Housing Benefit Change Could Have Bigger Impact

[shippers]

if you dont have a family then you should slum it, the tax payier isnt there to give you an easy free ride.

the system i suggest would also massively push down living costs such as housing.

there would be lots of people who will choose to live with friends/family and pocket the 80PW. that will free up places and hence make it cheaper

no subsidised housing benifit, council housing would also make renting/buying cheaper!

if you do have a family

you would get £13,500 TAX FREE which is enough for a ok-ish life. and that is all you should get! (i suppose people who legitimatly find it dificult to get work, such as blind people should get a tad more)

such a system would be simple

cheap to administer

FAIR

incentive to wrok (as you still get child benifits no matter what)

And what if there was no work, but you'd been previously been contributing through your NI and taxes, unlike the non-doms and bankers. What then?

During my previous experience on Merseyside when we took on Thatcher whilst she was decimating manufacturing industry I think a more sensible response would have been an allowance for working a number of hours doing some work, which didn't autmotically disqualify you from benefits for basic living expenses. However the crazy situation was that even if you did voluntary work or community stuff beyond a certain number of hours then you still got stiffed by the dhss.

Before we start having a go at poor people, we should really make sure everyone in this country who lives in this country contributes to this country. That especially includes the bonuses paid to the "free market" bankers.

[cells]

alternatively something like a citizons divident

every man/woman/child who is british gets £80PW no matter if they are working or not.

nothing else!

so if you find yourself in hard times you can get by.

full incentive to wrok

easy/cheap to administer

low/no fraud

would cost 250billion and iirc the current benifits system, costs in the region of 280-3000bil! thats inc all non-job-jobs. rent subsidies, benifits, the works

[cells]

And what if there was no work, but you'd been previously been contributing through your NI and taxes, unlike the non-doms and bankers. What then?

During my previous experience on Merseyside when we took on Thatcher whilst she was decimating manufacturing industry I think a more sensible response would have been an allowance for working a number of hours doing some work, which didn't autmotically disqualify you from benefits for basic living expenses. However the crazy situation was that even if you did voluntary work or community stuff beyond a certain number of hours then you still got stiffed by the dhss.

Before we start having a go at poor people, we should really make sure everyone in this country who lives in this country contributes to this country. That especially includes the bonuses paid to the "free market" bankers.

you have two main choices of goverment, well more but lets assume people really dont like dictatorship or fasisim or ...

capatilism:

my favourate, extreamly small state, extreamly low taxes. charities help those in need.

lots of people are against this

socilism:

imo it doesnt work, socilism roots are price controls and every counctry who tries price controls fails in time

so somewhere inbetween, something like a peoples divident. its socilistic but its as capatilistic as socilism can be.

see my last post for an example

[Pindar]

In principle and with a deposit, could the housing benefit not be used to make payments on a self-cert mortgage? This means the housing benefit system could be indirectly used to prop up the housing market. Think of a house share on which the landlord cannot meet the payments on his BTL mortgage. He could theoretically fill it with DSS tenants funded under the new scheme and meet his mortgage payments and get to keep his property. There are numerous ways the new system could be abused. They may as well set fire to a large pile of cash in parliament square.

[shippers]

alternatively something like a citizons divident

every man/woman/child who is british gets £80PW no matter if they are working or not.

nothing else!

so if you find yourself in hard times you can get by.

full incentive to wrok

easy/cheap to administer

low/no fraud

would cost 250billion and iirc the current benifits system, costs in the region of 280-3000bil! thats inc all non-job-jobs. rent subsidies, benifits, the works

So where do you live with this pocket money?

Serious question. I once lived in a B&B as an emergency placement. It doubled as a bail hostel and my weekly "allowance" was 10 quid, for all my spends after the landlord had supplied the bed and brekky. Have you ever actually experienced living like this? It's easy to advocate a particular living standard if you've never experienced it. Before you say it I wasn't there cause I was lazy. I was lucky. Previously been living rough as my home situation had got out of hand.

[physics34]

Each council will be updating their LHA rates monthly. Since these tenants underpin the rental system looking at the rates could give us a good idea as to where rents will go in the future.

[cells]

So where do you live with this pocket money?

Serious question. I once lived in a B&B as an emergency placement. It doubled as a bail hostel and my weekly "allowance" was 10 quid, for all my spends after the landlord had supplied the bed and brekky. Have you ever actually experienced living like this? It's easy to advocate a particular living standard if you've never experienced it. Before you say it I wasn't there cause I was lazy. I was lucky. Previously been living rough as my home situation had got out of hand.

80PW for a single person isnt bad money

also consider in such a system rents would be far cheaper as the demand from subsidised rent gos down a lot.

£20 for food and you still have £60pw left

also dont forget your being paid this £80pw if your working or not. soo while working you should be saving some!

[shippers]

80PW for a single person isnt bad money

also consider in such a system rents would be far cheaper as the demand from subsidised rent gos down a lot.

£20 for food and you still have £60pw left

also dont forget your being paid this £80pw if your working or not. soo while working you should be saving some!

Er, in your system there is no such thing as subsidised rent, as I don't see where your calculations on social housing provision are. Or are you saying the £80 pw includes housing costs. Where are all these people going to live, internment camps? Seems more beneficial to risk criminal behaviour and get locked up.

Can I ask what the minimum amount you've lived on as a single self-sustaining person is. I'd just like to know what you're basing your figures on.

[cells]

Er, in your system there is no such thing as subsidised rent, as I don't see where your calculations on social housing provision are. Or are you saying the £80 pw includes housing costs. Where are all these people going to live, internment camps? Seems more beneficial to risk criminal behaviour and get locked up.

Can I ask what the minimum amount you've lived on as a single self-sustaining person is. I'd just like to know what you're basing your figures on.

80pw is all you get so that would have to see all your costs.

but you get 80PW if you work or if you dont work. so while working you should have saved some money since you get working pay plus the states 80pw.

right now if you exclude my car costs (which i wouldnt have if i wasnt working) i have outgoings of £95 per week. but i share a 3bed detached in a nice area with just one other personn in the house!

that inc rent, council tax, gas,elect,tv,net,food.

and if your out of work go live with friends/family/charity/ in a tent, in your car... £80PW is more than enough per person!!!!!!!!

[Frank Hovis]

can you explain the full system if you know how it is ment to work?

say yor family need 4 bedrooms. and you choose to live in a 3 bed house, can you only pocket £15 difference or the full amount

i hope its the full amount as that would push rents down...

LHA paid is now paid based on the household members. You can live where you want (say family of five in a studio) but you can only keep a maximum of £15 per week per household. EVidence form the pilots is that people don't tend to cram into somewhere small for the money, and this was when it was uncapped.

LHA goes to the renter unless there's reason not to, this is agreed between the landlord and the council.

LHA rates are area-based, I think Coventry has one area, Newcastle six.

Where it's a council / Housing Association property the old system stands, with HB linked to the property not the household, and paid direct to the HA. For now.

[armorique4]

In principle, sounds like a good idea to me. The rent level can be set to encourage benefit claimants to migrate to cheap areas in the North of England and therefore not drive up the value of property in very expensive areas. In my own borough of Westminster in the centre of London, the council spends over £100 million annually housing benefit claimants, some of whom have very recently arrived, in one of the most expensive areas in the world. This drives up the cost of property for people who are working and want to privately rent.

Wouldn't a fixed level of subsity encourage rentals in deprived areas and encourage property into use there for rental?

[shippers]

In principle, sounds like a good idea to me. The rent level can be set to encourage benefit claimants to migrate to cheap areas in the North of England and therefore not drive up the value of property in very expensive areas. In my own borough of Westminster in the centre of London, the council spends over £100 million annually housing benefit claimants, some of whom have very recently arrived, in one of the most expensive areas in the world. This drives up the cost of property for people who are working and want to privately rent.

Wouldn't a fixed level of subsity encourage rentals in deprived areas and encourage property into use there for rental?

We no, we'll all just hang around the rich areas waiting for the fabled Thatcher "Trickledown". Sorry to disappoint you. ;-P

[padmorgan]

Under these ridiculous new rules, a single man who chooses not to work and lives in Lewisham can claim £800 a month to rent a flat.

This is more than a nurse could afford to pay in rent. It sickens me.

[ScaredEitherWay]

if your out of work go live with friends/family/charity/ in a tent, in your car... £80PW is more than enough per person!!!!!!!!

That is quite impractical. Do you want middle-aged people living in cars, especially lone females?

Not sure where to park the car though with no tax/MoT or insurance. Perhaps outside your house. You could keep an eye on them.

And peeing ... where?

Do you want to see a load of old ladies peeing in the streets outside your house?

The smell after 2 days wouldn't be good in that car (or your hedge)

[Uriah Heap]

alternatively something like a citizons divident

every man/woman/child who is british gets £80PW no matter if they are working or not.

nothing else!

so if you find yourself in hard times you can get by.

full incentive to wrok

easy/cheap to administer

low/no fraud

would cost 250billion and iirc the current benifits system, costs in the region of 280-3000bil! thats inc all non-job-jobs. rent subsidies, benifits, the works

A neat system. This was advocated by the Militant Tendency in the eighties, but even then it sounded like a good idea.