scothunter 12,609 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 This all boils down the unemployed/immigrants currently takin up housing in the more affluent parts of cities...chelsea /knightsbridge and suchlike. The amount of housing benefit in these areas run in the hundreds of thousands per year in some cases. Its not so much the amount of benefits recieved each week but more the housing benefit recieved. There,s also the fact that such areas as these are for the rich and not for the poor. It will be treated as a form of social cleansing by some do gooders whom i suspect may have a case...atb stabba...just to add i agree on the cap. ah right,so it's more to do with renting private property at huge rents.now that is a lucrative scam for some landlords. Having said that it's the goverments own fault if they hadn't flogged off all the council housing they would have saved a fortune. Then again they wouldn't have had such a hold of the working man,he needed to knuckle down and take what was dished out to him,as he had a mortgage and losing his job meant losing his home. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richc12 84 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 IMO...... capping benefits to £26k is a pisstake.... nobody in this country should recieve a penny more than the minimum wage is these days... if people have the self respect and dignity intact enough to work all week for the minimum wage, then its an absolute outrage that people should or expect more sat on there arses what ever the reason.... no jobs, immigration, blaw,, blaw theres 10 year old kids on my street, cleaning cars for pocket money!!! guess what it costs them, a bucket and some washing liquid and bit of elbow grease!!! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nik_B 3,790 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 everyone also has to remember thou that certain parts of the country cost more to live in, where i am in wrexham our council house is 360 a month and private rent is around 450, but the like of london will be higher so it wont be 26k across the uk, that will proberly be in somewhere costly to live in. It's one way of looking at it Another is to say that you and I don't have the luxury of living where we want, we have to live in places that are affordable....so why shouldn't they? massive difference between long term unemployed i.e. can't be arsed working and someone who is 'out of work' and actively looking who I have every sympathy with. Someone who's never made an effort to work should live where there is available housing and not get to pick and chose a £2000 per month house in London just because they don't want to live somewhere else. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
R. Docks 154 Posted January 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 everyone also has to remember thou that certain parts of the country cost more to live in, where i am in wrexham our council house is 360 a month and private rent is around 450, but the like of london will be higher so it wont be 26k across the uk, that will proberly be in somewhere costly to live in. It's one way of looking at it Another is to say that you and I don't have the luxury of living where we want, we have to live in places that are affordable....so why shouldn't they? massive difference between long term unemployed i.e. can't be arsed working and someone who is 'out of work' and actively looking who I have every sympathy with. Someone who's never made an effort to work should live where there is available housing and not get to pick and chose a £2000 per month house in London just because they don't want to live somewhere else. Spot on. There was also a comment this morning about the definition of 'homeless'. Apparently the government, and Shelter consider you homeless if your children have to share a bedroom. I think that part of the overall benefit problem is that people have a warped idea of what 'essential' means. To some, having the latest flatscreen TV in every room, a holiday abroad at least once a year and the latest mobile are all essential items. To most, they are luxuries that you can live without if you have to. I'm not sure how I feel about 're-homing' people to cheaper areas; but having said that, it makes sense that if you can't find work in one area, moving should be an option. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
R. Docks 154 Posted January 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 everyone also has to remember thou that certain parts of the country cost more to live in, where i am in wrexham our council house is 360 a month and private rent is around 450, but the like of london will be higher so it wont be 26k across the uk, that will proberly be in somewhere costly to live in. Council house rents are subsidised by the local authority and are not true market rents. That, I have no problem with. Lots of people made seriously good money buying their council houses, the problem is that none were built to replace them. Only last night I was talking to a chap who bought his house for 30k at a huge discount, and is now selling it for 175k. Nice for them, but not very fair to those of us who never had the chance to rent a council house in the begining. I still think that people who breed children that they can't afford to keep or house should not be given more money or moved into bigger houses. If you find yourself in trouble, the state should help you, if you bring more trouble on yourself then it's up to you to sort it out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rob190364 2,594 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 everyone also has to remember thou that certain parts of the country cost more to live in, where i am in wrexham our council house is 360 a month and private rent is around 450, but the like of london will be higher