Discussion
So poeple with a spare room who are living in council houses will get taxed if they have a spare bedroom.
What do you think?
I was reading my local newspaper and one woman was saying why should she have to live with a stranger - I like many other people who have bought thier house rent a room out to a stranger for extra income.
The general notion is that this is bad - it will force people to move etc.
Why do poeple on benifits in these positions feel they are owed what other poeple have to work to get.
Personally I think its a good idea.
I suggest next they test poeple on benefits for drug use.
What do you think?
I was reading my local newspaper and one woman was saying why should she have to live with a stranger - I like many other people who have bought thier house rent a room out to a stranger for extra income.
The general notion is that this is bad - it will force people to move etc.
Why do poeple on benifits in these positions feel they are owed what other poeple have to work to get.
Personally I think its a good idea.
I suggest next they test poeple on benefits for drug use.
I think its a good thing... why should a single occupant get a 2 bed flat and not a 1 bed flat/studio is beyond me.
If you have family and use the bedrooms, then fine, but if you dont or its your storage room , then there are a lot more people out there that need a larger property than you, especially if its been given to you rather than earned by way of buying it.
In fact was there not a recent case of an unfortunate couple who lost their child, made the room into a shrine, had done this for years and demand that they should not pay as its their right to have the shrine to their child who passed away.
If you have family and use the bedrooms, then fine, but if you dont or its your storage room , then there are a lot more people out there that need a larger property than you, especially if its been given to you rather than earned by way of buying it.
In fact was there not a recent case of an unfortunate couple who lost their child, made the room into a shrine, had done this for years and demand that they should not pay as its their right to have the shrine to their child who passed away.
Edited by Du1point8 on Tuesday 12th March 12:44
tom2019 said:
Why do poeple on benifits in these positions feel they are owed what other poeple have to work to get.
F g L'Oreal Generation. "They're worth it".They're all taught they're going to win X factor and be rich and famous. When a few generations ago they'd have been happy with shoes and a meal each day.
I don't think it's a tax. "Welfare reforms will cut the amount of benefit that people can get if they are deemed to have a spare bedroom in their council or housing association home." (http://www.housing.org.uk/policy/welfare_reform/%E2%80%98under-occupation%E2%80%99_penalty.aspx)
Could they not be given the option of renting it out and then giving the money to the council?
Otherwise, I'm going to apply for a 10 bedroom mansion in Kensington overlooking Kensington Gardens. And I'll see if I can get an F458 on disability benefits because I suffer from frequent, crippling pain that makes it hard for me to move*.
* - it's tough the day after gym day.
Could they not be given the option of renting it out and then giving the money to the council?
Otherwise, I'm going to apply for a 10 bedroom mansion in Kensington overlooking Kensington Gardens. And I'll see if I can get an F458 on disability benefits because I suffer from frequent, crippling pain that makes it hard for me to move*.
* - it's tough the day after gym day.
My parents have had council houses for about 40 years.
They currently live in a 2 bed house but have been on an exchange list to move to the south coast.
They have been offered numerous properties to bid on, but because all of them are smaller than the house they are in they are not interested.
Personally if you expect the council to house you for life at less than private rental then its not unreasonable at some time you may be required to move to a smaller house.
They currently live in a 2 bed house but have been on an exchange list to move to the south coast.
They have been offered numerous properties to bid on, but because all of them are smaller than the house they are in they are not interested.
Personally if you expect the council to house you for life at less than private rental then its not unreasonable at some time you may be required to move to a smaller house.
rover 623gsi said:
aside from the moral argument the really important bit is that it will not save the taxpayer one penny, and will almost certainly cost more. It is quite possibly the most ill-thought policy introduced by any government in this country.
How will it not save a penny ?
tom2019 said:
rover 623gsi said:
aside from the moral argument the really important bit is that it will not save the taxpayer one penny, and will almost certainly cost more. It is quite possibly the most ill-thought policy introduced by any government in this country.
How will it not save a penny ?Cost of government computer system update: £11bn a year.
QED.
tom2019 said:
So poeple with a spare room who are living in council houses will get taxed if they have a spare bedroom.
What do you think?
I was reading my local newspaper and one woman was saying why should she have to live with a stranger - I like many other people who have bought thier house rent a room out to a stranger for extra income.
The general notion is that this is bad - it will force people to move etc.
Why do poeple on benifits in these positions feel they are owed what other poeple have to work to get.
Personally I think its a good idea.
I suggest next they test poeple on benefits for drug use.
Just as a heads up, not everyone who lives in a council house is on benefits, some people pay fully rent too.What do you think?
I was reading my local newspaper and one woman was saying why should she have to live with a stranger - I like many other people who have bought thier house rent a room out to a stranger for extra income.
The general notion is that this is bad - it will force people to move etc.
Why do poeple on benifits in these positions feel they are owed what other poeple have to work to get.
Personally I think its a good idea.
I suggest next they test poeple on benefits for drug use.
Hoofy said:
tom2019 said:
rover 623gsi said:
aside from the moral argument the really important bit is that it will not save the taxpayer one penny, and will almost certainly cost more. It is quite possibly the most ill-thought policy introduced by any government in this country.
How will it not save a penny ?Cost of government computer system update: £11bn a year.
QED.
rover 623gsi said:
aside from the moral argument the really important bit is that it will not save the taxpayer one penny, and will almost certainly cost more. It is quite possibly the most ill-thought policy introduced by any government in this country.
My ex's Aunt lives in a three bedroom council house. Both her kids have moved out at least 5-6 years ago. She's a workshy alcoholic deadbeat (her kids aren't, thankfully) who does absolutely nothing. She's 46. The problem here, is that parasites like the above think they should be entitled to live in that property for life. Personally I don't think she should have another 30years taking up a three bedroom house whilst others go without.
The usual chant from idiots like the above is "It's my home!", except of course when it needs any work doing to it, in which case their attitude suddenly becomes "Why should I pay and increase the value of the councils property?" whilst they hold out indefinitely waiting for the council to put their hand in their pocket and moaning how hard they have it.
the bedroom tax (or under-occupancy charge if you prefer) will not release any capacity
Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
rover 623gsi said:
the bedroom tax (or under-occupancy charge if you prefer) will not release any capacity
Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
Given the mantra of the age....surely that's "fair"?Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
rover 623gsi said:
the bedroom tax (or under-occupancy charge if you prefer) will not release any capacity
Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
I note you've picked your examples carefully there. The question though isn't perhaps whether they have the money to move - its whether they have the money to stay. Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
(It doesn't cost much at all to move, if you put your back into it.)
rover 623gsi said:
the bedroom tax (or under-occupancy charge if you prefer)
It's not a tax or a charge. It's a reduction in benefits. If someone is adamant that they will stay in their family home (that isn't actually owned by them so it isn't theirs!) then they will receive less money so they have to find the money (perhaps by getting a job 
) to pay the landlord - or get kicked out. If they stay, then money is saved. So will they move or will they stay? Only time will tell.
SpeckledJim said:
But how much extra capacity will it release in the country's stock of council houses? How many empty bedrooms does the average tenant have? 1? 0.5? 0.25? I don't know.
Exactly this. If it does cost more but houses more people then it will likely cheaper than housing people in B&Bs or building more houses.rover 623gsi said:
the bedroom tax (or under-occupancy charge if you prefer) will not release any capacity
Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
That's making rather a lot of assumptions about the relative numbers of houses, bedrooms, and the current occupancy of them, don't you think?Household 1: Older couple in 3-bed house. Two grown up child now fled the nest.
Household 2: Couple with two children in two-bed house.
Household 3: Couple with one child in one-bed house.
Household 4: family of four registered as homeless – currently living in a B&B
Household 1 moves into house 3. Household 2 moves into house 1. Household 3 moves into house 2. Household 4 is still living in B&B.
The housing benefit bill has remained exactly the same and the rent being received by the landlord (council or housing association has remained exactly the same. So, no money saved anywhere and no extra capacity released.
Of course, household 2 and 3 are now living in more suitable accommodation. But, this presumes that the locations and conditions of the properties were acceptable to all parties and that they all have money to be able to move.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff