Mortgages for people on UC. Is it the stupidest idea ever?

[charliegolf]

Andy, you don't know that, because you have absolutely no idea of how much money is taken offshore, placed in trusts to avoid IHT, and all the other legal, but morally corrupt practices the rich can employ to steal from the tax payer.

Then there is the cash economy. Naturally, no tradesman on DIYNot has ever avoided taxes, but we all know it happens.

I'm not looking it up, but what is the welfare bill; and what percentage is fraud? Does welfare fraud exceed PPE contract 'anomalies'?

I had a 2 min google... c£200bn on welfare; and of that, £100bn is state pension. Fraud AND overpayments are at about 4%; and plenty of the latter is reclaimed.

 

[Odds]

Nothing costs more to the public purse than welfare payments. See my calculations earlier in this thread about how much a week's dole costs the country, it is not a paltry amount.

Unless you can also provide figures for how much the Oligarchs and their Tory chums cost the taxpayer then your claim that welfare payments are the main drain on the public purse means little.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

It could have been simple: a 10 year sales ban unless sold back to the LA at the same price + RPI/CPI inflation. Reversion to tenancy in cases of hardship.

I thought there was a similar condition placed on the right to buy?

 

[charliegolf]

I thought there was a similar condition placed on the right to buy?

Very likely Harry, but the principle of profiteering certainly holds good.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Unless you can also provide figures for how much the Oligarchs and their Tory chums

It's not me making that claim.

I thought there was a similar condition placed on the right to buy?

Under RTB, if you sold the house within three years of buying it you had to give a percentage of the profit back,to the council.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Under RTB, if you sold the house within three years of buying it you had to give a percentage of the profit back,to the council.

That ought to be increased to 10 years.

 

[Stivino]

It's not me making that claim.

Under RTB, if you sold the house within three years of buying it you had to give a percentage of the profit back,to the council.

I thought it was five years?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

I thought it was five years?

When I bought mine (in the 90s) it was 3 years. I don't know what it is now. It's one of those rules that changes all the time, so there's no point keeping up with it unless it directly affects you.

 

[charliegolf]

When I bought mine (in the 90s) it was 3 years. I don't know what it is now. It's one of those rules that changes all the time, so there's no point keeping up with it unless it directly affects you.

My point is that RTB ought to only benefit the tenant at the time of the purchase. If and when (within x years) that person wants to sell and move on, the council should be entitled and obliged to buy the house back at the sale price plus an inflation figure. Not house price inflation, CPI/RPI.

 

[Notch7]

It doesn't need to be that many - how many people working and paying tax, does it need to support one able person who make it a lifestyle choice to not work and not contribute?

The point is that those who accuse people on benefits of being lazy scroungers never ever qualify it by giving a percentage.

So they are labelling everybody on benefits as scroungers.


Do you want a system that makes those in genuine need suffer?

because that’s what the current system does.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

My point is that RTB ought to only benefit the tenant at the time of the purchase. If and when (within x years) that person wants to sell and move on, the council should be entitled and obliged to buy the house back at the sale price plus an inflation figure. Not house price inflation, CPI/RPI.

I do understand your point and agree with it.

 

[motorbiking]

There was a good article on More or Less (radio 4) on the post covid problem with the economically inactive/unemployed. The argument was that there were more open jobs than unemployed people. But when you break in to the numbers there seems to be a large bunch who got used to furlough and now don't want to go back to work. These are quite happy getting by.

The problem is, while they have reigned in spending to live on modest returns, they have substantially cut the taxes they paid through working. They have also squeezed the employment market causing a challenge in economic growth.

There are apparently record low numbers of "job seeking" unemployed.

 

[charliegolf]

MB, I would trust what 'More or Less' said over any politician or Department stats.

 

[Deleted member 292770]

My point is that RTB ought to only benefit the tenant at the time of the purchase. If and when (within x years) that person wants to sell and move on, the council should be entitled and obliged to buy the house back at the sale price plus an inflation figure. Not house price inflation, CPI/RPI.

Just as well your not running the country.

 

[Vinty]

so only the entitled rich should be allowed to have children

Not a very good idea.
If only the rich are allowed to have kids, who is going to empty their bins, clean their windows, cut their grass, replace leaking tap washers and clear blocked bogs, provide private security at their gated communities, ect, ect,.