# FILE NAME: 00001642.soc
# TITLE: Should the government have the right to limit the size of people's houses? [d3bd929cb0a9e52c943763ca2707c389]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - The government should not have the right to limit the size of people's houses. The most common argument in favour of the government limiting the size of houses was that it could have the effect of reducing house prices, particularly in expensive areas, making houses more affordable to lower-income people. Against this it was pointed out that reducing the size of houses would be unlikely to reduce the price of the house, so would not make houses more affordable.  Instead, the reduced size would lead to poorer quality of living for residents of smaller houses, while the housebuilders would make greater profits by selling the same number of houses at the same price, but at a smaller cost.  There was also a feeling that people should be able to choose what they want to do with their land.  As long as they are not harming others, and abiding by safety regulations, people should be allowed to make their own decisions.  It was noted that even in London there is no limit to the size of houses that can be built, but that the cost of land and planning restrictions meant that housebuilders would not build large houses anyway.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - In general, the government should not have the right to limit the size of people's houses.  However, it may be appropriate for the government to limit the size of houses in certain circumstances, for example, in areas where space is at a premium.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - We don't think the government should have the right to limit the size of people's houses because it wouldn't give any benefit.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - In general, the group was opposed to the idea of the government having the right to limit the size of people's houses.  The group felt that this was an infringement on personal freedom and that there were better ways to address issues such as the size of houses, such as planning regulations.  The group did, however, feel that there were some circumstances where the government should have the right to limit the size of houses.  These included in areas where there was a shortage of space, such as in cities, and in areas where there was a shortage of housing.  The group felt that in these circumstances, the government should have the right to limit the size of houses in order to ensure that there was enough space for everyone.
2: 1,4,2,3
1: 1,3,4,2
1: 2,4,1,3
1: 4,1,2,3