Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Odysseus

Bob Crow Lives In Ha Property

Recommended Posts

Orwell was right. "Four legs good, two legs better!" We are all equal but some are more equal than others. - Dave, kettering, 3/4/2011 8:39 Sorry Dave but Orwell wrote, "Four legs good, two legs bad".

- Dave, Leicester, 03/4/2011 17:31

Click to rate Rating 144

The fact that 144 people upvoted this comment speaks volumes.

(in case anyone doesn't know, Orwell said both. Which is rather the whole point of the book.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So not a champagne socialist then. You think this is a bad thing?

You'd think if he was all about sharing and socialism he'd realise there are more needy people than him.

Its like Tony Benn. People fawn over him because he gave up some dubious title, never saw him give his families wealth up though.

Socialism is nice, if you can afford it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So not a champagne socialist then. You think this is a bad thing?

I might have this wrong, but aren't council homes supposed to be for those with lower incomes, a kind of subsidy to full market rents?

Does someone who earns this much money need subsidising in this way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might have this wrong, but aren't council homes supposed to be for those with lower incomes, a kind of subsidy to full market rents?

Does someone who earns this much money need subsidising in this way?

he's minimising the amount extorted off him at gunpoint each month.

nowt wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think if he was all about sharing and socialism he'd realise there are more needy people than him.

Its like Tony Benn. People fawn over him because he gave up some dubious title, never saw him give his families wealth up though.

Socialism is nice, if you can afford it.

Maybe he salary sacrifices part of his wage to Shelter?

He really can't win, can he? Damned if he stays, damned he moves on to a home more in line with his income.

Sorry, but I respect a man that is comfortable with where he lives, and doesn't let snobbery change this.

Now, if we were talking about his politics, then I have less respect for the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might have this wrong, but aren't council homes supposed to be for those with lower incomes, a kind of subsidy to full market rents?

Does someone who earns this much money need subsidising in this way?

Nope. Everyone can apply for council housing, and as far as I'm aware, it's allocated on an individuals needs. Councils may run their housing stock on a 'not for profit' basis, but I'm not aware of any subsidies. I assume he is not claiming housing benefit of course!

I don't think your income should dictate where you can live, and how much your housing costs should be. That would be ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might have this wrong, but aren't council homes supposed to be for those with lower incomes, a kind of subsidy to full market rents?

Does someone who earns this much money need subsidising in this way?

You mention 'social housing', and you think it is a great way to help the poor.

If you actually look at it in any detail, you will find the opposite. It sucks tax, making us poorer, to pay for it. It sticks great wads in the pockets of people who manage all of this, and as you can see, the allocation of the housing is crooked.

Social Housing deserves to be consigned to history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Everyone can apply for council housing, and as far as I'm aware, it's allocated on an individuals needs. Councils may run their housing stock on a 'not for profit' basis, but I'm not aware of any subsidies. I assume he is not claiming housing benefit of course!

We've had this one before, the difference between 'social' rented cost and private rented is an 'implied subsidy'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Everyone can apply for council housing, and as far as I'm aware, it's allocated on an individuals needs. Councils may run their housing stock on a 'not for profit' basis, but I'm not aware of any subsidies. I assume he is not claiming housing benefit of course!

I don't think your income should dictate where you can live, and how much your housing costs should be. That would be ludicrous.

How do councils generate income/wealth to provide council homes? Do they receive funds through taxation?

Is council housing allocated on the applicants needs solely at the time of applying? Would Mr Crow qualify for a council home if he applied today?

Edited by Reck B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mention 'social housing', and you think it is a great way to help the poor.

If you actually look at it in any detail, you will find the opposite. It sucks tax, making us poorer, to pay for it. It sticks great wads in the pockets of people who manage all of this, and as you can see, the allocation of the housing is crooked.

Social Housing deserves to be consigned to history.

Housing needs to be affordable for all.

The more unaffordable housing gets the more insanely unviable the UK gets.

Social housing gives people more affordable housing and long tenancies. These are essential components for a society that works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's paying 600 per month for an end of terrace house? Surely it's enough?

The problem is that HA rents are now too high, this is no longer social housing.

I'm currently registered on a housing waiting list. Each week get to view online flats that I can bid for via Home Options.

This week, a 2 bedroomed flat, built about 5-10 years ago I would say, came available for £428 a month, which I thought was expensive for a HA flat. It is located in the City Centre so I guess this may be the reason for the premium, I suppose. Rent wise, that's not too far away from private rental 2 bed flats in the same city (if a bit further out). I'm paying £480 a month for my 2 bed flat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had this one before, the difference between 'social' rented cost and private rented is an 'implied subsidy'.

It's a real subsidy! If you still can't see that then try taking it to the extreme - If you were to live rent free or only pay for the maintenance of the property, do you not think that would be a subsidy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is council housing allocated on the applicants needs solely at the time of applying? Would Mr Crow qualify for a council home if he applied today?

You can't make mugging fair by mugging everyone.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm currently registered on a housing waiting list. Each week get to view online flats that I can bid for via Home Options.

This week, a 2 bedroomed flat, built about 5-10 years ago I would say, came available for £428 a month, which I thought was expensive for a HA flat. It is located in the City Centre so I guess this may be the reason for the premium, I suppose. Rent wise, that's not too far away from private rental 2 bed flats in the same city (if a bit further out). I'm paying £480 a month for my 2 bed flat.

I'd be very careful if I was you, HA rents are going up at 6 or 7% per year. Please check with the HA but rents are likely to match private rents within a year or two. Of course you can get a longer contract though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had this one before, the difference between 'social' rented cost and private rented is an 'implied subsidy'.

Missed that discussion.

Perhaps he takes the view that private rental homes, as they're 'for profit' don't fit his socialist credo?

The fact remains, he doesn't seem to want to enter the circus of private letting, despite the fact that he could afford a far more luxurious home. Good for him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a real subsidy! If you still can't see that then try taking it to the extreme - If you were to live rent free or only pay for the maintenance of the property, do you not think that would be a subsidy?

I pay 80 quid per week (going up at 7% per year), half of which goes to central government. It's the so-called 'negative subsidy', please feel free to google it.

If I paid for maintenance plus a management fee then there would be no subsidy.(40 quid per week) From next year the council will start to buy these council houses from the government using a bank loan (5.5% interest!) Where does your subsidy fit in here!?

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.

  • 311 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.