Current Affairs The Labour Party

[The binman chronicles]

The system is there to protect and support the children who had no say in being born and not those who decided (or not) to have them.

The 'lifestyle choice' argument is irrelevant in this scenario.

So you would break up families and support networks by moving people around the country because it's cheaper?

Nice.

Woah! I never said abandon the kids born in that situation! With a ration type system (perhaps a government style debit card allowing certain purchases? Sounds harsh i know but this is to protect the children and done correctly could stop food bank use, ensure that house is warm, has water and so on by the government paying the bills) the kids will eat etc. School programs should target these kids to have aspirations and training to show they are not locked into a hopeless life.

The only thing i'm sugguesting is they don't get a housing upgrade if they choose to have more children. Give advice on contraception, the power is in their hands.

With the moving people around suggestion, again i know it's harsh, but whats the rent on a 5 bedroom house in london? £2000 a month, maybe more. So 24k a year, 10 years of living there £240,000 just on one family and just on housing benefit, not including anymore payments they may receive. If they move we can probably halve the cost to the public.

Yes the fact that we don't have enough social housing is a real problem in this type of scenario but the lifestyle choice is still valid, they choice to continue to live in an area that I could not afford to move into, or if i was there and lost my job, after x amount of time trying to find a new one, I would move out to make my money stretch. Same difference surely?

These policies would just be targeting the few in % terms, can work but do not. I'd rather save in these areas to provide better social care for all the rest. These people can make a decision to move into the other group, try to contribute and that will give them more life choices. Hopefully it will discourage people from ever going down that path in the first place.

 

[Boss_Blue]

The only thing i'm sugguesting is they don't get a housing upgrade if they choose to have more children. Give advice on contraception, the power is in their hands.

Two bedroom terrace and four kids and you wouldn't give them a bigger house?

I have two kids in a two bedroom house and there's barely enough room (I own my house and will be looking to move as soon as I can afford to).

With the moving people around suggestion, again i know it's harsh, but whats the rent on a 5 bedroom house in london? £2000 a month, maybe more. So 24k a year, 10 years of living there £240,000 just on one family and just on housing benefit, not including anymore payments they may receive. If they move we can probably halve the cost to the public.

I appreciate that you acknowledge that the biggest issue here is lack of social housing but it's my belief that moving small families away from their community and support networks to save money, would only serve to further isolate and disengage people (especially children) from society and contribute towards an increase in anti-social behaviour, extremism (in both minority and white demographics) and a lowering in academic achievement.

I'd rather my taxes went towards preventing that thanks.

Hopefully it will discourage people from ever going down that path in the first place.

And therein lies the issue - Tory governments seek to discourage so called benefit scroungers whilst crippling the needy in society whilst a socialist government would support the needy in society despite the very small minority who abuse the system.

I know which option I'd prefer.

 

[Tree13]

A large bit of this increase is housing benefits because of rents being high. If we had proper social housing instead of private landlords raking money in off the state the housing benefit bill would be cheaper.

Wouldn't a rent cap make more sense than increasing housing benefits? Bring renting down to a more reasonable price would have the knock-on effect of seeing more houses coming onto the market, bringing the price of houses down a bit, as well as making renting more affordable. As policies go, it would only hit those who are affluent enough to own buy-to-let rental properties but it would benefit people who struggle to rent and it would help some people who struggle to buy.

Just jacking up housing benefit won't do anything to prevent rent costs continuing to climb. In fact, won't it prompt a rise? Agree with you re the lack of social housing.

 

[neil999]

Wouldn't a rent cap make more sense than increasing housing benefits? Bring renting down to a more reasonable price would have the knock-on effect of seeing more houses coming onto the market, bringing the price of houses down a bit, as well as making renting more affordable. As policies go, it would only hit those who are affluent enough to own buy-to-let rental properties but it would benefit people who struggle to rent and it would help some people who struggle to buy.

Just jacking up housing benefit won't do anything to prevent rent costs continuing to climb. In fact, won't it prompt a rise? Agree with you re the lack of social housing.

this could lead to less rental properties on the market, this is why they got rid of regulated rent in late 80's(or was the excuse depending on how you look at it...)

