Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
crash2006

The Destruction Of Social Housing

Recommended Posts

IDS want to destroy social housing in the UK, the more i think of it the more i wonder if they want the whole nation to be renters, the lowering of HB one answer to lower rents a lie, the new idea to put social housing rental prices at market rates, the new idea to limit the stay in social housing. Yet they are willing to subsides business and are not willing to subsides the very basic needs shelter, should the tax payer really fund businesses or should we fund the building of social homes to produce lower private rents.

The idea that the unemployed to move around the country for jobs right at the start and his total approach to the poor or working poor has been one attack after another, as the various groups attack him for his ideas he starts to take a more less offensive approach in his policies towards the poor. Rather than play the recession card blame, he sees this approach does not work, so now it using a more tactical approach to get the population( mostly made up of fools) to agree with him, some of you guys have agreed with him, so this new approach seems to be working with some of you.

Most of you need to open your eyes more and think of why they are only targeting the poor, when it wasn’t the poor’s fault that we are in this mess, it was the banks , MPs and landlords of this country yet the poor are taking the blame.

The only way to get cheaper homes is the building of social homes, to compensate for the demand in the private sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDS want to destroy social housing in the UK, the more i think of it the more i wonder if they want the whole nation to be renters, the lowering of HB one answer to lower rents a lie, the new idea to put social housing rental prices at market rates, the new idea to limit the stay in social housing. Yet they are willing to subsides business and are not willing to subsides the very basic needs shelter, should the tax payer really fund businesses or should we fund the building of social homes to produce lower private rents.

The idea that the unemployed to move around the country for jobs right at the start and his total approach to the poor or working poor has been one attack after another, as the various groups attack him for his ideas he starts to take a more less offensive approach in his policies towards the poor. Rather than play the recession card blame, he sees this approach does not work, so now it using a more tactical approach to get the population( mostly made up of fools) to agree with him, some of you guys have agreed with him, so this new approach seems to be working with some of you.

Most of you need to open your eyes more and think of why they are only targeting the poor, when it wasn’t the poor’s fault that we are in this mess, it was the banks , MPs and landlords of this country yet the poor are taking the blame.

The only way to get cheaper homes is the building of social homes, to compensate for the demand in the private sector.

I cannot disagree more. The big problem we have is a benefits system that is totally out of control. There are huge numbers working and claiming, defrauding the system at all levels. There are others too, not defrauding, but gaming the system so that they get the maximum out of society whilst putting the minimum in. The system cannot work when it is unable to distinguish between those truly in need and those who are able to pervert the purpose of these support systems.

There are many decent hardworking system, who are over burdened with taxation to pay for all of this largesse, unable to afford homes of their own. They are the ones who deserve places to live. The aim of the system should be to provide housing to those who have worked the hardest, learned the hardest, and saved the hardest, not those who have gamed the hardest.

And the best way to do this is to cut taxation, reducing the subsidies in the housing market, and in so doing stop those who are 'in need' from pushing their way into the housing queue at the expense of those making a contribution.

The more subsidies you have for the inactive and the gamers and the fraudsters, the more the economic argument becomes compelling for those who are currently working and contributing to join in with the ripping off of the taxpayer. At some point that becomes an unbearable burden, the government is no longer able to raise enough in tax to pay for all of this, and at that point, all benefits stop. Those who are in real need will know suffering then.

If you wish to bring about such interminable suffering to those who are in real need, please continue with this socialist intervention in the housing market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDS want to destroy social housing in the UK, the more i think of it the more i wonder if they want the whole nation to be renters, the lowering of HB one answer to lower rents a lie, the new idea to put social housing rental prices at market rates, the new idea to limit the stay in social housing. Yet they are willing to subsides business and are not willing to subsides the very basic needs shelter, should the tax payer really fund businesses or should we fund the building of social homes to produce lower private rents.

