Housing in England; Housing Benefit Change implications

[neonleon]

This is probably as important as proposed changes in Child Benefit, as the fundamental implications is mass migration to the suburbs of traditionally inner city dwellers - financial displacement on an epic scale with the dynamic of whole neighbourhoods potentially hanging in the balance.

Now, I've never thought it was right for Housing Benefit (and I receive it) to be paid to the tune of thousands for people with huge families living in ridiculously upmarket areas like Westminster - areas that people working two jobs could never afford to live in. But we must remember that these are the exception not the rule. Rental in England is ridiculously high as is, and London rent is a joke. I live in very humble circumstances and even then housing benefit only pays a proportion of my rent. The only way I could get cheaper rent, is with a sleeping bag in a doorway.

This change does strike me as radical. Remember that most of these people renting are paying their housing benefit to rich landlords who bought these flats, homes as investments - thereby inflating the housing market and reducing the availability of affordable housing for people who need it. They'll be forced to lower the rent most probably as tens of thousands of homes become unoccupied due to a mass immigration to cheaper rents further out of town.

This concept of the state paying rich private landlords billions of pounds has always vexed me. Why don't the state just invest in public housing - all the benefits are accrued to the government rather than private individuals who are already rich enough to buy several large homes (i.e Millionaires).

How about a massive tax on second homes, on private renting, on landlords?

But then that's biting a bit to deep into their own precious demographic of millionaires isn't it?

Ah well, lets hope inner city gangs move into the quiet suburbs where tory voting tarquin and miranda live. That should wake them up.

Myself I'm gonna stick to the ghetto, no matter what petty criminality I have to resort to. I'll not be an economic refugee in a social experiment to benefit the millionaires club of the tory party.

Just remember though, the next time you consider benefit scroungers - the majority of money paid out to people living on benefits, goes to millionaires who own portfolios of property and sun themselves in the caribbean.

They are the scroungers. They are the ones who are getting the majority of your taxes you worked so hard for.

[Poor language removed] the system.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

To be honest they're right though. Surely if people on low incomes (or even medium incomes) can't afford to live in central London and have to commute in from further afield, why should those on benefits be able to?

Even then, things are always possible. My gf lives in Elephant. Not the most desirable of areas but her rent is pretty low, her place reasonable and it's very central. Likewise when I first moved to London I lived in that area. Rent was just over £400 a month. In London terms it isn't much, but yes, you can get cheaper rent further out. After Elephant I lived in a shared house in Brockley and that was £350 a month all inclusive for an ok place with garden, garage etc.

Of course there are landlords that are poor, but you don't need to succumb to the sharks out there.

 

[neonleon]

To be honest they're right though. Surely if people on low incomes (or even medium incomes) can't afford to live in central London and have to commute in from further afield, why should those on benefits be able to?

Even then, things are always possible. My gf lives in Elephant. Not the most desirable of areas but her rent is pretty low, her place reasonable and it's very central. Likewise when I first moved to London I lived in that area. Rent was just over £400 a month. In London terms it isn't much, but yes, you can get cheaper rent further out. After Elephant I lived in a shared house in Brockley and that was £350 a month all inclusive for an ok place with garden, garage etc.

Of course there are landlords that are poor, but you don't need to succumb to the sharks out there.

My rent is £120 a week and I live in Hackney. That's for my own place - although its tiny. You know yourself how good a deal that is, but I still have to find extra money (even though I am not allowed to work part time - I'm meant to miracle extra funds out of the ether).

You are talking though of displacing whole communities. Its the kind of thing the tories do with a swift swish of the pen but its also the kind of thing that has major major implications. Not least culturally when huge self ghettoised areas of Jamaicans, Bangladeshi, Polish, Pakistanis are moved from one place to another. Which is not to suggest that these areas are filled with people predominantly on housing benefits, but there will be a significant number, moved from areas that they traditionally associate with and have family in. It will also cause considerable social unrest in the communities these people are displaced to. The excuse used is its being more fair, but the reality is, its just another way to shave off a bit of money of the welfare budget to help them rich bankers.

I sympathise with the view that someone working should be able to afford rent nearer to his work. But then this is all a result of a system that pays the majority of benefits to the richest in society, because they own property. Without a huge swathe of second third and fourth homes being used as cash cows, those working would definitely have access to cheaper homes - wherever they wanted to live, including the city.

 

[davek]

This is probably as important as proposed changes in Child Benefit, as the fundamental implications is mass migration to the suburbs of traditionally inner city dwellers - financial displacement on an epic scale with the dynamic of whole neighbourhoods potentially hanging in the balance.

Now, I've never thought it was right for Housing Benefit (and I receive it) to be paid to the tune of thousands for people with huge families living in ridiculously upmarket areas like Westminster - areas that people working two jobs could never afford to live in. But we must remember that these are the exception not the rule. Rental in England is ridiculously high as is, and London rent is a joke. I live in very humble circumstances and even then housing benefit only pays a proportion of my rent. The only way I could get cheaper rent, is with a sleeping bag in a doorway.

This change does strike me as radical. Remember that most of these people renting are paying their housing benefit to rich landlords who bought these flats, homes as investments - thereby inflating the housing market and reducing the availability of affordable housing for people who need it. They'll be forced to lower the rent most probably as tens of thousands of homes become unoccupied due to a mass immigration to cheaper rents further out of town.

This concept of the state paying rich private landlords billions of pounds has always vexed me. Why don't the state just invest in public housing - all the benefits are accrued to the government rather than private individuals who are already rich enough to buy several large homes (i.e Millionaires).

How about a massive tax on second homes, on private renting, on landlords?

But then that's biting a bit to deep into their own precious demographic of millionaires isn't it?

Ah well, lets hope inner city gangs move into the quiet suburbs where tory voting tarquin and miranda live. That should wake them up.

Myself I'm gonna stick to the ghetto, no matter what petty criminality I have to resort to. I'll not be an economic refugee in a social experiment to benefit the millionaires club of the tory party.

Just remember though, the next time you consider benefit scroungers - the majority of money paid out to people living on benefits, goes to millionaires who own portfolios of property and sun themselves in the caribbean.

They are the scroungers. They are the ones who are getting the majority of your taxes you worked so hard for.

[Poor language removed] the system.

These Tories are monsters. Seriously. Not even the loony Thatcherites like Keith Joseph would have advocated schemes like this. They are pure, unadulterated poison.

Riots coming to a town near you soon.

 

[Nordecke]

This is probably as important as proposed changes in Child Benefit, as the fundamental implications is mass migration to the suburbs of traditionally inner city dwellers - financial displacement on an epic scale with the dynamic of whole neighbourhoods potentially hanging in the balance.

Now, I've never thought it was right for Housing Benefit (and I receive it) to be paid to the tune of thousands for people with huge families living in ridiculously upmarket areas like Westminster - areas that people working two jobs could never afford to live in. But we must remember that these are the exception not the rule. Rental in England is ridiculously high as is, and London rent is a joke. I live in very humble circumstances and even then housing benefit only pays a proportion of my rent. The only way I could get cheaper rent, is with a sleeping bag in a doorway.

This change does strike me as radical. Remember that most of these people renting are paying their housing benefit to rich landlords who bought these flats, homes as investments - thereby inflating the housing market and reducing the availability of affordable housing for people who need it. They'll be forced to lower the rent most probably as tens of thousands of homes become unoccupied due to a mass immigration to cheaper rents further out of town.

This concept of the state paying rich private landlords billions of pounds has always vexed me. Why don't the state just invest in public housing - all the benefits are accrued to the government rather than private individuals who are already rich enough to buy several large homes (i.e Millionaires).

How about a massive tax on second homes, on private renting, on landlords?

But then that's biting a bit to deep into their own precious demographic of millionaires isn't it?

Ah well, lets hope inner city gangs move into the quiet suburbs where tory voting tarquin and miranda live. That should wake them up.

Myself I'm gonna stick to the ghetto, no matter what petty criminality I have to resort to. I'll not be an economic refugee in a social experiment to benefit the millionaires club of the tory party.

Just remember though, the next time you consider benefit scroungers - the majority of money paid out to people living on benefits, goes to millionaires who own portfolios of property and sun themselves in the caribbean.

They are the scroungers. They are the ones who are getting the majority of your taxes you worked so hard for.

[Poor language removed] the system.

This could be a bad idea as well.. Goverment is full of greedy leeches as well..

 

[neonleon]

This could be a bad idea as well.. Goverment is full of greedy leeches as well..

Well any appreciation the government makes on social housing they are welcome to - that's all positive. At least we are not overly taxing workers so that the richest in society can make money off the shelter of the most vulnerable.

 

[Robert Jarvis]

You make good points there Leon and perhaps one of the side benefits is for those rich landlords to feel the pinch and be forced to bring rates down or have empty properties.

Unfortunately you cannot have a massive tax on those landlords because the homes they rent are not lived in by them and thereforeare not second homes. They rent out as a business and pay Income tax on the profits they make or their businesses make plus NI.

As for council houses so they rent goes to the council this would be best but Labour in all their time would not release the purse strings and legal strings to let them do this. Where I live there are now huge areas where terrace houses have been demolished under a scheme brought in the previous government. The plan was for builders to build on those sites houses for sale but of course the house for sale market collapsed so no houses built. The then Government would not allow the building of council houses. Ever thought what Gordon Brown meant by affordable houses, I have and still cannot work it out. What is an affordable house sa Brown would have you believe. By the way the terraced houses wher purchased by CPO and at the top market value and the occupants were also given a gift called relocation grant of £30,000.

 

[uknightbreed]

These Tories are monsters. Seriously. Not even the loony Thatcherites like Keith Joseph would have advocated schemes like this. They are pure, unadulterated poison.

Riots coming to a town near you soon.

i like you davek but you sound like a typical unionist.pmsl ...all hot air for the sake of hot air and no sense at all.
as an ex labour voter i cant see how anyone can still have a go at the torries ? there mopping up labours mess , simple as that.
i voted for labour and i feel some responsibility for letting that bunch cripple this country on every level.
the reality is under labour the benefit system was a free for all . they punished the hard working but rewarded laziness and disfunctionality.
all these people who are having there benefits reduced imo deserve it .1 for not being responsible for themselves (why have kids if your cant provide for them in the first place)and 2. for having more than enough money to live on (20k+ a year = i dont think you need or deserve any financial help).

eg ... i have a family at the end of my road , 7 kids , 2 adults ,specialy built 6 bedroom council house . all work on the sly and dont declare it , sign on , get there rent+ council tax paid in full + all the other perks.they are rolling in money , laugh there heads off at the muggs who run this country and take take take but contribute nothing back .its people like this that need there benefits stopping completely.

also , leon mentioned about property developers/landlords , personally i think these profitering gits should be hit and taxed hard.(along with the bankers and online shops like the ones on ebay who are really killing local business).
i also agree with the comment that the government should start to build more social housing.

 

[uknightbreed]

You make good points there Leon and perhaps one of the side benefits is for those rich landlords to feel the pinch and be forced to bring rates down or have empty properties.

Unfortunately you cannot have a massive tax on those landlords because the homes they rent are not lived in by them and thereforeare not second homes. They rent out as a business and pay Income tax on the profits they make or their businesses make plus NI.

As for council houses so they rent goes to the council this would be best but Labour in all their time would not release the purse strings and legal strings to let them do this. Where I live there are now huge areas where terrace houses have been demolished under a scheme brought in the previous government. The plan was for builders to build on those sites houses for sale but of course the house for sale market collapsed so no houses built. The then Government would not allow the building of council houses. Ever thought what Gordon Brown meant by affordable houses, I have and still cannot work it out. What is an affordable house sa Brown would have you believe. By the way the terraced houses wher purchased by CPO and at the top market value and the occupants were also given a gift called relocation grant of £30,000.

i think labours plan for affordable housing was something like this .........

View attachment 2634

 

[chicoazul]

They're punishing the poor and needy again, this is what they do.

Sharpen that pitch fork good brothers, the uprising will come.

 

[Robert Jarvis]

Give over Chico mate, needy and poor, come on you have lived in the lap of Latin American beauties and where you are now I know not but damned well not needy or poor I bet.

 

[davek]

i like you davek but you sound like a typical unionist.pmsl ...all hot air for the sake of hot air and no sense at all.
as an ex labour voter i cant see how anyone can still have a go at the torries ? there mopping up labours mess , simple as that.
i voted for labour and i feel some responsibility for letting that bunch cripple this country on every level.
the reality is under labour the benefit system was a free for all . they punished the hard working but rewarded laziness and disfunctionality.
all these people who are having there benefits reduced imo deserve it .1 for not being responsible for themselves (why have kids if your cant provide for them in the first place)and 2. for having more than enough money to live on (20k+ a year = i dont think you need or deserve any financial help).

eg ... i have a family at the end of my road , 7 kids , 2 adults ,specialy built 6 bedroom council house . all work on the sly and dont declare it , sign on , get there rent+ council tax paid in full + all the other perks.they are rolling in money , laugh there heads off at the muggs who run this country and take take take but contribute nothing back .its people like this that need there benefits stopping completely.

also , leon mentioned about property developers/landlords , personally i think these profitering gits should be hit and taxed hard.(along with the bankers and online shops like the ones on ebay who are really killing local business).
i also agree with the comment that the government should start to build more social housing.

New Labour's biggest failure wasn't encouraging laziness (there was lots of draconian legislation for benefit claimants under their rule),
Re "Labour's mess": their big mistake was to accept from the get go - even prior to 1997 when they took power - that the public wouldn't wear progressive taxation. They ruled it out until the very end of their time in office. They made the judgement that the way to fund their social programmes such as Sure Start, NHS hospital building and school building programmes etc was to allow a deregulated economy where the Bank of England could be given the accelerator and brake on interest rates and turning a blind eye to the City of London and the financial sector in general making mega profits off unstable transactions in return for revenue pouring into the Treasury. That strategy crumbled to ashes in their hands in 2008 with the global financial meltdown, and that's why there was a mess, as you put it.

Their means were flawed but there objectives were sound enough.

 

[Matt Damon]

This is probably as important as proposed changes in Child Benefit, as the fundamental implications is mass migration to the suburbs of traditionally inner city dwellers - financial displacement on an epic scale with the dynamic of whole neighbourhoods potentially hanging in the balance.

Now, I've never thought it was right for Housing Benefit (and I receive it) to be paid to the tune of thousands for people with huge families living in ridiculously upmarket areas like Westminster - areas that people working two jobs could never afford to live in. But we must remember that these are the exception not the rule. Rental in England is ridiculously high as is, and London rent is a joke. I live in very humble circumstances and even then housing benefit only pays a proportion of my rent. The only way I could get cheaper rent, is with a sleeping bag in a doorway.

This change does strike me as radical. Remember that most of these people renting are paying their housing benefit to rich landlords who bought these flats, homes as investments - thereby inflating the housing market and reducing the availability of affordable housing for people who need it. They'll be forced to lower the rent most probably as tens of thousands of homes become unoccupied due to a mass immigration to cheaper rents further out of town.

This concept of the state paying rich private landlords billions of pounds has always vexed me. Why don't the state just invest in public housing - all the benefits are accrued to the government rather than private individuals who are already rich enough to buy several large homes (i.e Millionaires).

How about a massive tax on second homes, on private renting, on landlords?

But then that's biting a bit to deep into their own precious demographic of millionaires isn't it?

Ah well, lets hope inner city gangs move into the quiet suburbs where tory voting tarquin and miranda live. That should wake them up.

Myself I'm gonna stick to the ghetto, no matter what petty criminality I have to resort to. I'll not be an economic refugee in a social experiment to benefit the millionaires club of the tory party.

Just remember though, the next time you consider benefit scroungers - the majority of money paid out to people living on benefits, goes to millionaires who own portfolios of property and sun themselves in the caribbean.

They are the scroungers. They are the ones who are getting the majority of your taxes you worked so hard for.

[Poor language removed] the system.

I say [Poor language removed] the scroungers. I've seen people on disability off to the pub during the day where they spend it. Even with the faked "limp". Its really a piss take.

Whilst I was working from home that would be a daily event seeing same people on the way to the pub every day all on benefits!

We all know or at least suspect at least one person on the fiddle. You'd be surprised!


And for me every single part of this, is the result of basically 13 years of the piss takers take take taking.


Whilst many go out to work or go looking hard for work.

I was one of them. I took JSA for 2 months before getting back into work and I've never been happier. Having paid more than x100 times in NI than I ever took back in JSA.



Its the piss takers that have brought this about during the last 13 years they were pandered to even. Bleeding the country dry.

i.e. everyone else is having to pay for it.

 

[neonleon]

i like you davek but you sound like a typical unionist.pmsl ...all hot air for the sake of hot air and no sense at all.
as an ex labour voter i cant see how anyone can still have a go at the torries ? there mopping up labours mess , simple as that.
i voted for labour and i feel some responsibility for letting that bunch cripple this country on every level.
the reality is under labour the benefit system was a free for all . they punished the hard working but rewarded laziness and disfunctionality.
all these people who are having there benefits reduced imo deserve it .1 for not being responsible for themselves (why have kids if your cant provide for them in the first place)and 2. for having more than enough money to live on (20k+ a year = i dont think you need or deserve any financial help).

eg ... i have a family at the end of my road , 7 kids , 2 adults ,specialy built 6 bedroom council house . all work on the sly and dont declare it , sign on , get there rent+ council tax paid in full + all the other perks.they are rolling in money , laugh there heads off at the muggs who run this country and take take take but contribute nothing back .its people like this that need there benefits stopping completely.

also , leon mentioned about property developers/landlords , personally i think these profitering gits should be hit and taxed hard.(along with the bankers and online shops like the ones on ebay who are really killing local business).
i also agree with the comment that the government should start to build more social housing.

I kind of agree with you there. But we must remember a great majority of people get the bare minimum whilst they are looking for work. £60 a week. Its not much.

The actual cost to the tax payer when you take out taxes, that the government get back - taxes on food, VAT, tax on beer and ciggs (and before you say anything we live in the real world where people do drink and smoke), I worked out is about £40 a week or just over £2000 a year. Maybe add a further £5000 on housing benefit (they could reduce this by a third if they did it themselves rather than paid private landlords) that goes to some millionaire anyway (a totally idiotic system), its more like £7000.

The idea that people on the dole are regularly getting benefits worth 20,30,40 50k is false, at least in my experience. I concur though, that I would be quite rightly pissed at that if I saw people doing this and I was working myself, especially minimum wage.

 

[neonleon]

I say [Poor language removed] the scroungers. I've seen people on disability off to the pub during the day where they spend it. Even with the faked "limp". Its really a piss take.

Whilst I was working from home that would be a daily event seeing same people on the way to the pub every day all on benefits!

We all know or at least suspect at least one person on the fiddle. You'd be surprised!


And for me every single part of this, is the result of basically 13 years of the piss takers take take taking.


Whilst many go out to work or go looking hard for work.

I was one of them. I took JSA for 2 months before getting back into work and I've never been happier. Having paid more than x100 times in NI than I ever took back in JSA.



Its the piss takers that have brought this about during the last 13 years they were pandered to even. Bleeding the country dry.

i.e. everyone else is having to pay for it.

utterly repugnant statement couched in the rhetoric of Daily Mail inspired class hatred. Someone too sick to work - a scrounger. Someone who can't get a job - a scrounger. Someone who f*cks the country up with bad investments for his own selfish ends from the vantage point of his desk in the city and precipitates a global recession - what do we call them, taxpayers?