 

[ashwuk76]

Wouldn't a rent cap make more sense than increasing housing benefits? Bring renting down to a more reasonable price would have the knock-on effect of seeing more houses coming onto the market, bringing the price of houses down a bit, as well as making renting more affordable. As policies go, it would only hit those who are affluent enough to own buy-to-let rental properties but it would benefit people who struggle to rent and it would help some people who struggle to buy.

Just jacking up housing benefit won't do anything to prevent rent costs continuing to climb. In fact, won't it prompt a rise? Agree with you re the lack of social housing.

I think you may have misread my post. I'm not advocating a rise in housing benefit I was saying housing benefit is high due to high rents being charged by landlords who buy houses purely to rent out.

A cap may help but I don't think long term it will as all that would do is make landlords not rent to social security tenants and just rent to the private market.

Social housing really is one of the few ways to help with both the housing crisis and housing benefit. Yes it means looking long term but if done correctly will save money.

 

[Number_25]

You need to do a bit of reading around how clinical bioinformatic courses are funded and implemented in this country before making the massive leap here.

Well, I actually assist teaching/demonstration for 4 bioinformatic modules at my 'home' university - and am also involved in a NHS-focused clinical bioinformatics project for the detection and treatment of lung cancer.

More needs to be done, but limited funding is killing the potential.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Two bedroom terrace and four kids and you wouldn't give them a bigger house?

I have two kids in a two bedroom house and there's barely enough room (I own my house and will be looking to move as soon as I can afford to).

The point is to stop the family before they get to that stage as they will know they won't get a bigger house. They then abide by what you or I can do in that scenario. This will also help take the stigma out of benefits and maybe we will see more compassion for everyone who have to live like that.

This is something to be implemented in the future and not one i would retrospectively go about downsizing everyones homes now. Of course you would give at this point a larger house, but afterwards when they know the rules it is their decision.

I appreciate that you acknowledge that the biggest issue here is lack of social housing but it's my belief that moving small families away from their community and support networks to save money, would only serve to further isolate and disengage people (especially children) from society and contribute towards an increase in anti-social behaviour, extremism (in both minority and white demographics) and a lowering in academic achievement.

I'd rather my taxes went towards preventing that thanks.

It may do but then again it may not. It's how well the solution is delivered, what type of homes can be built and what facilities you have in the area.

It shouldn't be a Tory policy mate to help encourage people to make better life decisions and not to abuse a system that is there as a saftey net. Spend too much on this and at somepoint if we end up like Greece then these people will be really in trouble because they are dependant on the state.

 

[Boss_Blue]

The point is to stop the family before they get to that stage as they will know they won't get a bigger house.

So the children suffer then?

Or the parents choose to have an abortion so that they aren't penalised by the state?

No lad - in the bin with this idea.

It shouldn't be a Tory policy mate to help encourage people to make better life decisions

I'm going to leave this here for someone else to discuss as I can feel myself start to fume.

 

[ashwuk76]

The point is to stop the family before they get to that stage as they will know they won't get a bigger house. They then abide by what you or I can do in that scenario. This will also help take the stigma out of benefits and maybe we will see more compassion for everyone who have to live like that.

This is something to be implemented in the future and not one i would retrospectively go about downsizing everyones homes now. Of course you would give at this point a larger house, but afterwards when they know the rules it is their decision.



It may do but then again it may not. It's how well the solution is delivered, what type of homes can be built and what facilities you have in the area.

It shouldn't be a Tory policy mate to help encourage people to make better life decisions and not to abuse a system that is there as a saftey net. Spend too much on this and at somepoint if we end up like Greece then these people will be really in trouble because they are dependant on the state.

So correct me if I am wrong but you saying limiting families so they know they won't get a bigger house. Isn't this just another slight difference in the Chinese policy of limiting the amount of kids families can have? You haven't quite gone that far but you are pretty close.

No one should be made to move out of thier family home or forced away from their support network just to save a few bob. It's a disgusting policy hiding behind "social mobility " it's pyar rubbish and we all know it.

The bedroom tax should be abolished. Built proper affordable housing for all and limit but to let landlords and foreign property owners whose only goal is to make money off rents.

 

[orly]

Well, I actually assist teaching/demonstration for 4 bioinformatic modules at my 'home' university - and am also involved in a NHS-focused clinical bioinformatics project for the detection and treatment of lung cancer.

More needs to be done, but limited funding is killing the potential.

Not how you teach them , how they are funded and implemented on a national scale.

Funding is well behind a number of things, including people interested in becoming bioinformaticians (or seeing themselves as such) and the accreditation of courses.

 

[The binman chronicles]

So the children suffer then?

Or the parents choose to have an abortion so that they aren't penalised by the state?

No lad - in the bin with this idea.


I'm going to leave this here for someone else to discuss as I can feel myself start to fume.

Exactly how do they suffer? I shared a room with 3 siblings. It's not great, but far more important to keep them fed, clothed and warm I think. I came from that exact same type of family so it's not like I'm not aware of the struggles.

If you start to fume from a difference in opinion then maybe a politics forum isn't for you. I commend your views, I understand where you are coming from but also there is a problem that needs to be addressed too.

 

[orly]

Woah! I never said abandon the kids born in that situation! With a ration type system (perhaps a government style debit card allowing certain purchases? Sounds harsh i know but this is to protect the children and done correctly could stop food bank use, ensure that house is warm, has water and so on by the government paying the bills) the kids will eat etc. School programs should target these kids to have aspirations and training to show they are not locked into a hopeless life.

The only thing i'm sugguesting is they don't get a housing upgrade if they choose to have more children. Give advice on contraception, the power is in their hands.

With the moving people around suggestion, again i know it's harsh, but whats the rent on a 5 bedroom house in london? £2000 a month, maybe more. So 24k a year, 10 years of living there £240,000 just on one family and just on housing benefit, not including anymore payments they may receive. If they move we can probably halve the cost to the public.

Yes the fact that we don't have enough social housing is a real problem in this type of scenario but the lifestyle choice is still valid, they choice to continue to live in an area that I could not afford to move into, or if i was there and lost my job, after x amount of time trying to find a new one, I would move out to make my money stretch. Same difference surely?

These policies would just be targeting the few in % terms, can work but do not. I'd rather save in these areas to provide better social care for all the rest. These people can make a decision to move into the other group, try to contribute and that will give them more life choices. Hopefully it will discourage people from ever going down that path in the first place.

Anyone know where you can rent a 5 bed house in London for £2000?

It's £1500 for a one bed flat in Deptford ffs

 

[The binman chronicles]

So correct me if I am wrong but you saying limiting families so they know they won't get a bigger house. Isn't this just another slight difference in the Chinese policy of limiting the amount of kids families can have? You haven't quite gone that far but you are pretty close.

No one should be made to move out of thier family home or forced away from their support network just to save a few bob. It's a disgusting policy hiding behind "social mobility " it's pyar rubbish and we all know it.

The bedroom tax should be abolished. Built proper affordable housing for all and limit but to let landlords and foreign property owners whose only goal is to make money off rents.

Again have I said limit the family size by imposing a law? That family will have a choice whether they have a 3 kids in a 2 bed, 5 in a 3 and so on, up to them. They are limited to the kind of family planning that you or I would think about first.

I agree totally with you on the social housing and if done well may have prevented my whole spiel in the first place! I'm not a fan of the bedroom tax at all but there is a problem to be looked at in that area.

I know it's all emotive so i will stop here as my view is clear and to hopefully save any fallings out. It's fine to agree to disagree sometimes

 

[ashwuk76]

Again have I said limit the family size by imposing a law? That family will have a choice whether they have a 3 kids in a 2 bed, 5 in a 3 and so on, up to them. They are limited to the kind of family planning that you or I would think about first.

I agree totally with you on the social housing and if done well may have prevented my whole spiel in the first place! I'm not a fan of the bedroom tax at all but there is a problem to be looked at in that area.

I know it's all emotive so i will stop here as my view is clear and to hopefully save any fallings out. It's fine to agree to disagree sometimes

Never said you would introduce a law I clearly said you didn't go that far but you are close to it. You are playing semantics now though, you say limit the house they have which is just another way of limiting the amount of children someone has. Not with a law change specifically stating that but what you have outlined amounts to the same thing in essence.

 

[neil999]

Corbyn has done better than i thought he would in this campaign, prob cos the tories campaign is so awful..