, especially if this model is repeated around the country.

I like this, it shows you are coming up with solutions here.

Flaws for me are... The key is how do you persuade somebody to come off welfare to build the houses if their income from benefits is enough for them to sit on the sofa instead of lumbering bricks about? Therefore, you would have to agree with the reforming of benefits (ie cutting it to those who are fit to work) in order to incentivise them to do it. I'd stay on my sofa! What if you can't persuade these guys to work, then your whole idea is screwed.

The construction of houses IS a good way of getting the economy moving. Currently the government are right to adopt a few schemes that helps people fund deposits which ensures new builds are actually completed and they can build more. The trickle down effect of new construction is very, very good for the economy. This way, the govt only has to fund 20% of mortgage deposits, while your scheme has them funding 100% of it which means far less houses being built. So this is one scheme that would work for Osbourne if done effectively.

PS This govt money to build the homes has been largely made up from 'evil' corporations.