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

Force Hb Recipients To Chip In

Recommended Posts

Anything that gives benefits claimants an interest (however small) in keeping the rent down is a step in the right direction.

If it ever happens ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a brilliant idea.

However I'd be amazed if there are any legs in this policy. The VIs will be lobbying madly to get this shelved and will be helped by the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if there's a connection between the cost of housing and the HB bill rising in that graph?

Many of those cliamants are in social housing but policy is and had been for SH to be at 80% of the market rate.

Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this. Even now, the LHA in my area means that a family getting full LHA for an identical property to the one I live in has 87% of their rent paid (and this is according to the 30th percentile rule), whereas we have to pay it all from taxed income. Even if they have to contribute 10% they would still have almost 80% paid in full.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder if there's a connection between the cost of housing and the HB bill rising in that graph?

If it's due to the HPI then it's in the interests for the government to weaken HPI. If it's number of people being awarded HB, then it's still in the government's interest to weaken HPI.

I really don't get why the government set so many HPI props - HPI weakens the wider economy, gives the government bigger welfare bills, adds more debt burden to both taxpayer and borrowers (given we've already had a crash because of borrowers not being able to pay back), prevents work mobility, stops younger people becoming true consumers - yes, despite the useless boomer iphone argument against the younger population, well....duh what happens when you force someone to pay more and more toward a huge monthly cost - why yes - they have less money to spend on the wider economy. The government want all of this? Then....automation is coming into the workforce more and more....but let's prop up HP?! It's like someone who wants to get fit, but they insist on downing a bottle of vodka first thing every morning as part of their fitness regime.

So back to HB - 8th July will be where we learn if the government are now finally waking up to the HPI problem or not. I have no faith they ever will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The VI cant have it both ways....renters can take on more rent if the mortgage on the BTL goes up...this IS the plan that underpins BTL isnt it...banks have to check their risk, and the risk to a BTL loan is that the income wont cover the expenses.

So, they must see renters/customers as being able to underpin the hilt lent borrower.

Yet, here they are, protesting that some renters are not now going to recieve an increase in their benefit to cover the current rent rises.

so, its one, or the other...the renters are a bottomless pit, or they cant be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33353318

"forcing all housing benefit recipients to contribute towards their rent"

With cattle prods?

On top of bedroom tax?

For all tenants?

The private section already only gives people a set amount based on the bottom 30th centile of local rents.

As this hasn't lowered rents significantly then I assume they think that this will. Won't it just increase rents so that landlords receive (old rent+increase -this new 10% discount?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they actually want to control rents and lower HB then they need to build millions of properties, many of them 1 bedroom. Rent them out to these people who are paying 'over the odds' in rent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't get why the government set so many HPI props - HPI weakens the wider economy, gives the government bigger welfare bills, adds more debt burden to both taxpayer and borrowers (given we've already had a crash because of borrowers not being able to pay back), prevents work mobility, stops younger people becoming true consumers - yes, despite the useless boomer iphone argument against the younger population, well....duh what happens when you force someone to pay more and more toward a huge monthly cost - why yes - they have less money to spend on the wider economy. The government want all of this? Then....automation is coming into the workforce more and more....but let's prop up HP?! It's like someone who wants to get fit, but they insist on downing a bottle of vodka first thing every morning as part of their fitness regime.

It becomes a lot easier to understand if you remember that the government doesn't necessarily want the economy to grow and the citizenry to prosper and have a better standard of living. The governments interests and the populations interests don't always fully align. Sounds odd and conspiratorial but this is true of all sorts of governments all over the world, across different time periods and different cultures.

My inspiration for making this argument: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp/1846684307

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they actually want to control rents and lower HB then they need to build millions of properties, many of them 1 bedroom. Rent them out to these people who are paying 'over the odds' in rent.

Unless they stop landlords buying them all that will happen to new supply is that they will be bought up by BTLers. The whole system has to change. The housing crisis is like an organism with lots of parts that are connected and the obvious answer is not always the solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they actually want to control rents and lower HB then they need to build millions of properties, many of them 1 bedroom. Rent them out to these people who are paying 'over the odds' in rent.