The idea that the unemployed to move around the country for jobs right at the start and his total approach to the poor or working poor has been one attack after another, as the various groups attack him for his ideas he starts to take a more less offensive approach in his policies towards the poor. Rather than play the recession card blame, he sees this approach does not work, so now it using a more tactical approach to get the population( mostly made up of fools) to agree with him, some of you guys have agreed with him, so this new approach seems to be working with some of you.

Most of you need to open your eyes more and think of why they are only targeting the poor, when it wasn't the poor's fault that we are in this mess, it was the banks , MPs and landlords of this country yet the poor are taking the blame.

The only way to get cheaper homes is the building of social homes, to compensate for the demand in the private sector.

IDS isn't trying to destroy social housing Labour has already done it through its reckless spending and bribery of the electorate for the last five years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot disagree more. The big problem we have is a benefits system that is totally out of control. There are huge numbers working and claiming, defrauding the system at all levels. There are others too, not defrauding, but gaming the system so that they get the maximum out of society whilst putting the minimum in. The system cannot work when it is unable to distinguish between those truly in need and those who are able to pervert the purpose of these support systems.

There are many decent hardworking system, who are over burdened with taxation to pay for all of this largesse, unable to afford homes of their own. They are the ones who deserve places to live. The aim of the system should be to provide housing to those who have worked the hardest, learned the hardest, and saved the hardest, not those who have gamed the hardest.

And the best way to do this is to cut taxation, reducing the subsidies in the housing market, and in so doing stop those who are 'in need' from pushing their way into the housing queue at the expense of those making a contribution.

The more subsidies you have for the inactive and the gamers and the fraudsters, the more the economic argument becomes compelling for those who are currently working and contributing to join in with the ripping off of the taxpayer. At some point that becomes an unbearable burden, the government is no longer able to raise enough in tax to pay for all of this, and at that point, all benefits stop. Those who are in real need will know suffering then.

If you wish to bring about such interminable suffering to those who are in real need, please continue with this socialist intervention in the housing market.

Whats the percent of workers that recieve housing benefits and/or tax credits? why is that a large supply in homes in other countries has cause a drop in there prices during the downturn? what was golden years in UK, the late 50s and 60s what was that due too?

Why give subsidies to companies? tax money going back to pay your wages.

The market wage isnt the real wage needed, social homes reduce demand in the private sector, look at the correlation between the selling of of council homes and the increase in house prices, when they stopped building social homes prices rose by a small amount when they started to sell of the stock, price rises rose faster, surely you can see a correlation between social home, private homes and the economy.

There is a big difference between wasting money on HB and building social homes, how many rents can HB pay for a social home and how many can they pay for a private home, council assets would increase in more homes would be build reducing spending, no wonder IDS is desperately seeking to eliminate that factor by introducing market rates into council homes, inorder to reduce the amount of council homes on the market.

would you like this country to be like hong kong secret poor? would you like this country to turn in to an african county? thats what would happen when people are pushed for survival.

Edited by crash2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop attacking people.

Problem solved.

By attacking people do you mean

a ) stop loading and our unborn up with unpayable debts?

b ) stop over-taxing our hard working citizens?

c ) stop suggesting that benefits to the needy should be reduced to encourage them to work?

Unless you grow a magic money tree, someone isnt going to like it. Whom do you chose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By attacking people do you mean

a ) stop loading and our unborn up with unpayable debts?

b ) stop over-taxing our hard working citizens?

c ) stop suggesting that benefits to the needy should be reduced to encourage them to work?

Unless you grow a magic money tree, someone isnt going to like it. Whom do you chose?

Stop attacking people.

Problem solved.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By attacking people do you mean

a ) stop loading and our unborn up with unpayable debts?

b ) stop over-taxing our hard working citizens?

c ) stop suggesting that benefits to the needy should be reduced to encourage them to work?

Unless you grow a magic money tree, someone isnt going to like it. Whom do you chose?

If you want all that then, there must be less regulations on building, land needs to be redistributed among other things? we pay taxes and entered into a social contract with the state to provide everyone with a certain standard of living, if that standard of living provided by the state isnt there then why should i follow the state rules? its a trade.

