Bedroom tax
#31
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (10)
Good article in the independent. 96 % of those targeted by the tax have nowhere to move to; smaller properties just aren't available.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...m-8745597.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...m-8745597.html
http://www.homeswapper.co.uk/
#32
Scooby Regular
I would have thought with all the property moguls on here there would be much rejoicing of having folk on disability being pushed into the private sector.
Rather a disabled person with a guaranteed income then someone employed that might lose their job and do a runner?
Rather a disabled person with a guaranteed income then someone employed that might lose their job and do a runner?
#33
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam Smith was no socialist but was very much against rent seeking economic behavior.
#35
Scooby Regular
I'm asking for some clarity. The real people being subsidised are those who own state grated monopoly rights which entitle then to receive rent (the very essence of something for nothing). To say the benefits claimants are being given money is only trivially true, the money is de facto going to the owning class ultimately.
Adam Smith was no socialist but was very much against rent seeking economic behavior.
Adam Smith was no socialist but was very much against rent seeking economic behavior.
Seriously mate, as Warren said this o'level debating society stuff. Perhaps this sort of nonsense is how Sociology students waste their time but most grown ups have no time for it.
Last edited by Dingdongler; 06 August 2013 at 09:38 PM.
#36
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#37
Scooby Regular
#38
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hereford
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to see how reducing a benefit has become known as a tax. Things like this will always hit some unfortunate people but I know of 4 or 5 three or four bedroom council houses in my old village that have only a couple in them. Like it or not it is not a good use of TAX PAYERS money to house a couple in a large house when there are families housed in B&B's.
The council housing stock is there for a social need and should always used to the most efficient.
The council housing stock is there for a social need and should always used to the most efficient.
#39
Scooby Regular
I fail to see how reducing a benefit has become known as a tax. Things like this will always hit some unfortunate people but I know of 4 or 5 three or four bedroom council houses in my old village that have only a couple in them. Like it or not it is not a good use of TAX PAYERS money to house a couple in a large house when there are families housed in B&B's.
The council housing stock is there for a social need and should always used to the most efficient.
The council housing stock is there for a social need and should always used to the most efficient.
Yes but Tony de Sociologist will be along in a moment to tell you that there are millionaires living in large houses with more bedrooms than they need. They are the real problem.
Then he'll waffle on about feudal land systems
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone read the article. There just aren't enough smaller houses to move into. If you choose 100 people living in oversize housing, and they all agree to move, there is only enough spare smaller homes for four of them.
In principle, it's a fair policy. It's perfectly acceptable if a one child family asks for a three bedroom house, for the council to say, no, a two bed will be enough. Perfectly acceptable. However, as the report says, there is a shortage of smaller homes.
In principle, it's a fair policy. It's perfectly acceptable if a one child family asks for a three bedroom house, for the council to say, no, a two bed will be enough. Perfectly acceptable. However, as the report says, there is a shortage of smaller homes.
#41
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (10)
Has anyone read the article. There just aren't enough smaller houses to move into. If you choose 100 people living in oversize housing, and they all agree to move, there is only enough spare smaller homes for four of them.
In principle, it's a fair policy. It's perfectly acceptable if a one child family asks for a three bedroom house, for the council to say, no, a two bed will be enough. Perfectly acceptable. However, as the report says, there is a shortage of smaller homes.
In principle, it's a fair policy. It's perfectly acceptable if a one child family asks for a three bedroom house, for the council to say, no, a two bed will be enough. Perfectly acceptable. However, as the report says, there is a shortage of smaller homes.
#42
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That isn't what the policy is doing though. It's just imposing a financial penalty.
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Wingnuttzz
Member's Gallery
30
26 April 2022 11:15 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
20
22 October 2015 06:12 AM