so it wont be 26k across the uk, that will proberly be in somewhere costly to live in. Council house rents are subsidised by the local authority and are not true market rents. That, I have no problem with. Lots of people made seriously good money buying their council houses, the problem is that none were built to replace them. Only last night I was talking to a chap who bought his house for 30k at a huge discount, and is now selling it for 175k. Nice for them, but not very fair to those of us who never had the chance to rent a council house in the begining. I still think that people who breed children that they can't afford to keep or house should not be given more money or moved into bigger houses. If you find yourself in trouble, the state should help you, if you bring more trouble on yourself then it's up to you to sort it out. That should never have been allowed to happen, ridiculous and takes the piss out the reason why those houses were built in the first place! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
R. Docks 154 Posted January 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 That should never have been allowed to happen, ridiculous and takes the piss out the reason why those houses were built in the first place! I agree......... I think...... Overall, I think it was good that everyone got the right to buy their own home; and plenty of people took advantage of it and made a few quid along the way. BUT, I do think it's wrong that the council house stock was not replaced. Money made from selling the houses off should have been put straight back into new houses, preferably built by the unemployed. The chronic housing shortage is pushing up the rental market. Around here you can't rent anything for less than £750 a month, and that's for one bedroom with no garden and no parking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
R. Docks 154 Posted January 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 I see that they've lost the vote in the house of lords tonight, so it looks like there are some who will carry on raking in the benefits.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6pack 60 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 I don't think benefits need to be capped if the government just changed a few strategies on who was eligible . If the cap is all about lowering the deficit, then the increase in unemployment will cancel that out surely? Close loop holes, change a few policies and those that need help will be rightfully receiving it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mattydski 560 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 anyone watch Edwina Currie on the one show a while back??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
staffs riffraff 1,068 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 think they should sort the reasons why people of this country have ti rely on benefits. stop letting in any people that havent got a skilled job and when that job ends they go straight back unless they have another to go straight in to and the joib has to be secured first and only when no one in this country cant do it, get rid of employment agencies as along with unskilled cheap immigrant labour they are THE 2 main factors keeping wages down, the people who are running the country and should be putting the people first start setting an example by not screwing with tax payers money for expenses and people like that twat tony.b making millions and paying as little tax as possible, putting problems of this country first before sending billions in aid to places like pakistan to teach little talibanistas how best blow us up and most painfull way to behead us kuffar. I could go on but you get my drift but what pisses me off is when people sau if it wasnt for immigrants none of the low paid jobs would get done lol who did it before? how much were the hard working miners etc paid before they got sold out? i know cleaning a hotel for 9 hours a day is alot easier than a shift down the mines 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
staffs riffraff 1,068 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 interesting point stabba even though people shouldnt get huge amounts in housing but are they trying doing similar to the land clearances in the cities ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SNAP SHOT 194 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Once in the trap of social benifits its very hard to get of it, unless your WILLING, AND WANTING TOO, i see people get dole money head to the pub for the weekend live the high life and then do nothing ALL week.. Those that want to have dignity, Are simply not helped enough to better themselves and seek employment, and those that dont simply fire out a few kiddies, which in turn are not brought up properly and learn nothing Except to laze about like thier parents are doing, no will to work... until reform is made on certain policies, and then the weeding out starts, sadly nothing will change, The people that need it dont get it, and those on long term milk it..... no win situation right there.... Snap. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
craigyboy 1,274 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 i,d cap it to feck all for most cases if you can sit in a chair, then you can work and if theres no work an people cant get a job then do summat else,whatever you can to make a butty,kinel theres hundreds of ways to make money,youve just gotta get off your arse 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest born to run1083 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Aye crack right down, stop the foreign wankers flooding over and breeding an army. Then getting the government to fund there ten bedroom house and other bills. Maybe another type of cull is needed 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.