Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
SarahBell

Couldn't Afford To Live There

Recommended Posts

I must admit I thought genuinely sick folk were protected from the Bedroom Tax.

Cancer and then Myasthenia Gravis (rare and quite nasty muscle wasting disease) is awful luck (as is IDS being allowed to be in charge of anything I suppose).

Poor woman.

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would like the government to pay for me to live exactly where I chose regardless of whether I can afford it or not.

Get a job as an MP then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why doesn't it mention how much she is getting in benefits?

Because it's not a Daily Express story? ;)

It'll take this lazy (muscle) waster around 2000 years at £11 a week to pay back what Maria Miller has troughed so far.

Clearly we'll need to tax some more sick people ASAP to keep our poor hungry MPs in their subsidised second & third homes.

I can't see a problem with that. And nor can Cameron. Cold? Just throw another prole on the fire...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it's not a Daily Express story? ;)

It'll take this lazy (muscle) waster around 2000 years at £11 a week to pay back what Maria Miller has troughed so far.

Clearly we'll need to tax some more sick people ASAP to keep our poor hungry MPs in their subsidised second & third homes.

I can't see a problem with that. And nor can Cameron. Cold? Just throw another prole on the fire...

I don't see the baby bonus as a bedroom tax. Have enough babies and you have the bonus of having larger houses funded by taxpayers. It's a Coalition policy that just encourages more breeding like some of the New Tory Labour ones.

I'd lock Miller up if I could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too would like the government to pay for me to live exactly where I chose regardless of whether I can afford it or not.

If the govt hadn't spent hundreds of billions supporting the housing market while simultaneously operating an open door immigration policy it's unlikely there'd be a shortage of affordable property anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the govt hadn't spent hundreds of billions supporting the housing market while simultaneously operating an open door immigration policy it's unlikely there'd be a shortage of affordable property anywhere.

Indeed. It is a bizarre policy where we have now got people so poor that they feel compelled to move just to save £11 a week living in houses and flats 'worth' many hundreds of thousands.

Even for working people, what they earn has become totally divorced from the type of property they can afford. Got a good £35k graduate job in London? Great news, you'll be able to buy a 1 bed flat in Basingstoke in 10 years time provided prices don't go up anymore. God knows what the poor people in Basingstoke earning half that are going to do.

It is a strange situation where high house prices are seen as a great thing, but very few people really gain anything.

Most people on benefits don't care how much the house they are living in is worth as they will never afford to buy it anyway.

Working people have to subsidise the landlords of social housing through taxes whilst also trying to buy in to the market at over-priced houses themselves.

Retired people might have benefitted from house price increases in the past, but many of them are going to have to pass a lot of that gain to their children who are struggling with the reasons above. If they don't, demand will fall, prices will crash and the money goes anyway.

It doesn't stop a lot of members of all of these groups thinking that high houses prices are a great thing, though. Retired people are often the most out of touch, living in '£1m houses' even though they never earned more than £25k a year in their careers. I think that they just assume people doing the same jobs now earn 10 times what they did, when in reality it is probably more like 1.5 times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its Owen Jones ! :lol:

Who?

I don't see what that git who got famous for singing a song about walking in the air with a snowman (even though it was someone else singing) has to do with anything. ;)

I don't think an inconvenient tax on someone genuinely ill whilst excusing someone from making millions on tax-payer funded homes is particularly consistent with anything other than avarice, hypocrisy and stupidity. I doubt anyone (except the Tory frontbench) does.

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand the hostility of posters towards social tenants troubled by the bedroom tax. These posters were not born in a time when it was only politically acceptable to offer a secure tenancy, so that people could 'put down roots' and become part of a local community, start families, get kids into local schools, live near friends and neighbours etc..

Obviously this is disastrous for the functioning of a modern capitalist economy trying to compete with China, India etc. Its quite right that tenants should be herded about like cattle, be expected to relocate at a moments notice, never know where they are living from one year to the next, and be evicted at the whim of a mom and pop rentier who is only in the game for 'capital growth.'

All this greed came to a head in 2007, with lower orders and their excessive demands for 'spare bedrooms' which of course brought down the financial system.

Poor things, for they do not know any better.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel sorry for her illness, but I see no reason why that entitles her to have her accommodation subsidised beyond her needs.

Ian Duncan Smith agrees with you- from the comfort of his state subsidized living quarters on the family farm, which has received over 1 million in taxpayer funding in the last decade.

The man is a hero of frugality when it comes to taxpayer funded families- excluding his own of course- we can't take things too far after all. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the govt hadn't spent hundreds of billions supporting the housing market while simultaneously operating an open door immigration policy it's unlikely there'd be a shortage of affordable property anywhere.

That's a different point, but yes, agreed. I could also add that, if they hadn't continued to support planning policies that allow old rich people to stop houses being built for young poor people we would also likely not the same problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian Duncan Smith agrees with you- from the comfort of his state subsidized living quarters on the family farm, which has received over 1 million in taxpayer funding in the last decade.

The man is a hero of frugality when it comes to taxpayer funded families- excluding his own of course- we can't take things too far after all. :lol:

The CAP, yet another thing that should be abolished. Ironically, IDS was all for leaving the EU back in the day IIRC. None of that makes it right for the state to be paying for people to live in places that they couldn't otherwise afford though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CAP, yet another thing that should be abolished. Ironically, IDS was all for leaving the EU back in the day IIRC. None of that makes it right for the state to be paying for people to live in places that they couldn't otherwise afford though.

Couldn't afford now you mean? Its not her fault prices locally have gone crazy.

I doubt many home owners could afford to live, where they live now.

And council tenants didn't blow up the housing market, falling over themselves to get mortgages they couldn't afford and driving up prices.

Its like these parts of London, like Southwark, Isle of Dogs, Poplar, etc when these places were rock bottom cheap because they were total shitholes and no one wanted to live there.

Now the uberich and oligarchs want the space, the people that moved there for that reason, have to be turfed out. This is like a Soviet nightmare.

Seems very odd to me, all the nightmares you would have ever have had of living in a socialist State, have all come to fruition under an apparently capitalist system.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't afford now you mean? Its not her fault prices locally have gone crazy.

Indeed, and see my previous comments on that subject to see that I agree completely. It doesn't change the situation though, the state shouldn't be paying for people on welfare to live in places that people working for a living can't afford any more than the state should be paying for rich land owners not to grow things, or for MPs to own second homes etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, and see my previous comments on that subject to see that I agree completely. It doesn't change the situation though, the state shouldn't be paying for people on welfare to live in places that people working for a living can't afford any more than the state should be paying for rich land owners not to grow things, or for MPs to own second homes etc.

Surely the state has an obligation to house people when it denies them a right to build, which it has denied people for 526 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, and see my previous comments on that subject to see that I agree completely. It doesn't change the situation though, the state shouldn't be paying for people on welfare to live in places that people working for a living can't afford any more than the state should be paying for rich land owners not to grow things, or for MPs to own second homes etc.

Think this is an HPC false argument. So why can't working people afford even the most basic of housing anymore?

Its due to the Tory politburo rationing housing to force prices up.

Why aren't people working?

Because the Tory politburo have outsourced/insourced all the work; also you'd have to be bonkers working because houses cost so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the state has an obligation to house people when it denies them a right to build, which it has denied people for 526 years.

You do nail the heart of the problem there.

Either we have very lax/easy planning laws and folk can build, or we heavily regulate planning law and consequently have to house those who can't afford to do it themselves (with the price of doing this obviously raised by strict planning laws).

I'm yet to see a viable alternative offered up as to what to do in a case like this either.

Genuinely sick woman. Obviously can't work (even if she could, she'd struggle to find employment in an already saturated job market). The options are really:

A) The state provides and she lives.

B ) The state doesn't provide and she either dies or does whatever she can to get by (probably not much - but I'm sure some sick bugger out there would pay for a ride occasionally).

I'm happy with A and I'll be happy with A until we've stopped wasting way more public money on the elite and the banksters at the top of the food chain than we do on the likes of this poor woman.

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think this is an HPC false argument. So why can't working people afford even the most basic of housing anymore?

Its due to the Tory politburo rationing housing to force prices up.

Why aren't people working?

Because the Tory politburo have outsourced/insourced all the work; also you'd have to be bonkers working because houses cost so much.

Yes before the Tories took over in 2010 housing was cheap and plentiful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.