State to "help" elderly to downsize....
Discussion
Is this some Soviet republic - the State are now going to help the elderly to downsize....
what's wrong with the old deciding for themselves to downsize or rent out their homes - that they've paid for...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9019124/S...
A small step to compulsory seizing of homes to give to the poor...
Surely this has to have Clegg's name on it...
Nice to let the elderly use the rental income to pay for their new homes....
what's wrong with the old deciding for themselves to downsize or rent out their homes - that they've paid for...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9019124/S...
A small step to compulsory seizing of homes to give to the poor...
Surely this has to have Clegg's name on it...
Nice to let the elderly use the rental income to pay for their new homes....
Burgmeister said:
Seems well intentioned and rather sensible to me.
Yeah! Sod the old people.They have worked hard all their lives. They have bought their homes and paid off their mortgages. What right do they have to live in their own homes?
Kick 'em out. In fact, we should probably line them up against the wall and shoot the lot of them.
How dare they occupy the houses that they have paid for? These old farts don't understand the financial pressures that the modern youth. After all, these old codgers didn't have to struggle with the expense of an Iphone, or a monthly Sky bill. They didn't have to buy a 52" flat screen TV for every room in the house. They didn't even have to have a foreign holiday every year, let alone twice a bloody year.
These old farts didn't need a tumble drier, they hung their clothes up in the garden to dry. They were also spared the expense of having to buy a microwave oven.
So, yes, kick them out of their homes.
The homes that they have paid for,
because young people shouldn't have to pay for their homes.
Don
--
If young families stopped having so many kids then they wouldn't have the problem of big families being crammed into small houses.
Even if it works, it's a temporary solution. Give it another 50 years and as the population continues to grow and grow, unless we build on every green inch of land, anyone whose kids have moved out will be forced to downsize or something.
Even if it works, it's a temporary solution. Give it another 50 years and as the population continues to grow and grow, unless we build on every green inch of land, anyone whose kids have moved out will be forced to downsize or something.
don4l said:
Burgmeister said:
Seems well intentioned and rather sensible to me.
Yeah! Sod the old people.They have worked hard all their lives. They have bought their homes and paid off their mortgages. What right do they have to live in their own homes?
Kick 'em out. In fact, we should probably line them up against the wall and shoot the lot of them.
How dare they occupy the houses that they have paid for? These old farts don't understand the financial pressures that the modern youth. After all, these old codgers didn't have to struggle with the expense of an Iphone, or a monthly Sky bill. They didn't have to buy a 52" flat screen TV for every room in the house. They didn't even have to have a foreign holiday every year, let alone twice a bloody year.
These old farts didn't need a tumble drier, they hung their clothes up in the garden to dry. They were also spared the expense of having to buy a microwave oven.
So, yes, kick them out of their homes.
The homes that they have paid for,
because young people shouldn't have to pay for their homes.
Don
--
Hoofy said:
If young families stopped having so many kids then they wouldn't have the problem of big families being crammed into small houses.
Even if it works, it's a temporary solution. Give it another 50 years and as the population continues to grow and grow, unless we build on every green inch of land, anyone whose kids have moved out will be forced to downsize or something.
How many families see having another kid as simply a 'benefit top up'? (Like Vodafone - top up £20 and get another £5 free...)Even if it works, it's a temporary solution. Give it another 50 years and as the population continues to grow and grow, unless we build on every green inch of land, anyone whose kids have moved out will be forced to downsize or something.
Stop making having kids rewarding for the non workers and perhaps the elderly can live in what they have paid for, rather than the state telling them they have to move (potentially), to make room for the feckless, of which the government are too scared to address the benefits issues - like bullies, they pick on the weakest.
I read a snippet yesterday sayig that 87% of landlords who let to DSS tenenats have had problems with them. Admittedly it was a poll of 1000 landlords, and I guess those who responded had an axe to grind.
The majority of problems centred on non or late payment, but the next problem was damage to the property.
How are the old people going to cope when either the money doesn't arrive, or their long held property gets smashed up?
The majority of problems centred on non or late payment, but the next problem was damage to the property.
How are the old people going to cope when either the money doesn't arrive, or their long held property gets smashed up?
don4l said:
Burgmeister said:
Seems well intentioned and rather sensible to me.
Yeah! Sod the old people.They have worked hard all their lives. They have bought their homes and paid off their mortgages. What right do they have to live in their own homes?
Kick 'em out. In fact, we should probably line them up against the wall and shoot the lot of them.
How dare they occupy the houses that they have paid for? These old farts don't understand the financial pressures that the modern youth. After all, these old codgers didn't have to struggle with the expense of an Iphone, or a monthly Sky bill. They didn't have to buy a 52" flat screen TV for every room in the house. They didn't even have to have a foreign holiday every year, let alone twice a bloody year.