If you want people to work rather than steal then you must provide them with certain basics like a roof over their heads, you cannot expect people to receive no help but stick to state rules. It was not the state but the MPs running the state who created this mess changes to rules such as not allowing councils to reinvest money gained from selling off council properties to be used to build new council properties. You can't just pick and choose what you’re willing to give up, why should my taxes pay for FDI, why should my taxes pay for overseas aid, why should my taxes pay for the maintenance of aristocratic homes? list goes on and on..

Edited by crash2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot disagree more. The big problem we have is a benefits system

The aim of the system should be to provide housing to those who have worked the hardest, learned the hardest, and saved the hardest, not those who have gamed the hardest.

No it isn't you fekk brain!

Where does that study/work mentality get billions of Asians?

It just makes Globalist, corporatist elites and their sponging shareholders richer!

Workers jump out of tower blocks in Taiwan and commit hari kari in Japan after getting pissed out of their miserable minds everynight - having to go back and live in something little bigger than a dog kennel after 80+ hour weeks.

And the American 'work ethics' - winner takes all - they are just waking up to this.

Read this https://www.nytimes....=me&ref=general

The Americans I'm talking about are not just those shadowy anonymous corporate campaign contributors who flooded this campaign. No less triumphant were those individuals at the apex of the economic pyramid — the superrich who have gotten spectacularly richer over the last four decades while their fellow citizens either treaded water or lost ground.

The top 1 percent of American earners took in 23.5 percent of the nation's pretax income in 2007 — up from less than 9 percent in 1976.

During the boom years of 2002 to 2007, that top 1 percent's pretax income increased an extraordinary 10 percent every year. But the boom proved an exclusive affair: in that same period, the median income for non-elderly American households went down and the poverty rate rose.

Edited by erranta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDS want to destroy social housing in the UK, the more i think of it the more i wonder if they want the whole nation to be renters, the lowering of HB one answer to lower rents a lie, the new idea to put social housing rental prices at market rates, the new idea to limit the stay in social housing. Yet they are willing to subsides business and are not willing to subsides the very basic needs shelter, should the tax payer really fund businesses or should we fund the building of social homes to produce lower private rents.

The idea that the unemployed to move around the country for jobs right at the start and his total approach to the poor or working poor has been one attack after another, as the various groups attack him for his ideas he starts to take a more less offensive approach in his policies towards the poor. Rather than play the recession card blame, he sees this approach does not work, so now it using a more tactical approach to get the population( mostly made up of fools) to agree with him, some of you guys have agreed with him, so this new approach seems to be working with some of you.

Most of you need to open your eyes more and think of why they are only targeting the poor, when it wasn't the poor's fault that we are in this mess, it was the banks , MPs and landlords of this country yet the poor are taking the blame.

The only way to get cheaper homes is the building of social homes, to compensate for the demand in the private sector.

why do we need more housing in UK?

I do not see any homeless people around ...

if we build more houses they will be empty ... and there is apparently 70k empty houses ... I can see a lot of houses in RightMove waiting empty for sale ...

the private rent is high because HB pays for any size of the private rent ... it is an ultimate market floor .. nobody will rent for less as the state always pay the market rate ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just makes Globalist, corporatist elites and their sponging shareholders richer!

Indeed, bloody shareholders !!!! All the rich should be taken off their assets !!!

Let's start here:

http://www.manifest.co.uk/manifest-i/fact_boxes/0305NAPFfact_box.htm

The UK pension funds represent over £800bn in assets, a large proportion of institutional investor funds.

Do not you realise that these days majority of the taxes and majority of the capital is actually generated and owned by the middle class ????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do we need more housing in UK?

I do not see any homeless people around ...

if we build more houses they will be empty ... and there is apparently 70k empty houses ... I can see a lot of houses in RightMove waiting empty for sale ...

the private rent is high because HB pays for any size of the private rent ... it is an ultimate market floor .. nobody will rent for less as the state always pay the market rate ...

Do you read its who owns the housing thats the problem, not the amount, the reason you dont is because the state pays for it, go to places were the state doesnt pay your housing and regulation stops them from building housing, and theres no state housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you read its who owns the housing thats the problem, not the amount, the reason you dont is because the state pays for it, go to places were the state doesnt pay your housing and regulation stops them from building housing, and theres no state housing.

so we do not need to build more houses .... we need to change the house ownership from private to council one ....

or perhaps we can provide cheap mobile housing run by councils ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not see any homeless people around ...

Open your eyes !!! suppose the homeless are like the london rats as far as your concerned they don't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open your eyes !!! suppose the homeless are like the london rats as far as your concerned they don't exist.

how can you be homeless if council pays you HB in the same price of the local private rent ... it is impossible to be homeless ... it is not sustainable, but I told you already ...

Edited by Damik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can you be homeless if council pays you HB in the same price of the local private rent ... it is impossible to be homeless ... it is not sustainable, but I told you already ...

if you are paying rent or a mortgage you are homeless but housed.

it's only if you own and can't be removed at whim and will are you in a home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can you be homeless if council pays you HB in the same price of the local private rent ... it is impossible to be homeless ... it is not sustainable, but I told you already ...

Open your eyes open your ears and when you open your mouth ask the right questions you might understand what people are talking about , then you can stop your moronic posting against the people of the country that you have chosen as a place to live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Th benefits bill and system was a huge problem before the recession, Labour didn't deal with it because they are ideologically incapable of doing so.

This is not an attack on the poor because, having lived on minimum wage I can tell you that that isn't poor in any real material way. I was well fed, well housed and saved money. I was living in the south at the time and so it was hardly the cheapest life in the world.

The fact that even now I am paying taxes for someone to live in a nicer house than mine that even I couldn't afford fills me with rage at the person who thought that was somehow "fair!" and the right thing to do.

We need more houses, in the right places and govt as ever is not the best way to deliver that. Prices tell you where houses are most in demand, so we should be building lots more in the south east. And by "we" I mean builders who should take the risk and the loss if things don't sell.

We need more jobs - again something that govt cannot create. They can set up a framework to help create jobs, but at the moment all we seem to do is make labour expensive by piling on high taxes. Then we make sure there are lots of regulations that big companies have no trouble with, but small companies are swamped by, it is a farce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems amazing to think that if you go back 25 years, one of Mrs Thatcher's main policies was "home ownership for all".

So much has changed in such a short time that we now have here an immigrant telling us we should live in caravans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems amazing to think that if you go back 25 years, one of Mrs Thatcher's main policies was "home ownership for all".

So much has changed in such a short time that we now have here an immigrant telling us we should live in caravans.

NO look closer he also stated tents put up around the M25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can you be homeless if council pays you HB in the same price of the local private rent ... it is impossible to be homeless ... it is not sustainable, but I told you already ...

I have talked to people in the uk who don't have anywhere 'to go', so there is something you are missing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems amazing to think that if you go back 25 years, one of Mrs Thatcher's main policies was "home ownership for all".

So much has changed in such a short time that we now have here an immigrant telling us we should live in caravans.

you and Miko really do not like foreigners ....

I told you already ... I am German and Czech ...

if all English leave Germany and Czech R. I will go as well back home ...

if NOT I will stay here and in this case I will tell you what should happen with my £1950, which go every months to the HMRC ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------

this place is running with 13% deficit every year and if we do not change it we will not stay in caravans, but in tents ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have talked to people in the uk who don't have anywhere 'to go', so there is something you are missing

is not every council required to provide you with HB ???? I thought it is a law .... Am I mistaken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO look closer he also stated tents put up around the M25.

so who is going to pay for these new council houses? we have a highest deficit in the developed world and the council housing is a pure consumption ...

or do you want to tax the middle class even more???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 144 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.