Housing benefit cap.
Discussion
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Problem is that the horse has already bolted. If mortgage affordability criteria was in place 10-15 years ago then there'd be much less of a problem now.House prices are only rising now because of an availability of deposits from people who benefited from the 1995-2007 boom (or whose parents benefited).
xjsdriver said:
Andy Zarse said:
Do you not find it in any way extraordinary in this day and age that working people should, as a matter of course, be reliant on the State to provide the bricks and mortar of their housing?
If you cannot see that a generation or so ago, most working people could afford to buy their own home if they were of a mind to do so.....now being able to buy one's own home is out of reach to most working people on median salaries.
If you do not see this as a problem, then you are severely deluded, or simply have no bearing on reality.
What I was trying to drill down into were the possible solutions and ask you to explain why you seem to think building more council houses is a silver bullet or that the state has a pivotal role?
Edited by Andy Zarse on Friday 3rd July 11:15
Negative Creep said:
Which is all well and good, but how is someone on £15-20k a year going to raise money for a deposit? Not to mention if you do own your own home you're responsible for the upkeep, whereas at least with renting you have some protection if the boiler packs up or the roof leaks
Perhaps they should work a bit more/harder/smarter if they'd like to own their own home. Or get a bit smarter with expenditure and put "owning a home" further up their list of priorities.Ridgemont said:
I'm not trying to diminish your plight but a couple of comments on that;
1) The decisions to move from Nottinghamshire to London, to marry, have a son, by a car and have nursery care, all in one of the world's most expensive city's are life style choices. They give you the life you have now with all the great stuff. However those decisions had an opportunity cost: you can't afford to buy a house. That is uncomfortable, but it might be worth considering that job + wife + child + car is a result in itself, and that expecting to buy a house in London or the SE might be pushing it unless you are on some serious dough?
2) Have you considered moving out of London? I lived in Oxford and commuted to High Wycombe. Like you, was settling down but couldn't afford to live in either place. Moved to Northampton where prices were 50% of the equivalent. I had to make the decision to suck up the 1hr15 min commute, but again it was a lifestyle choice. You pays yer money...
I don't mean to be glib, but it does appear that you find it unreasonable to not be able to have the whole shebang, when in fact what you have is pretty good, and with a change of expectation or lifestyle, could be better?
Don't get me wrong. I'm happy, I have a 1) The decisions to move from Nottinghamshire to London, to marry, have a son, by a car and have nursery care, all in one of the world's most expensive city's are life style choices. They give you the life you have now with all the great stuff. However those decisions had an opportunity cost: you can't afford to buy a house. That is uncomfortable, but it might be worth considering that job + wife + child + car is a result in itself, and that expecting to buy a house in London or the SE might be pushing it unless you are on some serious dough?
2) Have you considered moving out of London? I lived in Oxford and commuted to High Wycombe. Like you, was settling down but couldn't afford to live in either place. Moved to Northampton where prices were 50% of the equivalent. I had to make the decision to suck up the 1hr15 min commute, but again it was a lifestyle choice. You pays yer money...
I don't mean to be glib, but it does appear that you find it unreasonable to not be able to have the whole shebang, when in fact what you have is pretty good, and with a change of expectation or lifestyle, could be better?
My move was Liverpool - Glasgow - Enfield - London - Peterborough - London and could well take in Belfast or Nottingham in the future rather than direct from Nottingham to London. All of those moves have been through work. First job meant relocating to Glasow (at 3 days notice) and then a promotion meant the move to Enfield. I accept that I won't be able to buy in London and I'm happy with that. It helps that I'm not home-owning obsessed.
We could move out of London but we would both have to commute back in. My commute at the moment is 1 hour, my wife's - when she returns to work - is 40 minutes.
We looked at moving slightly further out but increased commute cost (time and ££) precluded that.
To move completely out of London would mean one of us being out of work for a period unless we got very lucky and both got jobs in another area at the same time. So that's also a financial factor.... could we survive for three months - even outside London - on one wage? Maybe, but difficult.
You don't sound glib at all - my previous post was more a dig at the post I replied to than a genuine moan.
So basically, my expectations are realistic. My life is pretty damn good.
I prefer this life and renting than a crap car, and no son but owning a property.
The situation in this country though is that it's becoming unrealistic for more and more people to own a house, get married, own a car, and have a family, they have to choose which ones they want.
No doubt someone will tell me that's a "me me me, whiny socialist want it all but won't pay for it" attitude. It's not. People are having to make the choices about the things that were considered normal a generation ago. My dad (and mum) worked hard and bought a house, furnished it, bought a car, had a kid and my mum didn't work until I was 4 or 5.
We accept we can't do all of those things.
Edited by Hackney on Friday 3rd July 12:11
Throughout our history there's always been the aristocratic class, whether by invasion & colonization, exploiting natural resources around the globe, industrialization complete with 'workhouses' for the peasants etc. In this age the homeowner just happens to be part of the new aristocracy ie, the homeowner.........I know, haters going to hate, but that's just life.
Hackney said:
Ah right, that does raise another issue that you may be able to help with.
I'm 43 - how do I rewind to 18?
What were you and your mrs doing between the ages of 18 and 30? You had the golden ticket into property ownership! I'm 43 - how do I rewind to 18?
ETA didn't see the above response, did you not think of purchasing a house where you wanted to live and renting it out? Youd be pissing yourself now. Hindsight I know...
Edited by MajorProblem on Friday 3rd July 11:35
dazwalsh said:
Another "let's blame landlords for the benefits bill",
When demand for social housing vastly outstripped supply who did you think would take up the slack?
Call me what you want but I have about a 1/3 of my portfolio let to HB tenants and you wouldn't believe the demand that comes my way, councils are desperate to house people, and are trying schemes like buying back at market value what they sold off for peanuts years ago, paying bonds for tenants and even paying for the maintenance and damages if you take on some of the more troublesome folk. Rent is also paid direct to landlord.
Forget about the HB figure for a minute, I dread to think how much is being paid for temporary accommodation like B&B's etc. It really is a desperate situation.
The ONLY way to balance things is to build new houses, lots and lots of them, and to have a more stringent immigration policy as the numbers entering the uk are vast and uncontrolled.
I'd call you daft, renting to HB? Are you into S&M? is that the single most stressful way to employ capital? I would rather grate my own genitals than rent to HB again lolWhen demand for social housing vastly outstripped supply who did you think would take up the slack?
Call me what you want but I have about a 1/3 of my portfolio let to HB tenants and you wouldn't believe the demand that comes my way, councils are desperate to house people, and are trying schemes like buying back at market value what they sold off for peanuts years ago, paying bonds for tenants and even paying for the maintenance and damages if you take on some of the more troublesome folk. Rent is also paid direct to landlord.
Forget about the HB figure for a minute, I dread to think how much is being paid for temporary accommodation like B&B's etc. It really is a desperate situation.
The ONLY way to balance things is to build new houses, lots and lots of them, and to have a more stringent immigration policy as the numbers entering the uk are vast and uncontrolled.
We all know that this is a direct result of "Thatcherism" in full flow.
Allows Council Homes to be purchased but does not allow them to replace the housing stocks. Yes it's relatively old history now but it is one of the two main root causes.
The other can also be laid at her door - "market forces" rule - no matter what the negative impact on a high percentage of the UK population! What a great success that has been - well for the very few who are still getting richer by the way.
A more up to date issue is the total lack of regulating of the private rental sectors landlords and agencies. When I lived in London during the early 90's my monthly rent for a rather nice one bed-roomed garden flat was £800 and that was in a very pleasant part of Islington, Now a similar rental would be between 2,300 - 2,700 pm! How the hell has that massive percentage increase been allowed to happen? Supply & demand - and in addition a total lack of rental charging caps by landlords and agencies. It gets even worse in some respects as I have seen whole streets in "fashionable" parts of London with most properties not actually being lived in at all. Investments by multi millionaires who never even use them.
Both my sons and their partners work bloody hard and after tax (can't get any tax credits as they are a few hundred a year over the threshold) really struggle just to pay the essential bills!
To me the very fact that people are able to claim, what today appears to be seen as a right, up to £26K in housing benefits is rather amazing anyway.
Benefits was/is supposed to be a safety net while individuals get back on their feet again not a bloody lifestyle choice. I fully accept that many claiming these benefits are only doing so until they can get sorted, and I for one don't begrudge some of my taxes supporting them at all, but we all know that a large minority could not give a rats ass about ever getting a job.
Now I know that the more "liberal" among us will be incandescent about what I have just outlined which is OK but I don't give a rats ass either...
Rant over - for now ;-)
Allows Council Homes to be purchased but does not allow them to replace the housing stocks. Yes it's relatively old history now but it is one of the two main root causes.
The other can also be laid at her door - "market forces" rule - no matter what the negative impact on a high percentage of the UK population! What a great success that has been - well for the very few who are still getting richer by the way.