These old farts didn't need a tumble drier, they hung their clothes up in the garden to dry. They were also spared the expense of having to buy a microwave oven.
So, yes, kick them out of their homes.
The homes that they have paid for,
because young people shouldn't have to pay for their homes.
Don
--
scotal said:
I read a snippet yesterday sayig that 87% of landlords who let to DSS tenenats have had problems with them. Admittedly it was a poll of 1000 landlords, and I guess those who responded had an axe to grind.
The majority of problems centred on non or late payment, but the next problem was damage to the property.
How are the old people going to cope when either the money doesn't arrive, or their long held property gets smashed up?
There is one rented house in our street, and it has DSS in it. Since they moved in, it has been hell for the neighbours – the couple arguing all the time, and very loudly in the street, doors and windows smashed in constantly – the last time was by the Police on Christmas Eve (The Police said Merry Christmas to one of the neighbours as they were heading to the ‘battle zone’ – the neighbour said back, “It will be a happy Christmas if you manage to get rid of them”. They must have been kicked out now, as it’s been quiet ever since.The majority of problems centred on non or late payment, but the next problem was damage to the property.
How are the old people going to cope when either the money doesn't arrive, or their long held property gets smashed up?
Is this the type of useless flotsam the state want the elderly kicked out for?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
We sold 3 houses out of our family last year. It'll sell in a flash if the price is right. We let my Mum's go for a lower price than she wanted - sometimes it's just better to get shut, particularly if it's costing time and money to keep on top of repairs and maintenance.
I'd hazard a guess that there are quite a few unused bedrooms in the Clegg and Cameron households, possibly a few under-used houses. So let's see them voluntarily trial the suggested bright idea in one or more of their homes before they get too old to remember how silly they were when in office.
The idea does have some merit.
I have just bought a house off a 76 year old. She had lived there with her two children since 1960 and had not been able to afford to carry out any maintenance or repair on the property since her children grew up and left. The house was freezing cold, very basic conditions with death trap electrics and a garden like a jungle.
She had become a prisoner in her own home and really should have moved out over 15 years ago and could have lived a very comfortable existence since then. I suspect she had no help from her children who really should have helped her move out. The problem is people want to stay in their own home so put it off but then get to a point where it becomes too difficult or daunting to do it on their own until they need to go into care.
Old people should not be allowed to suffer in those conditions. In the end she has been penniless for mouse of her adult life, spent the last thirty years in sub standard housing but now at 76 is in a nice warm suitable flat with over a quarter of a million quid in her bank account. It makes no sense.
It's not nanny state, it's having the help there for people who need it and can't manage it on their own.
I have just bought a house off a 76 year old. She had lived there with her two children since 1960 and had not been able to afford to carry out any maintenance or repair on the property since her children grew up and left. The house was freezing cold, very basic conditions with death trap electrics and a garden like a jungle.
She had become a prisoner in her own home and really should have moved out over 15 years ago and could have lived a very comfortable existence since then. I suspect she had no help from her children who really should have helped her move out. The problem is people want to stay in their own home so put it off but then get to a point where it becomes too difficult or daunting to do it on their own until they need to go into care.
Old people should not be allowed to suffer in those conditions. In the end she has been penniless for mouse of her adult life, spent the last thirty years in sub standard housing but now at 76 is in a nice warm suitable flat with over a quarter of a million quid in her bank account. It makes no sense.
It's not nanny state, it's having the help there for people who need it and can't manage it on their own.
chris watton said:
There is one rented house in our street, and it has DSS in it. Since they moved in, it has been hell for the neighbours – the couple arguing all the time, and very loudly in the street, doors and windows smashed in constantly – the last time was by the Police on Christmas Eve (The Police said Merry Christmas to one of the neighbours as they were heading to the ‘battle zone’ – the neighbour said back, “It will be a happy Christmas if you manage to get rid of them”. They must have been kicked out now, as it’s been quiet ever since.
Is this the type of useless flotsam the state want the elderly kicked out for?
Jesus, Chris. Do you live in my street? Is this the type of useless flotsam the state want the elderly kicked out for?
The one house on our street that is let by a private landlord, and a 5 bedroomed detached at that, was occupied by DSS pondlife up until October. Karaoke full blast with the windows open, 3' high front lawn, a (probably untaxed and illegal) noisy old banger parked on the drive. Police regularly visiting every few days, arguments and fights in the street (with each other), family of 5 (I think) with an on/off boyfriend scrote, not a job between them.
Apparantley, the landlord (owner) is some old bloke who lives abroad. It's a real shame as it's a nice house, just hope the next tennants are decent folks.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff