Do You Think Bedroom Tax Will Be Scrapped

[j j m 6,539]

How many on here think the bedroom tax will get scrapped if labour get in, and do you think it should of been brought in to force in the first place,surely if they didnt let as many foreigners in the country in the first place we would have enough houses

[paulus 26]

How many on here think the bedroom tax will get scrapped if labour get in, and do you think it should of been brought in to force in the first place,surely if they didnt let as many foreigners in the country in the first place we would have enough houses

its nothing more than a cut in housing benefit pure and simple, the first of many back door cuts that bypass the law

[northern lad 2,292]

 

How many on here think the bedroom tax will get scrapped if labour get in, and do you think it should of been brought in to force in the first place,surely if they didnt let as many foreigners in the country in the first place we would have enough houses

its nothing more than a cut in housing benefit pure and simple, the first of many back door cuts that bypass the law

 

If Labour get in they wont scrap it,they will re package it and call it something else.Just like when they slagged the Poll Tax off and vowed to get shut of it....still here but called council tax its quite an emotive one this...when I was working and reading about families with 16 kids living in huge houses at the tax payers expense I would have said yes bring in some sort of capping system.....now I cant work any more it looks like we will end up having to look for a 2 bed ....the rents killing us,never been so skint in all my life

[j j m 6,539]

Yes I fear theres more to come I feel sorry for people that have lived in houses for years and. Have had to give them up only for a foreign family to move in I own my own home and the family next door are renting the house they are foreign dont work and the dhss pay the rent

[paulus 26]

 

 

How many on here think the bedroom tax will get scrapped if labour get in, and do you think it should of been brought in to force in the first place,surely if they didnt let as many foreigners in the country in the first place we would have enough houses

its nothing more than a cut in housing benefit pure and simple, the first of many back door cuts that bypass the law

 

If Labour get in they wont scrap it,they will re package it and call it something else.Just like when they slagged the Poll Tax off and vowed to get shut of it....still here but called council tax its quite an emotive one this...when I was working and reading about families with 16 kids living in huge houses at the tax payers expense I would have said yes bring in some sort of capping system.....now I cant work any more it looks like we will end up having to look for a 2 bed ....the rents killing us,never been so skint in all my life

 

the reality is often far different to the believed

[just jack 998]

you can bet the foreigners won't pay bedroom tax as every room will be chocka so maybe they will get a rebate of what they claim already for utilising so called rooms

[northern lad 2,292]

 

 

 

How many on here think the bedroom tax will get scrapped if labour get in, and do you think it should of been brought in to force in the first place,surely if they didnt let as many foreigners in the country in the first place we would have enough houses

its nothing more than a cut in housing benefit pure and simple, the first of many back door cuts that bypass the law

 

If Labour get in they wont scrap it,they will re package it and call it something else.Just like when they slagged the Poll Tax off and vowed to get shut of it....still here but called council tax its quite an emotive one this...when I was working and reading about families with 16 kids living in huge houses at the tax payers expense I would have said yes bring in some sort of capping system.....now I cant work any more it looks like we will end up having to look for a 2 bed ....the rents killing us,never been so skint in all my life

 

the reality is often far different to the believed

 

Yeah,quite right mate,thats why I put my opinion from both sides of the fence....its strange how so many of my opinions have changed since things went tits up and now live on benefits.....am I now one of them whinging cnuts who thinks the world owes him a living on a serious note how anyone can think this benefit larks a life choice (as it is for some,sadly)that would suit them is beyond me....sat here now wondering how to make £40 last till next Thursday....fecking grim

[The one 8,479]

Four folk up here in fife have fought it and won they set the ruling about the size of the room so you don't pay if its a box room classed as a bedroom

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

And council tax is not the same as poll tax. Poll tax was the equitable taxing of families per head of population. Council tax is worked out on the council's valuation of your residence. So a childless couple will living in a nice detached house which they have spent their income (which they have already paid tax on) improving will pay more than a family of 16 living in an unimproved terrace house. Cos that is fair!

[paulus 26]

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

its morally wrong as it discriminates against social housing occupants that claim rent rebate and not all social housing tenants!! it also does not apply to private rented properties. The argument of under occupancy has some merits but there is not the smaller properties available for couples and single people to move into. then theres the point some couples have lived in the properties and paid rent for seventy years plus and so have arguably paid more into the economy than those who chose to buy rather than rent, back in the late seventies when the housing boom started we created a better than my neighbour culture because the bank owns my house rather than the council was thought to have a higher social standing, the situation with employment,mortgage availability and high house prices is now creating a situation where renting private or social housing is the only option for a lot of todays youngsters, i keep saying this, the only way to significantly reduce the benefit bill is to increase earning to a level that mirrors the true cost of living and solve the problem of pensions as over half of all benefits is paid to pensioners. not using benefits to buy votes would also help, ie the winter fuel payment etc.

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

 

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

 

its morally wrong as it discriminates against social housing occupants that claim rent rebate and not all social housing tenants!! it also does not apply to private rented properties. The argument of under occupancy has some merits but there is not the smaller properties available for couples and single people to move into. then theres the point some couples have lived in the properties and paid rent for seventy years plus and so have arguably paid more into the economy than those who chose to buy rather than rent, back in the late seventies when the housing boom started we created a better than my neighbour culture because the bank owns my house rather than the council was thought to have a higher social standing, the situation with employment,mortgage availability and high house prices is now creating a situation where renting private or social housing is the only option for a lot of todays youngsters, i keep saying this, the only way to significantly reduce the benefit bill is to increase earning to a level that mirrors the true cost of living and solve the problem of pensions as over half of all benefits is paid to pensioners. not using benefits to buy votes would also help, ie the winter fuel payment etc.

Housing benefit claimants in privately rented properties are affected. I have recently had tenants move out of one of my houses as they had their housing benefit reduced. There were 4 adults living in a 3 bedroom house. The government was paying £425 per month and the total rent was £525. Between them 4 adults had to find £100 per month, that is less than £1 per adult per day. And they were unable to find that money, but they had plenty of cash for beer, fags, stock car racing etc.

 

If youngsters today don't want to live in privately rented houses or social housing, they should work hard and save up a deposit then get a mortgage. However, if people wish to rent that is there choice, but I object to them renting a larger house than they need, with my (tax payers) money.

 

A couple who have rented for 70 plus years in the same property will not have paid any more into the economy than a private owner if the renting couple have been in receipt of housing benefit the entire time. The bedroom tax is not a tax. Taxes are raised against income. It is a benefit reduction, affecting only those people in receipt of housing benefit.

 

The 70s culture of better than my neighbour is justified in my mind. We live in a free market economy and a capitalist society. Should people wish to spend their money on property that is there prerogative. It is not the case that the bank owns the property rather than the council. I own my properties, not the banks. I have loans taken out which I used to initially pay for the properties. The banks have an interest in the properties as they were used as collateral, but it is my name on the deeds, and in 18-24 years the banks will no longer have an interest in these particular properties as the mortgages will have been paid off.

 

As I said in the other thread, it is not the governments sponsibility to create employment on people's door steps. It is down to them individual's to get out there and find work. If you cannot live on the money you are currently earning, then get an additional job, get a better paying job or lower your standard of living.

[R.A.W 1,987]

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

 

If there were enough 2 bedroom properties about in my area I'd agree mate but the government brought about a tax knowing full well that that there isn't enough ....................... Which is unfair..............................................

 

Why tax the poorest people at the time when they need help the most? especially when google are dodging paying like fork and allowed to get away with it.

 

 

 

If people had somewhere to move too then fair enough but come on .

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

 

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

 

If there were enough 2 bedroom properties about in my area I'd agree mate but the government brought about a tax knowing full well that that there isn't enough ....................... Which is unfair..............................................

 

Why tax the poorest people at the time when they need help the most? especially when google are dodging paying like fork and allowed to get away with it.

 

 

 

If people had somewhere to move too then fair enough but come on .

Why should people remain in the area? There are enough houses in the country to put them in. If someone has to move to a new place a few counties away what's the problem? It's not like they have to stay in the area for their job is it?

 

Again, it's not a tax, it's a benefit reduction.

 

I whole heartedky agree with you on the a google point though. If a company has significant holdings of real estate and/or personnel in this country then they should have to pay corporation tax on the % of their profits at least equal to the % of their company present in the auk.

[paulus 26]

 

 

Grips my shit that its called a bedroom tax. Its not, as paulus pointed out its a benefit reduction. And a justified one in my mind. Why should tax payers pay for someone to have more bedrooms than they require? All this shite about people who have to move out of homes they have lived in for years fucks me off. Tough shit. Social housing should be allocated according to need, like military quarters. If you want to live in one house your entire life, regardless of need, then save up and buy it like most other people...

its morally wrong as it discriminates against social housing occupants that claim rent rebate and not all social housing tenants!! it also does not apply to private rented properties. The argument of under occupancy has some merits but there is not the smaller properties available for couples and single people to move into. then theres the point some couples have lived in the properties and paid rent for seventy years plus and so have arguably paid more into the economy than those who chose to buy rather than rent, back in the late seventies when the housing boom started we created a better than my neighbour culture because the bank owns my house rather than the council was thought to have a higher social standing, the situation with employment,mortgage availability and high house prices is now creating a situation where renting private or social housing is the only option for a lot of todays youngsters, i keep saying this, the only way to significantly reduce the benefit bill is to increase earning to a level that mirrors the true cost of living and solve the problem of pensions as over half of all benefits is paid to pensioners. not using benefits to buy votes would also help, ie the winter fuel payment etc.

Housing benefit claimants in privately rented properties are affected. I have recently had tenants move out of one of my houses as they had their housing benefit reduced. There were 4 adults living in a 3 bedroom house. The government was paying £425 per month and the total rent was £525. Between them 4 adults had to find £100 per month, that is less than £1 per adult per day. And they were unable to find that money, but they had plenty of cash for beer, fags, stock car racing etc.

 

If youngsters today don't want to live in privately rented houses or social housing, they should work hard and save up a deposit then get a mortgage. However, if people wish to rent that is there choice, but I object to them renting a larger house than they need, with my (tax payers) money.

 

A couple who have rented for 70 plus years in the same property will not have paid any more into the economy than a private owner if the renting couple have been in receipt of housing benefit the entire time. The bedroom tax is not a tax. Taxes are raised against income. It is a benefit reduction, affecting only those people in receipt of housing benefit.

 

The 70s culture of better than my neighbour is justified in my mind. We live in a free market economy and a capitalist society. Should people wish to spend their money on property that is there prerogative. It is not the case that the bank owns the property rather than the council. I own my properties, not the banks. I have loans taken out which I used to initially pay for the properties. The banks have an interest in the properties as they were used as collateral, but it is my name on the deeds, and in 18-24 years the banks will no longer have an interest in these particular properties as the mortgages will have been paid off.

 

As I said in the other thread, it is not the governments sponsibility to create employment on people's door steps. It is down to them individual's to get out there and find work. If you cannot live on the money you are currently earning, then get an additional job, get a better paying job or lower your standard of living.

 

again you assume that all housing benefit recipients are non working this is not the case!! there are a shit load of hard working families out there who do not earn enough to pay the rents that are being charged. then again theres also a load of landlords that use housing benefit claimants to subsidise their growing portfolio!! also the way i was brought up something is not owned until its paid for in full. your name might be on them deeds but i am quite sure you don't have them the lender does?? my grand parents lived in a council house for over 70 years and paid rent for that time, The government does have a responsibility to create jobs on as you say "peoples doorsteps" otherwise you get the situation like in london where only the well off can afford to live there despite that being the place where the work is.