So the chancellor wants to save £25bn-start here

Its an early election campaign, bashing the poorest people again to get a few more votes.

This new money saving project is to be introduced after the election. :mrgreen:
 
Sponsored Links
"But good old gideon is merely sowing the seeds for the next load of riots"

They were sown long before gideon arrived by previous governments.
Mainly by 15 years of new labours squandering.
He just inherited the mess. Frankly I don't know how he can be bothered.

If in about 30 years from now he gets his funeral cortege pelted then we will certainly know he did a good job.
 
there is many a family who have to choose whether to heat or to eat

And there are many that have flash phones and 40" TV's.

The problem isn't unemployment benefit, it's housing benefit, once people have their foot in the social housing ladder, they have no incentive to ever leave once they do get work (do the maths and you can see why), so you have loads of people getting cheap housing by the state, and then others living in poverty.

But this is an aside, If I wanted to cut the budget, the first thing I would do is enact a 10% pay cut on anyone earning over 40k, 20% over 60k and 30% over 100k (for example).

I'm sure there are some public jobs that need to pay lot's to get the best, but I think they are the minority.
 
there is many a family who have to choose whether to heat or to eat

And there are many that have flash phones and 40" TV's.

The problem isn't unemployment benefit, it's housing benefit, once people have their foot in the social housing ladder, they have no incentive to ever leave once they do get work (do the maths and you can see why), so you have loads of people getting cheap housing by the state, and then others living in poverty.

But this is an aside, If I wanted to cut the budget, the first thing I would do is enact a 10% pay cut on anyone earning over 40k, 20% over 60k and 30% over 100k (for example).

I'm sure there are some public jobs that need to pay lot's to get the best, but I think they are the minority.

with second biggest group on benefits hard working parents do you begrudge them a telly or the latest phone ??

the biggest problem is successive governments selling off the housing stock to buy votes then using the income for tax cuts further reducing the ability to build housing

we should stop blaming people on benefits its the fault off successive governments
subsidizing wages pushing up the benefits to help big business make greater profits whilst looking for legal or illegal ways to avoid paying as much tax as possible

only about something like 5% on benefits are off working age and unemployed
 
Sponsored Links
Social housing is a sign of failure so why promote it?

The tories are always seen as the nasty party and yet could build more social housing in the thatcher era in a single year than new labour did in 13 years.
 
Social housing is a sign of failure so why promote it?

The tories are always seen as the nasty party and yet could build more social housing in the thatcher era in a single year than new labour did in 13 years.

why on earth do you say social housing is a sign off failure??

are you advocating that anyone in a job that doesnt pay enough to save up a deposit then buy a house is a failure ??

if so you are suggesting most working people are failures ??
 
"are you advocating that anyone in a job that doesnt pay enough to save up a deposit then buy a house is a failure ??"

Of course they are failures.
People have enough struggles with out having to pay for the housing for those who don't want to earn it.
Far too many people around who thinks the world owes them a living.
Mostly labour voters!

People in Africa live in what ever housing they can afford. They don't go cap in hand to the government as they don't provide for spongers.
 
ooo well good luck norcon :D

people will judge you and i by our words and actions
 
Social housing is a sign of failure so why promote it?

Hmmmm, Private housing is vastly overpriced , simply because there is the demand for them. Social housing isn't a sign of failure,,,, it's a sign of poor wages and mis-government. It's the only choice for many working people.
 
Isn't it time the Government introduced a tax on all second properties ? It's all this buy to let and holiday homes for the rich that is making home ownership impossible for the young and lower earners. If second properties were taxed heavily then the housing market would be transformed and young people would find housing prices far more affordable. Housing is too expensive now and this needs to be addressed.
 
with second biggest group on benefits hard working parents do you begrudge them a telly or the latest phone ??

I don't have a mobile, what do you think my answer to that is?

the biggest problem is successive governments selling off the housing stock

The exucution of right to buy was a mess, but the principle was sound, get people to own their own homes, and they have incentive to work harder and save, keep them living in subsidised state homes, why bother working harder or saving?

why on earth do you say social housing is a sign off failure??

Of course the increasing need for social housing is an abysmal failure.

A huge part of the problem is many people get given social housing when they do need it, but later go on to work, but keep the cheap social housing, but then someone else get's "bad luck" and then needs it, the cycle repeats, and you have millions of "hard working families" living in social housing, who are perfectly able to pay private rents (but maybe not as good as what they got).

Hugely inflated costs are another issue, if someone is earning more than the minimun wage, they should be able to afford private rents/mortages, but issues of speculation, building restriction and lack of mortgage regulation cause the inflated costs, as well as an expectation for a bedroom for all children.

And of course there are all the social arguments about why the need for social housing is increasing. Far to many singles needing social housing, far to many feckless women getting pregnent blablaba.

The ever increasing need for social housing is a sign of utter failure, the amount that should actually be needed to service the few who get into trouble should be small, that's why selling off the housing stock should not have lead to any issues, it only has because of a host of other failures.
 
the need for social housing has always been there
what has happened with selling off the housing stock at up to 70% discount is the need for councils rather than just have the cost off maintainance on a house now have to pay a private landlord to house the family so rather than few hundred a year maintainance costs turns into several thousands paid to the landlord

now off course the houses don't disappear but gradually a lot finish up with the private landlords who then rent them back to the council for around 10 times the cost

and i don't have a mobile phone as i decide its not good value for money but thats my choice
 
The exucution of right to buy was a mess, but the principle was sound, get people to own their own homes, and they have incentive to work harder and save, keep them living in subsidised state homes, why bother working harder or saving?
I’m from working class stock and old enough to remember Council Estates which were decent with honest, hard-working folk living there. We took pride in our homes and neighbourhood; it’s the attitude which has sadly changed for the worse since the 60s/70s; not ownership of a house.

So I don’t buy your argument there Aron. Can I rent it instead? ;)
 
the need for social housing has always been there

Yes, that is what I said.

what has happened with selling off the housing stock

So you didnt read or understand my points.

We didnt sell of our housing stock, we still retained millions of council homes.

The point is that we shouldnt need an increasing supply of housing stock, it is a failure that we need more and more, when we should be needing less and less, or at least keeping it at a steady number.

needing an increased number of council houses, means you have an increased number of problems

= Failure.

I’m from working class stock and old enough to remember Council Estates which were decent with honest, hard-working folk living there. We took pride in our homes and neighbourhood; it’s the attitude which has sadly changed for the worse since the 60s/70s; not ownership of a house.

And why have those attitudes changed (ignoring the rose tinted picture you paint).

Lot's of poor people bunged into cheap social housing, which they get for life, which is looked after for them.

And somehow you are in disagreement with me that this wouldnt lead to exactly what you allude to, poor attitudes.

What is it you disagree with exactly?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top