Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
bomberbrown

Jobless Go To Back Of Housing Queue

Recommended Posts

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23992078-jobless-go-to-back-of-housing-queue.do

"Adults who have been in work for two years- OR ACTIVELY SEEKING A JOB - will leapfrog those on the dole."

So, if you're actively seeking a job, you are technically unemployed. So how exactly will this work?? More headline grabbing ******** from a government and London borough council I would have expected something better from.

On the face of this Standard article, words truly fail me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comedy gold from that housing justice bloke, saying housing is a human right. Well if someone gets a house for free, someone else has to slave to produce it. Presumably the right to housing is greater than the right not to be held in bondage.

Again all this council house nonsense and unfairness can be solved by simply selling off all council houses. There is no need for this free stuff for the lucky few when we have housing benefit, which despite its many faults, is far fairer than council housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comedy gold from that housing justice bloke, saying housing is a human right. Well if someone gets a house for free, someone else has to slave to produce it. Presumably the right to housing is greater than the right not to be held in bondage.

Again all this council house nonsense and unfairness can be solved by simply selling off all council houses. There is no need for this free stuff for the lucky few when we have housing benefit, which despite its many faults, is far fairer than council housing.

Yet another brainless remark about so called Council Housing? Its all in the hands of Housing Associations, not run by councils any more and its hardly free (small question about rent to be paid). Really wish you people would join the 21st century.

Plus selling off Housing stock oh that will work won't it? NOT! round here (Hertfordshire) we are seeing ex "council houses" that have subsequently been brought by BTL'ers who can't maintain them and either have under under-insured or not at all with the result that many people are living in sub-standard accommodation and when things go badly wrong (such as the roof falls in and such like) find themselves homeless because they technically have a home and can get help to be re-homed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another brainless remark about so called Council Housing? Its all in the hands of Housing Associations, not run by councils any more and its hardly free (small question about rent to be paid). Really wish you people would join the 21st century.

Plus selling off Housing stock oh that will work won't it? NOT! round here (Hertfordshire) we are seeing ex "council houses" that have subsequently been brought by BTL'ers who can't maintain them and either have under under-insured or not at all with the result that many people are living in sub-standard accommodation and when things go badly wrong (such as the roof falls in and such like) find themselves homeless because they technically have a home and can get help to be re-homed.

Why don't these people just move then? If they are paying rent, as you say, why don't they spend it on a different landlord?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<br />Why don't these people just move then? If they are paying rent, as you say, why don't they spend it on a different landlord?<br />
<br /><br /><br />

Security of Tenure.

But that's a whole different discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I just wanted to add that isn't this just a half hearted revamp of the council house system from the 50's.

i.e. You didn't qualify or weren't even considered for council housing unless you had a proper job and could pay the rent. It seems we have come full circle.

What a mess!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they let the Global rich come in and price us out.

They let the unskilled come and push pay down .

They squeeze the middle untill there is no more to squeeze .

We end up with a housing problem a job problem and they blame those most affected !! What c--ts !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't these people just move then? If they are paying rent, as you say, why don't they spend it on a different landlord?

Why don't they just build their own shelter out of the enormous amount of raw materials that the earth has for all to use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they let the Global rich come in and price us out.

They let the unskilled come and push pay down .

They squeeze the middle untill there is no more to squeeze .

We end up with a housing problem a job problem and they blame those most affected !! What c--ts !!

Those most affected being the hard working but low paid people who are taxed to death to house those who don't work I assume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't they just build their own shelter out of the enormous amount of raw materials that the earth has for all to use?

:D:D:D

How very Naive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those most affected being the hard working but low paid people who are taxed to death to house those who don't work I assume.

Pretty easy fix.

End the planning laws, stop all taxation, close the state down.

Simples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please email the Evening Standard letters page with your thoughts on this.

Get them in by noon if you can and you stand a good chance of being published!

Letters

Letters Editor: Joshua Neicho

P: 020 7938 7596

E: letters@standard.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to do the actual calculation and show that which is better in terms of cost to the taxpayer

- someone unemployed to be in private rented

- someone unemployed in council

- someone employed on minimum wage in private rented

- someone employed on minimum wage in council

Looking at it like that I would assume it's better for the employed person to be in private rented so they pay some of their rent.

BUT what tax credits would they also get? It all needs working through - where's the spreadsheet man?

Of course cheaper rents across the board would mean that people weren't so desperate for a council place.

Edited by SarahBell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not nice having to upsticks from a house that many will call home, but lets not be greedy and selfish, stand aside and help society put those housing resources to better use. :D

+ 1. Although the Government really ought to abolish Right To Buy for this to be successful (says the poster whose parents bought their council house :ph34r: ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to do the actual calculation and show that which is better in terms of cost to the taxpayer

- someone unemployed to be in private rented

- someone unemployed in council

- someone employed on minimum wage in private rented

- someone employed on minimum wage in council

Looking at it like that I would assume it's better for the employed person to be in private rented so they pay some of their rent.

BUT what tax credits would they also get? It all needs working through - where's the spreadsheet man?

Of course cheaper rents across the board would mean that people weren't so desperate for a council place.

Yes, this is a good point.

If you sold off all council housing (except a few homes for those that cannot cope by themselves), then you would also need to factor in the monies repaid to the taxpayer, and the fact that now council housing is in the market, you are more likely to get a higher number of people occupying each property. That would reduce rents overall in the current private rented sector. Existing council properties converted to private rental ones would most likely see rising rents, but then that is the whole point, to end the situation where poor taxpayers are paying more tax to keep the living costs of those wealthier than themselves in a subsidised home.

As you rightly point out, many people are desperate for a council place, nothing better than housing where someone else gets to pay a portion of the tab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah the other 'Bankers Friends Party' and their twisted obsession with making people homeless.

I quite agree, the council house system is a gross misallocation of resources that leads to homelessness. A market solution is the best way to allocate housing and reduce homelessness.

If all the council houses were in the marketplace, then whereas they are currently 'allocated' according to points or more often than not corruptly, it will be the highest bidder than is able to purchase any given place. That person will have an advantage in the auction process if they are working and producing, and there will be a disadvantage to those not producing, that is how it should be. If we encourage people to work and produce, more will be produced, enriching our lives.

Those on benefits will still be able to bid, as they have housing benefit to fall back on. This benefit will allow them to rent a place in the bottom 30th decile according to rents by value, and the benefit disappears if they are no longer in need, unlike the council house which they can keep indefinitely. Seems to be little to complain about., after all there are many who find accommodation this way.

At the moment the council house system works by withholding housing from society in general, a very odd way of allocating resources properly. Of course the majority of people like it because they are either getting a very nice benefit at someone else's expense, or just dont realise how much extra tax they are having to pay to finance it all. Return the tax, and let people sort their own accommodation out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite agree, the council house system is a gross misallocation of resources that leads to homelessness. A market solution is the best way to allocate housing and reduce homelessness.

If all the council houses were in the marketplace, then whereas they are currently 'allocated' according to points or more often than not corruptly, it will be the highest bidder than is able to purchase any given place. That person will have an advantage in the auction process if they are working and producing, and there will be a disadvantage to those not producing, that is how it should be. If we encourage people to work and produce, more will be produced, enriching our lives.

Those on benefits will still be able to bid, as they have housing benefit to fall back on. This benefit will allow them to rent a place in the bottom 30th decile according to rents by value, and the benefit disappears if they are no longer in need, unlike the council house which they can keep indefinitely. Seems to be little to complain about., after all there are many who find accommodation this way.

At the moment the council house system works by withholding housing from society in general, a very odd way of allocating resources properly. Of course the majority of people like it because they are either getting a very nice benefit at someone else's expense, or just dont realise how much extra tax they are having to pay to finance it all. Return the tax, and let people sort their own accommodation out.

There you go again - Council Housing - NO SUCH THING!

Social Housing is run by

Housing Associations

Registered Social Landlords

both of the above have to comply with the law on various issues.

How about making those with those with BTL empires having to be RSL's and comply with the law, especially with maintaining their properties to a reasonable standard. I can remember about 15 years ago local authorities in London were seizing property from "absent landlords" maybe its time the same thing occurred to housing stock that is privately rented that is not being maintained or where something that has gone disastrously wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it depends - like you say hard to prove though.

Ive long though that housing benefit should only be paid in places like London to productive (albeit low earners) who have a job, freeing up other HB housing for the poor sods who are too proud to claim and have to commute in from the midlands or beyond.

Ship all the long term (ie 2+ years unemployed) who cant or dont want to work up to Burnley.

Housing them in one of the worlds most expensive cities is idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite agree, the council house system is a gross misallocation of resources that leads to homelessness. A market solution is the best way to allocate housing and reduce homelessness.

You would think so.

Ultimately some kind of discrimination must occur. Physically we cant all live in the finest street in one of the worlds most expensive cities. It is simply not possible.

Price seems to be the least unfair way of allocating who lives where.

I guess the fear is that the rich wont pay more for their cleaners, au pairs and other HB claimant types, and so theyll resort to living in garages and such. But thats already a reality anyway. HB hasnt stopped that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those most affected being the hard working but low paid people who are taxed to death to house those who don't work I assume.

Or the hard working well paid , average paid , low paid who have lost their jobs. I know you think that once someone has become unemployed they should be shot but many have paid in plenty and now get penalised to apease people like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you think that once someone has become unemployed they should be shot but many have paid in plenty and now get penalised to apease people like you.

I've yet to see anyone suggest that those who have worked hard and paid lots of National Insurance shouldn't receive assistance if they encounter problems. You can argue whether the state is really the best vehicle for providing this insurance, but that is a detail.

However what do you do with the significant section of society who just want a free ride? The answer has both moral, practical, and financial aspects. The most pressing is the financial, given that we cannot afford the benefits bill any more. Some people who get help now are going to have to receive less in future, why shouldn't it be those who least "deserve" that help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thisislon...ousing-queue.do

"Adults who have been in work for two years- OR ACTIVELY SEEKING A JOB - will leapfrog those on the dole."

So, if you're actively seeking a job, you are technically unemployed. So how exactly will this work?? More headline grabbing ******** from a government and London borough council I would have expected something better from.

On the face of this Standard article, words truly fail me!

It is clear what they mean. Foreigners who have not been in the country and had the right to work for at least two years.

It might be that it also excludes mothers living off child-related benefits. It is unclear if it also applies to people who were too proud to claim benefits after losing their job but ran out of money before they found another one. My guess is that there will some sort of an exemption for everyone except immigrants, and then possibly only ones from outside the EU.

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.

  • 343 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.