Agreed. I would be a good candidate for a home like this.

They ought to build these 1 bedders well soundproofed, with a separate kitchen, storage cupboards and decent room sizes as well. And a parking space.

I'm asking for too much here aren't I?! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well soundproofed, with a separate kitchen, storage cupboards and decent room sizes as well.

... and with a decent-sized balcony to sit out on ...

Yep, as in the flats I've lived in in Sweden and Germany. Countries that have built decent-quality rather than low-cost since 1945, and consequently have a much better stock than us of decent housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless they stop landlords buying them all that will happen to new supply is that they will be bought up by BTLers. The whole system has to change. The housing crisis is like an organism with lots of parts that are connected and the obvious answer is not always the solution.

I meant to create 'govt owned housing'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The linked article of the welfare budget just highlights that both HB and WTC are dwarfed by disability benefit - the latter obviously being the most toxic for any government to touch. Using my own limited experience of my extended family, I have seen disability benefit create a higher standard of living for the disabled than both those unemployed and in work. Made all the worse when my example gave way to a on-the-face-of-it perfectly able person. Able to tend to a large splendid garden, decorate his house from top-to-bottom etc. while claiming to be in constant pain and unable to lift or do any strenuous activity. Able to sit at a computer all day at home but not so in an office. I know this might represent a small portion but the new cars and very generous allowances for people who don't actually need it needs to be brought into line. It has created a two tier welfare system. The fact the morbidly obese can fit into this category is reason enough to say it has gone too far. I really hate how this affects upon people in real need with real disability who are in need of the full support, invariably they have own disability challenged because free-loaders abuse a system which wasn't intended for them. Sad state of affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The linked article of the welfare budget just highlights that both HB and WTC are dwarfed by disability benefit - the latter obviously being the most toxic for any government to touch. Using my own limited experience of my extended family, I have seen disability benefit create a higher standard of living for the disabled than both those unemployed and in work. Made all the worse when my example gave way to a on-the-face-of-it perfectly able person. Able to tend to a large splendid garden, decorate his house from top-to-bottom etc. while claiming to be in constant pain and unable to lift or do any strenuous activity. Able to sit at a computer all day at home but not so in an office. I know this might represent a small portion but the new cars and very generous allowances for people who don't actually need it needs to be brought into line. It has created a two tier welfare system. The fact the morbidly obese can fit into this category is reason enough to say it has gone too far. I really hate how this affects upon people in real need with real disability who are in need of the full support, invariably they have own disability challenged because free-loaders abuse a system which wasn't intended for them. Sad state of affairs.

No, not by my experience. Goes for about 70% of professional cripples I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The linked article of the welfare budget just highlights that both HB and WTC are dwarfed by disability benefit - the latter obviously being the most toxic for any government to touch. Using my own limited experience of my extended family, I have seen disability benefit create a higher standard of living for the disabled than both those unemployed and in work. Made all the worse when my example gave way to a on-the-face-of-it perfectly able person. Able to tend to a large splendid garden, decorate his house from top-to-bottom etc. while claiming to be in constant pain and unable to lift or do any strenuous activity. Able to sit at a computer all day at home but not so in an office. I know this might represent a small portion but the new cars and very generous allowances for people who don't actually need it needs to be brought into line. It has created a two tier welfare system. The fact the morbidly obese can fit into this category is reason enough to say it has gone too far. I really hate how this affects upon people in real need with real disability who are in need of the full support, invariably they have own disability challenged because free-loaders abuse a system which wasn't intended for them. Sad state of affairs.

And the drunks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not by my experience. Goes for about 70% of professional cripples I know.

Not just me then, I tried to be as PC as possible ;) , perhaps not needed on this forum!

I welcome the reforms but it does seem that working people are going to take disproportionally more pain while the professionally disabled and well-off pensioners absorb none of the impacts yet again. I hope that employers will take up the slack for the working but in the meantime we need to at least see that the load is being shared when in work living standards are declining.

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.

  • Next General Election   90 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    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.