A more up to date issue is the total lack of regulating of the private rental sectors landlords and agencies. When I lived in London during the early 90's my monthly rent for a rather nice one bed-roomed garden flat was £800 and that was in a very pleasant part of Islington, Now a similar rental would be between 2,300 - 2,700 pm! How the hell has that massive percentage increase been allowed to happen? Supply & demand - and in addition a total lack of rental charging caps by landlords and agencies. It gets even worse in some respects as I have seen whole streets in "fashionable" parts of London with most properties not actually being lived in at all. Investments by multi millionaires who never even use them.
Both my sons and their partners work bloody hard and after tax (can't get any tax credits as they are a few hundred a year over the threshold) really struggle just to pay the essential bills!
To me the very fact that people are able to claim, what today appears to be seen as a right, up to £26K in housing benefits is rather amazing anyway.
Benefits was/is supposed to be a safety net while individuals get back on their feet again not a bloody lifestyle choice. I fully accept that many claiming these benefits are only doing so until they can get sorted, and I for one don't begrudge some of my taxes supporting them at all, but we all know that a large minority could not give a rats ass about ever getting a job.
Now I know that the more "liberal" among us will be incandescent about what I have just outlined which is OK but I don't give a rats ass either...
Rant over - for now ;-)
Mrr T said:
You can always trust a lefty to blame Maggie.
Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
The councils have found themselves with a shortfall of available properties to let out, we have record levels of homelessness - of course you're right - the sales of council properties made no difference what-so-ever!!!Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
A few things as well for housing shortages,
As soon as Brittany has a kid, mum says right you can f
k off out this (rented house payed for by benefits) and get your own (rented house paid for by benefits)
So you could have a family living together but they don't, they all have their own places.
If they are lucky to get with a bloke who works and has his own house they "keep" their (rented house payed for by benefits) just in case it doesn't work out. I know people who have have been together for years yet still have a spare house paid for by the taxman.
They all ask for private landlords no council or managed properties as they full well know they've burnt their bridges with them by wrecking everything they've been given.
As soon as Brittany has a kid, mum says right you can f
k off out this (rented house payed for by benefits) and get your own (rented house paid for by benefits) So you could have a family living together but they don't, they all have their own places.
If they are lucky to get with a bloke who works and has his own house they "keep" their (rented house payed for by benefits) just in case it doesn't work out. I know people who have have been together for years yet still have a spare house paid for by the taxman.
They all ask for private landlords no council or managed properties as they full well know they've burnt their bridges with them by wrecking everything they've been given.
daytona365 said:
The trouble now is that even privately rented areas soon take on the same squalid appearance as council estate dumps. Complete with all their nasty 'social' problems.
i think you are confusing private rented with opportunistic investment private rented ... a lot of private rented you would not know unless you knew the current tenants or owners
xjsdriver said:
Mrr T said:
You can always trust a lefty to blame Maggie.
Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
The councils have found themselves with a shortfall of available properties to let out, we have record levels of homelessness - of course you're right - the sales of council properties made no difference what-so-ever!!!Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
The Council need empty propertiies, not occupied houses.
As has been said above, when sold the same family lives in the same house. No more or less properties are available for occupation.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Unless I'm missing something, in order to save up £40k over 18 months and still pay your mum £250 a month, you would need to earn at least £39,500 per year, and that assumes you literally aren't spending anything apart from the £250 a month for your keep/board.£39,500 is not a very common salary for someone in their 20's to say the least.
xjsdriver said:
Mrr T said:
You can always trust a lefty to blame Maggie.
Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
The councils have found themselves with a shortfall of available properties to let out, we have record levels of homelessness - of course you're right - the sales of council properties made no difference what-so-ever!!!Its so left wing saying we did not build council house to replace those sold to tenants. Are you suggesting the houses sold to tenants some how disappeared!!
No those house where still part of the housing stock and the same people lived in them. If they had not been sold then guess what the same people would have lived in them!!!
The sales made NO difference.
The properties owned by the councils where not available to let, they had people living in them. Or are you suggesting the councils should have forced many families into one property.
Let me explain this very slowly for you.
Lets say the total number of houses in the UK was 100, 50 are privately owned and 50 by the council. Lets say the councils sell 10 to tenants. How many houses are there now? Your right there are still 100 houses.
The shortfall in public sector housing is not about council house sales but about a system which requires councils to provide housing to more and more people.
As for record levels of homelessness its all about the mad way figures are recorded not about real homelessness.
http://www.thamesreach.org.uk/news-and-views/homel...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff