How to get a council house.
Discussion
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!
I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
These people are not all unemployed, they are low income. I don't know the exact levels that give you access to be on the housing list. I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
To give you an idea, IIRC the average combined income to get on the property ladder is c£80k pa. The average salary is closer to £27k.
That is why very few people can afford to buy in London anymore and there is a generation of young people renting.
Pushing people who cannot afford to live in London to outter London boroughs is sort of passing the buck really. Those boroughs don't want inner London exporting their poor families out and wiping their hands of them.
This also creates wealthy ghettos in central London, Councils want mixed communities. Particularly where there are families who are established and have their support network in an area. Not to mention a balanced work force, not all jobs in society are well paid, including essential services.
Westminster council tried moving their homeless out of London and got lambasted for 'social cleansing':
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/westminst...
Edited by handbraketurn on Sunday 4th August 23:51
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!
I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.
egor110 said:
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!
I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.
Funkycoldribena said:
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.
I kind of agree yet on the flipside it would piss me off if i was paying a mortgage and had a neighbour in the same road/house getting money off from the council.On the flip side if i was on a 0 hour contract and getting paid £7 hour to travel into london for 3 hours cleaning work i doubt i'd do it either.
If i was a postie in inner london would there be public transport to get me into london for a 6.30 start? if not what would i be paying out per week on parking?
Funkycoldribena said:
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that. Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
But sadly the system will never change
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?Funkycoldribena said:
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. [b}I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it[/b), what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?Guvernator said:
Funkycoldribena said:
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. [b}I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it[/b), what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?However while benefits levels are a problem for some I'd say the problem more lies with the lousy wages a lot of employers in this country think they can get away with paying.
Funkycoldribena said:
I dont disagree,the flat featured on the program was ridiculous for social housing (the fact they at first refused it made the whole thing twice as unpalatable).
However while benefits levels are a problem for some I'd say the problem more lies with the lousy wages a lot of employers in this country think they can get away with paying.
Not think, do get away with paying.However while benefits levels are a problem for some I'd say the problem more lies with the lousy wages a lot of employers in this country think they can get away with paying.
Wtf is the point of 0 hour contracts? The employer gets cheap labour but tax payers still end up paying because how does somebody on a 0 hour contract save, or get on the housing ladder when they have no idea how many hours they'll be working.
So we still end up paying for the council houses, there reduced council tax etc.
Funkycoldribena said:
eccles said:
The Don of Croy said:
Also, no lack of wide screen flat panels in social housing, is there?
Why do people bang on about wide screen flat tv's whenever people on benefits are mentioned as if it's some kind of wealth/ status symbol. You can't buy any other kind of tv, and they not exactly expensive! eccles said:
ikarl said:
eccles said:
Markhoskins said:
eccles said:
Why do people bang on about wide screen flat tv's whenever people on benefits are mentioned as if it's some kind of wealth/ status symbol. You can't buy any other kind of tv, and they not exactly expensive!
Hundreds of pounds on flat screen TV and dog food is a lot when you are wondering how you are going to purchase your next mealAs per the chaps suggestion above, monopoly is free to play, as are cards. How about a local library membership, and they can start reading for entertainment?
I don't know why people have this baseline assumption that if they can't afford a normal life they should be provided one by the state. The state should be providing the bare minimum to survive and no more.
Chris Type R said:
In the interview with the council chappy banging on about lack of money and choice...anyone else spot what looks like a Herman Miller Mirra chair in the background ? £600 a pop. I suppose they are 50% cheaper than the Aeron model.
Yep, I noticed that. I might be wrong but it looked like the whole office with people working the phones had them.I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
AndyWoodall said:
Yep, I noticed that. I might be wrong but it looked like the whole office with people working the phones had them.
I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
I bet you they get bought right at the end of the financial year. I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
AndyWoodall said:
I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
(To be fair, they are very good chairs - last for absolutely ages and a little cheaper to buy in bulk.)As a IT Contractor, working in many companies, I can't say I've ever had better than a Viking direct chair.
Funkycoldribena said:
egor110 said:
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!
I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.
This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.
Edited by Jonathan27 on Tuesday 6th August 15:10
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff