FabSwingers.com forum: Capped Benefits

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Plans for a £26,000-a-year household benefit cap.

The annual cap would come into force for working age families in England, Scotland and Wales from 2013.

With the universal benefits coming into play do you think this is a good idea and what are your _iews on this

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

imo that is to high, why should some one on benifit get as much as a hard working family, amazed we even need to talk about it

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The govt will probably be damned if they try and combat the benefit culture, and damned if they don't.

Somehow it has to be made plain to those spending a life on benefits (and yes I acknowledge that the current system penalises some benefit claimants financially if they return to work), that it should be less attractive to sit at home than going out to work. Capping benefits will go some way to changing the mindset of those who have been on benefits for so long that they've come to accept it as normal. I welcome the move by the govt but it won't be enough by itself, they need to ram the point home again and again that it's better to work than sit at home.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

It is all over the news and the church is now getting involved just wondered on others _iews on this.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"imo that is to high, why should some one on benifit get as much as a hard working family, amazed we even need to talk about it"

So much for the Tories being the party for the rich only eh?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i think it is a good idea

when i saw it on the news the other day, i did think of polo's 'breeders' thread the other week

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 24/01/12 12:56:20]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"imo that is to high, why should some one on benifit get as much as a hard working family, amazed we even need to talk about it"

I'm in favour of the cap but a lot of low-income working families receive benefits, do many/any get more than £26K p.a.? Anyone here know the facts ?

As regards housing benefit, I think a lot of it just gets paid to very rich private landlords who own many, many properties; individuals who own whole streets in the North for instance. If HB comes do, most of them will just have to accept a smaller profit margin.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I agree that the proposed rate of £26000 is too much, but aside from that, why are the church getting involved? They've been ripping people off for centuries with their bullplop - they should have no say whatsoever in government policy.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move."

people have always moved for ecanomic reasons so if they cant live where they are on the money they have then yes.

I know lots of people who have moved because they cant afford an area, why should people on benifit be better off?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move."

Yes, they should. Hard working families who want to live in London, but can't afford to, have to live elsewhere. Why should benefit claimants say they have a right to live where they choose when people paying for accommodation out of their own pockets have to take into consideration where they can afford to live, not where they want to live.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire

I was amazed when i read this that people actually get that amount in benefits. Does this include everything they recieve like non means tested benefits ie child benefit. Its got to be one hell of a big family that cant live on 26k a year. It puts it into perspective why working families are so damned pissed off.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *edangel_2013Woman
over a year ago

southend

I work full time, usually on average about 56 hours a week, and pull about £19,000 before tax etc. I don't get housing benefit, or any help at all. I live in Essex, which isn't cheap, but I manage. I'm doing Open University to try to get a better future for myself. Which again I'm paying for, and at £900+ for a course, and I need to do 6 at least to get my degree.

I'm all for a benefit cap, but why the hell is it capped way above what I'm earning when I'm working my bollocks off just to survive?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The government will overturn it. In my _iew if the Bishops are so concerned about this benefit cap, why not start dishing some cash out from there own coffers. The country is broke, those on benefits cannot unfortunately rely on the state to pay out wads of money when others work and do not make the same kind of money.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *aulnh2Man
over a year ago

belfast

Ok, I live in Northern Ireland where this at the minute will not take place.

I am a welfare rights adviser, and there is this demonisation of the benefit class. If you want to ethnically, or society cleanse, at least say so.

The headlines all say that this has been passed, but there is a serious problem, previous laws, and especially case law will make it very hard for those the Sun/Mail highlight to lose their benefits.

Those who will lose out are those from this date on who make a claim

On an aside, those DLA scroungers in the papers. Ask how many others were successful in winning their case. If I were in Eng/Sco/Wales then would seek help from a welfare rights bureau

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move.

I hate the idea of benefit tourism in any form but after how long does a recently-unemployed "hard working" person then become just yet another benefit claimant living in an area of expensive real estate?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *isterTeaseMan
over a year ago

Chigwell

Capping benefits is only a small part of the problem, surly raising the minimum wage so you get more than £26,000 would be beneficial. You have to remember the cost of living is going up not down, so sooner or later families in benefits (i very much doubt they all get £26k) won't be able to afford the bare minimum to live a normal/healthy life

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The problem is it isn't better for some people to go to work. 26k, bare in mind that's net, so if were assuming both parts of the couple are uneducated, they'd both have to get a full time job at a bit over NMW in order to net 26k. It still leaves no incentive for many to work! I earn good money, and I pay a fair amount of tax. I don't want to crap on about it, that's how it is. Incentives are needed for these people to work. Some benefit caps are needed, eg, cap child benefit at 2 or 3 children, any more, no extra child benefit. Also allow those that have been on benefits 5 years or more to work and still receive ALL benefits they did before for the first 6 months, payable in a lump sum only when they've completed 12 months continual employment. May sound radical, but it would prove an incentive for people to get of their arse and work. 26k still leaves no incentive for many. If were going to put a cap on, make it 12k, such that a person on benefits is definately better off working!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The government will overturn it. In my _iew if the Bishops are so concerned about this benefit cap, why not start dishing some cash out from there own coffers. The country is broke, those on benefits cannot unfortunately rely on the state to pay out wads of money when others work and do not make the same kind of money."

A vicar pointed out that the Bishops consider £26K too low an income level for a family but he is only paid £22K by the Church.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move.

off?"

Without getting into a debate about immigration. Some of the families would have travelled halfway across the world to get to the UK. Moving out of London to somewhere cheaper should therefore not be too much of a chore.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *edangel_2013Woman
over a year ago

southend

Is there any wonder there is a demonisation of the welfare class?

Whilst probably in the minority, when I was signing on last year, I came across one man bragging he had been receiving benefits since he was 18, he worked most weeks, but cash in hand, he was waiting in line to get another crisis loan, because he only had to pay back £5 a fortnight, and it was an easy way to get money.

Another who was wanting a crisis loan, because his mates were going out that night, and he couldn't afford to go out with them.

A woman who hadn't worked for 10 years because she had been on disability benefits for depression, refusing any job unless it paid her over £20k a year, because she wasn't getting out of bed for any less.

These are just the few I came across and spoke to personally, as I say, these may well be in the minority, but it's the minority that gives the majority a bad name. Just ask single guys on here!!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *isterTeaseMan
over a year ago

Chigwell

"I work full time, usually on average about 56 hours a week, and pull about £19,000 before tax etc. I don't get housing benefit, or any help at all. I live in Essex, which isn't cheap, but I manage. I'm doing Open University to try to get a better future for myself. Which again I'm paying for, and at £900+ for a course, and I need to do 6 at least to get my degree.

I'm all for a benefit cap, but why the hell is it capped way above what I'm earning when I'm working my bollocks off just to survive?

I might be wrong but isn't the £26k cap for families on benefits only?, I dont think an individual can get that much.... Can they?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move.

When they've hit the cap, obviously.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Something I would personally like to see is the scrapping of child benefit for more than one child for anyone born after 2012 . Increase the amount paid for that first child and raise tax thresholds to take more low earners out of tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

scotland must be a cheap place to live,my mate is claming unemployment bennifet for him wife and 2 children and full housing counciltat his total sum comes to 12.000 ,and cameron says the average wage is 26,000 ,i beg to differ in scotland the average is 17,000,and from that you have 3000 rent 1200 council tax before you start to live ,i wonder where they get there figures, so if bennifits are to be caped at 26000 ,i am singing on .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The average wage for a couple is £26,000.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

why stop at capping them....why not provide hats and scarves too????

God I love being out of touch with the world

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Capping benefits is only a small part of the problem, surly raising the minimum wage so you get more than £26,000 would be beneficial. You have to remember the cost of living is going up not down, so sooner or later families in benefits (i very much doubt they all get £26k) won't be able to afford the bare minimum to live a normal/healthy life "

the problem with rising the minimum wage is that someone has to pay for it, this means employers, most of whom are struggling as much as the rest of us, so this would prob reduce jobs.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not before time!--to many people playing the system now and hard working taxpayers are worse off. If we all decided to live on benefits the whole system would fail.

Benefits were inroduced to help those in hardship-not for career scroungers.I'd actually go further and issue food stamps not cash.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When they've hit the cap, obviously."

But they might hit the cap in the short term before getting another job in e.g. central London as a cleaner. So would they have to move to a low cost area before they had chance to regain employment?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

yes i can see where you are coming from ,swings and round abouts,however i am a enployer a small bar only employ 6 people and i pay well above the min wage ,only fair they work hard,on the other hand i no of a local man employes 30 or more pays min wage has put his guys on a 3 day week has three houses drives a damler has a land rover top range goes away for a month every 2 ,his three kids all drive expencive cars all payed by daddy ,and he comes in my bar and pleads poverty ,he cant aford to pay any more than min wage ,mmmmmmmmmmmmm let me think and there is a lot ,not all ,who are the same ,a fairer capitlist society ,ok lets get that on off the ground first

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *isterTeaseMan
over a year ago

Chigwell

the problem with rising the minimum wage is that someone has to pay for it, this means employers, most of whom are struggling as much as the rest of us, so this would prob reduce jobs."

Yes somebody has to pay for it & I personally nominate the greedy politicians & fat cat bankers, who are mostly responsible for the shit this country/world is in, in the first place

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no go on tell us what you think

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED"

I usually steer clear of religion, politics and commercialism threads for similar reasons.

The politicians (and I mean all of them) don't have a clue really what to do to sail the ship now the rudder's fell off

Wolf

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED"

As long as it is not libellous, defamatory or racist you should be OK

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

If the fair rents tribunal had not been scraspped in the 80s we would not have rents going through th4e roof ,most of the benefit is housing benefit -it will effenct 67000 housholds who will lose on average £83 pweek .over 54% of these people live in london or surrounding areas (Govt figures).

So many people are going to present them selves as homeless, the councils are all saying how will we cope ?

Total saving 290 million year 1 -300 million yeare 2 ....total cost in rehousing =unknown

it saves a total of 1% of the welfare budget but at least we will all feel a bit better eh ...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *edriderCouple
over a year ago

glasgow

"Not before time!--to many people playing the system now and hard working taxpayers are worse off. If we all decided to live on benefits the whole system would fail.

Benefits were inroduced to help those in hardship-not for career scroungers.I'd actually go further and issue food stamps not cash."

well said x

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED

I usually steer clear of religion, politics and commercialism threads for similar reasons.

Won't that just leave the interminable "would u shag the above /bareback / look at me" threads?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *all-Eddies QosCouple
over a year ago

wirral

Being a breeder and a scrounger this affects me but not yet cos I've not popped out enough kids yet.......if i was to go back to work which i want to very much, I'd be worse off but i know that's not the point. But i will get extra types of benefits like working tax credit and child care paid for. So in reality its swings and roundabouts. Either way id be getting handouts. Can't win.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is also confusion with DLA... DLA is a benefit which is given to aid and or assist people who are classed as Disabled or in rare cases who have illness's or aliments not classed as Disabilities.

Most Disabled people (I include myself as I am classed as Disabled) Are entitled to DLA and are permitted to WORK... If your Disabled and working you will get extra Working Tax Credits.

I am Disabled and unemployed at the moment, I have struggled to maintain a job for a while I have Aspergers Syndrome and I have struggled to find the Support I need from Employers and so called Middle Men Firms/Agencies who are paid alot from Government to Support me.

I am not Lazy....... But I do struggle I see familys like the Chawners (spelling?) on TV and they ANGER me..... this is something that the Benefit capping should be changing.....

MARK of Mark and Jayne

Ps, I am also disgusted that our Government gave £7 Billion away last year in Oversea's aid when our country clearly needs it FIRST unlike other countries who promise AID but rarely pay it in FULL... America/Germany being two examples!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

I'm all for a benefit cap, but why the hell is it capped way above what I'm earning when I'm working my bollocks off just to survive?

I might be wrong but isn't the £26k cap for families on benefits only?, I dont think an individual can get that much.... Can they? "

the cap for an individual is 350 per week ,doubt if the single folf will be effected just the familes with 3 kids or more

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED

I usually steer clear of religion, politics and commercialism threads for similar reasons.

Won't that just leave the interminable "would u shag the above /bareback / look at me" threads?"

oh sod those... besides I'm always bareback - can't see how you can have safe sex with yer shirt on, but save it for another thread eh

lol

;)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So many people are going to present them selves as homeless, the councils are all saying how will we cope ? "

Surely the private landlords will have to lower what they charge as rent so the potential homeless figures could be grossly overstated?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire

"Not before time!--to many people playing the system now and hard working taxpayers are worse off. If we all decided to live on benefits the whole system would fail.

Benefits were inroduced to help those in hardship-not for career scroungers.I'd actually go further and issue food stamps not cash."

Not everyone plays the system, there are some that play the system. Most people i know on benefits can hardly manage, i dont personally know of anyone that leads a life of luxury. Do you really think that issuing food stamps will help the majority of people living on benefits. The ones i know juggle their money around, some weeks they will bulk buy food and other weeks cut back. If you give someone food stamps that means they will have to spend a set amount of money on food each week.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

What you all have to realise is that most of that 26K a year benefit includes rent...

Most working age families (lets say mum/dad an 2 kids) get CASH benefits of roughly 12,000 a year! That is based on all 4 members claiming job seekers allowance!!

They are not saying EVERY family will receive 26k a year!

The rest is paid to council/private landlords..

It is the PRIVATE landlords that will be getting the bulk of that 26K..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *edriderCouple
over a year ago

glasgow

"Being a breeder and a scrounger this affects me but not yet cos I've not popped out enough kids yet.......if i was to go back to work which i want to very much, I'd be worse off but i know that's not the point. But i will get extra types of benefits like working tax credit and child care paid for. So in reality its swings and roundabouts. Either way id be getting handouts. Can't win."

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

I might be wrong but isn't the £26k cap for families on benefits only?, I dont think an individual can get that much.... Can they? "

Capped for working age families...

Were all members of family can work...

Not single people or families with young children! Simply because they don't receive that amount...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

"oh dear,food stamps ,you, i take it are not unemployed,well you better hope you never are ,,and believe me there is a fair chance of this,, and see if you want to stand out in a que with food stamps ,"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *averiMan
over a year ago

Swindon to bristol

a cap has to be a good idea.

Also if you can afford Sky TV you should not qualify for any benifits!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also worth pointing out is that the £26k in benefits equates to a working wage of £36k because of Tax/NI paid by those working.

As others have said if you can't afford to live in an area when you are working, why should you be able to when you are not working. It may force people to move out of London, thus increasing the rentable housing stock available, thus reducing demand and hopefully finally reducing the prices a bit so those of us that do work can afford to live closer to where the work is.

Just my two penneth worth (3p before tax)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

just because there is no work ,does not make you a begger,i have unemployed guys who come into my bar for a pint or two ,decient guys ,would rather work than sit at home,we allneed to get out and live a little even unemployed,you best hope its not your turn next to be on the dole ques,

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"a cap has to be a good idea.

Also if you can afford Sky TV you should not qualify for any benifits!"

The working lambast the so-called 'easy life' the non working have. Somehow the grass is greener on the poorer side of the fence, where the peasants sit disconnected from the rest of society coping on the crumbs from the rich man's taxable income. These people would willingly watch pensioners and the homeless starve to death to lighten the statistics - another problem solved.

Let us hope that they never have to experience that stark reality, where you make the decision in your later life whether to have the heating on and skip a meal, or eat a snack and wear two extra jumpers while the house deteriorates with damp - have a read about housing poverty, and child poverty too while you're at it - see how it grabs you when you read the stories that come of it.

When you pare the corps to the bone, there is only bone left. If you fear the system is unfair to you, then I suggest you stand on the other side of the fence awhile and walk a mile in the shoes of the really hard up for whom a few quid makes the difference between having a meal and going without.

Wolf

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED"

+1 .. yeah me too

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Something I would personally like to see is the scrapping of child benefit for more than one child for anyone born after 2012 . Increase the amount paid for that first child and raise tax thresholds to take more low earners out of tax."

Thats a good idea.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Folks, I am afraid to say we are being conned here. Yes we pay out big money in benefits but it is nothing compared to the tax loop holes exposed by the big corps and other private organisations. People on benefits can't afford fancy lawyers to justify not paying their way. They are easy meat for the government and media.

However £26K is way more than most working people in my area. It is too much unless housing is over 50% of that expence. Mind you it probably goes to a private landlord who may or may not be filling in his tax return.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"just because there is no work ,does not make you a begger,i have unemployed guys who come into my bar for a pint or two ,decient guys ,would rather work than sit at home,we allneed to get out and live a little even unemployed,you best hope its not your turn next to be on the dole ques,"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *all-Eddies QosCouple
over a year ago

wirral

so i take it you are planning on 'popping out' more kids while you live on benefits?? and how would you get child care paid for if you went back to work? ive never heard of that before! if it wasnt for our parents spending their days off work babysitting for us, i couldnt work as couldnt afford childcare costs! this may be a scottish/english law thing though..your right that you cant win as there isnt enough reasons for people to get off benefits and work when theyre not going to be better off or at least equal."
yes im just gonna keep churning them out......different dads, ethnicities,religion etc......how else am i gonna be able to buy that big mahoosive plasma telly? NO OF COURSE I'M NOT. i am a single parent i have no intention of having anymore children while being on my own or not working. I have always worked and stopped a year ago (tomorrow) after struggling for months juggling kids and work. While i was with my children's father i worked 2 jobs with over 70 hours a week. I took 2 weeks holiday to have a baby. I ain't no slacker. Tax credits pay up to 70% of child care. My childcare costs would also exceed my earnings as my child care costs would be at least £200 a week. Unfortunatly i also have no family to help with child care either so im gonna keep scrounging till my kids are of a age where they are all at school and my eldest is old enough to mind them until i get home. I paid my taxes and am only taking what i am entitled to.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

so i take it you are planning on 'popping out' more kids while you live on benefits?? and how would you get child care paid for if you went back to work? ive never heard of that before! if it wasnt for our parents spending their days off work babysitting for us, i couldnt work as couldnt afford childcare costs! this may be a scottish/english law thing though..your right that you cant win as there isnt enough reasons for people to get off benefits and work when theyre not going to be better off or at least equal. yes im just gonna keep churning them out......different dads, ethnicities,religion etc......how else am i gonna be able to buy that big mahoosive plasma telly? NO OF COURSE I'M NOT. i am a single parent i have no intention of having anymore children while being on my own or not working. I have always worked and stopped a year ago (tomorrow) after struggling for months juggling kids and work. While i was with my children's father i worked 2 jobs with over 70 hours a week. I took 2 weeks holiday to have a baby. I ain't no slacker. Tax credits pay up to 70% of child care. My childcare costs would also exceed my earnings as my child care costs would be at least £200 a week. Unfortunatly i also have no family to help with child care either so im gonna keep scrounging till my kids are of a age where they are all at school and my eldest is old enough to mind them until i get home. I paid my taxes and am only taking what i am entitled to."

well at least your honest. and your entitled you have paid in so you can take out that is only fair

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 24/01/12 14:42:25]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Milk tokens are still issued up until child is 5 years old if your on benefits

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Of course there needs to be a long overdue welfare cap, but let us not take our eye off the ball here....

This figure includes rent benefits, it's high time that the 'Fair Rent Board' came into power again....it was abolished by Thatcher so that her cronies could drive up rents on private properties and milk the benefit system of cash.

Since the last general election alone average rents for private properties have rocketed way above inflation...all part of the Tory 'pay back' to their backers and cronies for getting them elected.

The biggest burden to the UK welfare system is rent benefit....you can't expect to sell off the vast majority of the national council housing stock and not be left with a private rental crisis.

So yes to a welfare cap....but an even bigger yes to fair rents for private tenants, put in that position because previous governments sought to buy votes by selling off housing stock.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"a cap has to be a good idea.

Also if you can afford Sky TV you should not qualify for any benifits!

Wolf

Thank you. Thank you.

It is so dispiriting to read the ill will and sneering of some of the posters on here.

Last week there was someone on lambasting a "friend"of hers on Facebook for having a holiday in Lanzarote, nightly trips to the pub and living a life of Riley. All on benefits apparently.

When it came to light that in fact the holiday was on a loan the poster couldnt get her head round the fact that it was obvious that the benefits receiver couldnt afford the holiday on the receipt of benefits alone.

I still ask the question how does anyone have the plasma TV, X Box and high living on £62 a week?

Please someone tell me how it's done? I'm desperate to know. I asked last week but got no answer.

How do you live it up on three and a half grand a year?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no guys i never ment you should not have to que,what i ment was no one should have to use food tokens,and yes the person who sugested it on a earlyer post is still a prat ,lets hope they are never unemployed and end up getting issued food tokens ,

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Since the last general election alone average rents for private properties have rocketed way above inflation...all part of the Tory 'pay back' to their backers and cronies for getting them elected.

I am no Tory but surely they would now be excluding housing benefit from the cap if they purely wanted to line their supporters' pockets?

I think the biggest impact will be reduce the mountains of cash going to these large private landlords.

As you rightly mentioned, both Labour and Conservative governments participated in the sale of public housing and as I understand it Labour did nothing to change the rules that stopped local authorities re-investing the money into new housing. I am happy to be corrected on any facts.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

would i be right in saying that there are some states in america where there are goverment food stores where the unemployed go to buy there foor??

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *edriderCouple
over a year ago

glasgow

@ fakeblonde1980 yes you are entitled when you have always worked, i didnt know you were a single parent either so apologies, thanks for your honesty.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Since the last general election alone average rents for private properties have rocketed way above inflation...all part of the Tory 'pay back' to their backers and cronies for getting them elected.

I am no Tory but surely they would now be excluding housing benefit from the cap if they purely wanted to line their supporters' pockets?

I think the biggest impact will be reduce the mountains of cash going to these large private landlords.

Labour under Blair and then Brown twice reduced the discount available to purchasers under the 'Right to Buy' scheme in an effort to slow the decline in public housing....this new government now want to reverse those cuts, in fact they want to give more discount than has ever been offered before.....just to sweep up the last bastions of council ownership of housing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"would i be right in saying that there are some states in america where there are goverment food stores where the unemployed go to buy there foor?? "

there is also shops in this country they are called Aldi

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Having returned too jobseekers after caring for a family member for five years previous all on a monthly payment of £ 300 or so.i know find it misson impossible to secure full time employment,all in fact that i have secured is 18 wks work in 12 mths and thats three different contracts,i totally agree with a benifits cap,its the same faces every time i attend to sign on,

times are hard at home but we manage our money and have no extravances,benifits are a safety net but so was care in the community but nobody cares for the carers or is there any gov. help to get carers back to work but anybody that advocates food stamps needs to take a look at the bigger picture,not everybody on benifits are scroungers or playing the system

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

" Labour under Blair and then Brown twice reduced the discount available to purchasers under the 'Right to Buy' scheme in an effort to slow the decline in public housing....this new government now want to reverse those cuts, in fact they want to give more discount than has ever been offered before.....just to sweep up the last bastions of council ownership of housing.

OK so reduced but did not remove discounts and I presume I am correct in thinking Labour did nothing to make it easier for local authorities to re-invest what little they got from those sales in new housing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

yes i no ,but for some other person to sugest that food tokens could be used is contemptable ,hope they never go down that road,most people want to work and most cant help being unemployed ,and food tokens are just degrading ,how low would this make a person feel,cant work keep there kiddies buy them a little something now and again ,sort of thing most of us do every week end ,this is such a greedy society we live in now ,i am all right jak, till it happens to you,,i read that sales in charity shope have sored does that not say something to us more fortunate ones ,and no its not because we have all just got a concance,there are aeras of where i live in scotland where people have not worked for years ,and the same in parts of england where there is no jobs or hope ,low payed work where ,yes dare i say it not worth getting out of bed for ,people not making ends meet day in day out,fair days pay for a fair days work,,no more of this see how much work we can get for as little payd out

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Totally agree it is contempable to suggest food stamps, how degrading,its degrading enough to go and sign on and recieve a hand out

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"yes i no ,but for some other person to sugest that food tokens could be used is contemptable ,hope they never go down that road,most people want to work and most cant help being unemployed ,and food tokens are just degrading ,how low would this make a person feel,cant work keep there kiddies buy them a little something now and again ,sort of thing most of us do every week end ,this is such a greedy society we live in now ,i am all right jak, till it happens to you,,i read that sales in charity shope have sored does that not say something to us more fortunate ones ,and no its not because we have all just got a concance,there are aeras of where i live in scotland where people have not worked for years ,and the same in parts of england where there is no jobs or hope ,low payed work where ,yes dare i say it not worth getting out of bed for ,people not making ends meet day in day out,fair days pay for a fair days work,,no more of this see how much work we can get for as little payd out"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden

"it was abolished by Thatcher so that her cronies could drive up rents on private properties and milk the benefit system of cash"

Just as Tony B Liar had the rules changed on the legal profession being able to advertise so HIS cronies could make a fortune along with his cronies in the gambling industry!

I reckon Margaret Thatcher must have been really good at her job. She told us that it wouldn't be easy after another term bolloxed by Labour and it wasn't easy!

And almost 20 years later, Chapagne Socialists are still blaming her for the ills of this country! Even after Tony B Liar didn't change anything back and gave a large portion of our countries wealth to the benefit culture!

Blame the bankers if you will, but just remember that Gordon Clown actually admitted that he should have put in place tighter regulation, on an inter_iew on Radio 4!

As for the cap? Why should someone who doesn't work live better than someone who does? Why should the tax payers of this country support families who are on the benefit bandwagon? £26000... Way too high! It should be at minimum wage rates at most and certainly not at a gross of £36,000!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Apologies to those that have had posts removed

If you have quoted an abusive post that was on here your post will have been taken off the thread as well

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move."

No i dont think they should be made to move, where would they all go anyway?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

You would be incorrect in your assumptions, since 1997 Housing Associations have been involved in the building of new rental property and the overhall and redevelopment of old properties for rental to the tune of over 100,000 properties...but that hasn't come close to plugging the hole in the public sector housing market as between 1980 and 1998 nearly Two Million Council homes were sold.

Under law (passed by Thatcher) the receipts of these Two Million council home sales was only permitted to be used to reduce the debts of councils and to artificially reduce the amount of central government funding distributed to councils.

It was by law not permitted to be used to build new Council homes....lest the underclass were encouraged to breed in their shanty towns...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

""it was abolished by Thatcher so that her cronies could drive up rents on private properties and milk the benefit system of cash"

Just as Tony B Liar had the rules changed on the legal profession being able to advertise so HIS cronies could make a fortune along with his cronies in the gambling industry!

I reckon Margaret Thatcher must have been really good at her job. She told us that it wouldn't be easy after another term bolloxed by Labour and it wasn't easy!

Blame the bankers if you will, but just remember that Gordon Clown actually admitted that he should have put in place tighter regulation, on an inter_iew on Radio 4!

How mature of you to change Blair's name to B Liar.....such an original thought you had there....oh, and the Gordon Clown thing you threw in there..

Oh how we laughed....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"And what about the families that say live in London and can't afford to live there should they be made to move.

No i dont think they should be made to move, where would they all go anyway?"

The suburbs....Kent, Surrey, Essex etc. all have inflated housing and house rental costs....you are correct, where would they all go?

Worth remembering these are the people that keep London, our capital city, operating on a daily basis.

The low paid workers, who clean the streets, clean the banks and offices, work in the shops, empty the bins....

The same people who are in receipt of council tax benefits and rental benefits to afford to live in the Capital.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It was by law not permitted to be used to build new Council homes....lest the underclass were encouraged to breed in their shanty towns..."

Oh Jane, you were doing so well until that last sentence.

If you really believe in a eugenicist motive to the legislation would you also concede that Marie Stopes founded her clinics to control the fertility of the "irresponsible" underclass and those darlings of the left, Beatrice and Sydney Webb were happy to recommend sterilising the weak and infirm?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

It was by law not permitted to be used to build new Council homes....lest the underclass were encouraged to breed in their shanty towns...

Oh Jane, you were doing so well until that last sentence.

I couldn't resist it...

But seriously, new council homes were not built in the main for financial reasons....but also because by cutting down on working class areas (ok, better than shanty towns) there were less likely to be enclaves of traditional Labour voters.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Plans for a £26,000-a-year household benefit cap.

The annual cap would come into force for working age families in England, Scotland and Wales from 2013.

With the universal benefits coming into play do you think this is a good idea and what are your _iews on this"

Not bad for doing nothing! Maybe we should be thinking about people having to do voluntary work if they want more.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I couldn't resist it...

Or _iewed another way, home-owning members of the working class are no longer part of the client state that keeps inept / corrupt Labour politicians in perpetual power. Once again I must state that I am not a tory.

I appreciate the "shanty town" comment was a throwaway line but I have to say it is the kind of comment so often spouted by the privately-educated, publicly-employed, Oxbridge-sourced, middle class elite that pollute the Labour party. The sport of people who have NEVER lived in a working class area and who would die, simply die darling, if a dustbin man won the lottery and bought the house next to theirs.

(I know that is not you, you are in business and live in Devon)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The govt will probably be damned if they try and combat the benefit culture, and damned if they don't.

Hmmmm, making work pay, making it more attractive to be in work than in benefits. Lets reduce the amount of benefits that people can claim, that will sort it.

Revolutionary I agree, but how about ensuring that people can have low cost housing, or perhaps, restricting the cost of food fuel and other nesecary expenses, or (and this is the silliest idea) Lets make employers Increase peoples wages to realy make it pay to go to work?

Nah, it'll never happen, cos Unions are a bad idea......

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It was by law not permitted to be used to build new Council homes....lest the underclass were encouraged to breed in their shanty towns...

Oh Jane, you were doing so well until that last sentence.

I couldn't resist it...

Tosh. Councill estates were built to combat Chronic housing shortages from the 1920's onwards.........

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Here you go some interesting reading from the BBC :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16694991

Note the financial values showing rent and child benefit amongst them.

A family of 2 adults and 3 kids on £678 a week, is equivalent to a NET income of some £36,000 a year, not £26,000.

Even then a NET £26,000 is too high.

All this talk of child poverty is shite, maybe without so much cash, the parents will spend more TIME and LOVE with their kids.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Devon seems quite a large mostly empty county, i say build 400,000 new homes a year there.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

to it being capped.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Rent in London pushes costs up so why not ship them all to Liverpool and they can learn how to thieve to supplement lower benefits.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Can't we just stick all the benefit people in camps in places like marshes or old power stations so they can serve the needs of the wealthy as and when they are required?

If there are any old Pontins camps we could stick them there out of the sight of the magnificent grafters who keep this mighty nation as powerful as it is.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden

“It was by law not permitted to be used to build new Council homes....lest the underclass were encouraged to breed in their shanty towns”

Oh how mature! Shanty towns indeed. I am sure that all those who have no option but to live in Council housing will appreciate your _iews.

It was a throwaway comment? Yes, one that only a champagne Socialist would think of in a discussion on this subject… It shows distain for the very people you are crying for.

And Flybinite.. Nicely put!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

Note the financial values showing rent and child benefit amongst them.

A family of 2 adults and 3 kids on £678 a week, is equivalent to a NET income of some £36,000 a year, not £26,000.

Is that a family on benefits??

How much of that £678 is paid directly to landlords?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *all-Eddies QosCouple
over a year ago

wirral

"@ fakeblonde1980 yes you are entitled when you have always worked, i didnt know you were a single parent either so apologies, thanks for your honesty.

"
its ok....none of what i said in reply was meant in a snotty way... Xx

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Note the financial values showing rent and child benefit amongst them.

A family of 2 adults and 3 kids on £678 a week, is equivalent to a NET income of some £36,000 a year, not £26,000.

Is that a family on benefits??

How much of that £678 is paid directly to landlords?"

Do you want me to come over and read the frigging article to you?

At bedtime fgs.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Can't we just stick all the benefit people in camps in places like marshes or old power stations so they can serve the needs of the wealthy as and when they are required?

If there are any old Pontins camps we could stick them there out of the sight of the magnificent grafters who keep this mighty nation as powerful as it is."

Yes, the Daily Mail et al continue to bash people who claims a few quid whilst lauding millionaires and billionaires who pay an effective tax rate of less than 2% but why do people have to resort to this kind of hyperbole with undertones of the 3rd Reich?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

Do you want me to come over and read the frigging article to you?

At bedtime fgs.

Aww would you?

And if I ask the question again will you conceal your look of distain and just answer?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well i have just read through this thread and ive got to say that the fault is with our government.

the problem is there is no work out there , i work as a security officer working nights and i only come out with £180 a week.

i have looked for work but its difficult to find any work now, this is down to our country being a open book, we let people come over and work from foreign countries that milk the money from our country then send it back home to there family.

i have no problem with people who graft and work hard but the government has made this country what it is.

theres not much things made in this country any more its all made abroad, then what does the government do , they give work to other countries when our country is on its knees.

also they need to give workers a incentive to work as at the moment its more attractive not to work, get free rent, council tax, free nhs care, etc.

why not cut some of this and give the workers on low income some perks.

it annoys me that companies like cheap labour too thats another reason why most companys have left the uk and moved abroad.

all i can say is where does all the money go...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Most seem fairly agreed, I think that there is a time period where help should be uncapped, i.e. if you lose a £50,000 a year job in central London, chances are you pay a massive mortgage or rental on your home, because things are stupid money there.... so for 6 months you should be covered no cap no limits, if you haven't got a job at the end of that time then apply the cap and force a move so someone else can get into London who does have a job. as someone said rent in Scotland (and in Bristol) is a lot less!

I would deal with the breaders by freezing benefits at two children any more you have to find a way to pay for them or they get taken into care and fostered out, not saying you can't have 15 kids if you want them, just that if you do then you must pay for them.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *umourCouple
over a year ago

Rushden

If the government (both) deem the National Minimum Wage to be the point that you are on that line of how much you need to live, why are there some getting over double that in benefits?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Do you want me to come over and read the frigging article to you?

At bedtime fgs.

Aww would you?

And if I ask the question again will you conceal your look of distain and just answer?

The figure quoted for rent, north London, is £340.

ie the proposed cap on housing benefits.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *hoenixcouplexxCouple
over a year ago

Leicestershire

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED

I usually steer clear of religion, politics and commercialism threads for similar reasons.

The politicians (and I mean all of them) don't have a clue really what to do to sail the ship now the rudder's fell off

Wolf

That about sums it up!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Devon seems quite a large mostly empty county, i say build 400,000 new homes a year there. "

Like every other area of the country, Devon has been expected to meet it's quota on new housing.

And I'm in Devon because we worked hard enough to leave the city we lived and worked in....

Of course I could have stayed living in a built up area moaning about those who work hard enough to escape it....couldn't I?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ath-N-DelCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow area

Bloody el...thats a lot!!

Not moving to London....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"Rent in London pushes costs up so why not ship them all to Liverpool and they can learn how to thieve to supplement lower benefits.

That is so going to get you in trouble...bad boy!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Rent in London pushes costs up so why not ship them all to Liverpool and they can learn how to thieve to supplement lower benefits.

That is so going to get you in trouble...bad boy!"

Well housing is cheaper there and top class training

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 24/01/12 16:26:31]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

OK before it goes to pot again....please keep the immigration posts out of the thread as it just causes mayhem and I got an eadache already

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Devon seems quite a large mostly empty county, i say build 400,000 new homes a year there.

Like every other area of the country, Devon has been expected to meet it's quota on new housing.

And I'm in Devon because we worked hard enough to leave the city we lived and worked in....

Of course I could have stayed living in a built up area moaning about those who work hard enough to escape it....couldn't I?

What is your _iew on Devonian and Cornish working class folk being completely priced out of the housing market by wealthier incomers, especially from London, snapping up the limited housing?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"OK before it goes to pot again....please keep the immigration posts out of the thread as it just causes mayhem and I got an eadache already

Can we get away with negative emigration?

Thought not.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *am sampsonMan
over a year ago

cwmbran

"Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers""

Maybe if a former tory government hadnt sold off all the social housing - we wouldnt not have so may landlords raking in HB

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers"

Maybe if a former tory government hadnt sold off all the social housing - we wouldnt not have so may landlords raking in HB"

Let's get the facts straight, Labour government did not repeal the laws forcing council house sales. yes, Conservatives started it but Labour continued it. They did the same with selling-off playing fields as well.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Devon seems quite a large mostly empty county, i say build 400,000 new homes a year there.

Like every other area of the country, Devon has been expected to meet it's quota on new housing.

And I'm in Devon because we worked hard enough to leave the city we lived and worked in....

Of course I could have stayed living in a built up area moaning about those who work hard enough to escape it....couldn't I?

What is your _iew on Devonian and Cornish working class folk being completely priced out of the housing market by wealthier incomers, especially from London, snapping up the limited housing?"

My _iew is it is nothing that I didn't experience myself when I lived and worked in the South East, we were constantly priced out of our first time purchase when City workers....in from all over the country, indeed from all over Europe, decided to work and settle in the South East because of better wages.

I had the _iew that no-one has any more right than anyone else to live in any given area within these isles....

Birthright or 'born and bred' sounds ok in a perfect world....except we don't live in a perfect world, we live in a world where people move around.

In any case, our first house we purchased in Devon had been empty for Two and a half years when we moved in....giving local people ample opportunity to purchase it.

The previous owner, being Devon born and bred, who had the house built for him, had no qualms about who he sold it to nor did he complain that the house he had built for £67,000 was then sold on for a profit of almost £200,000....quite the opposite, he must have been thrilled.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Myself and the hubby both work hard to provide for our family, we provide as best we can. We don't earn much, but can sit down at the end of the day and feel proud that it is us keeping a roof over our heads and not other hard working tax payers.

Its lack of work ethic thats the problem, people who sit at home all day spending our hard earned cash have none at all. Its come to the point in this country where people don't appreciate help they expect it. The government will never win this battle, its only set to get worse in my opinion.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"snip its only set to get worse in my opinion."

Must get worse, automation means less staff = more profit or lower unit sale price so ultimately there has to be mass unemployment, won't be my problem though finished the work stuff, have a couple of houses rented out and a small pension so I can chill

don't make £26,000 anymore though!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"snip its only set to get worse in my opinion.

don't make £26,000 anymore though!"

But isn't that the key to it all, people don't actually need £26,000 to be happy?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Of course there needs to be a long overdue welfare cap, but let us not take our eye off the ball here....

Of course, they all sat round Maggie's table in No.10 to conjure up a plan for giving Tarquin Farquhar down in Devon a new way of replenishing the family silver that had been lost in the Lloyds fiasco, didn't they. How naive can someone be to completely misunderstand that the backbone of Conservatism is based upon the reward for one's industry. The council housing stock was't just a bunch of houses, it included all the staff employed to keep them in a fit state to be habitable, and that army of idlers took the piss basically. They didn't work 8 hours doing a professional job, they were slackers who thought the govt gravy train would never stop rolling. Well, it did - and Maggie knew why it ought be brought to a grinding halt too - it was too fookin expensive for the benefit it provided. By putting rent out to private landlords she made them accountable for the state of the houses they provided and liable for the repair costs too. And they had the admin headache of it all to deal with also.

It was a great idea that has been watered down and ruined by successive govts that followed her by not ensuring that landlords were forced to keep their properties in a fit state for people to live in, whilst still coining it in from the Treasury. THAT'S where the real problem with private rental housing lies.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *nJ_NW_cplCouple
over a year ago

wirral

One thing that always seems to be forgotten is that every penny the government pays out comes from money paid in. They don’t just print what they need. We both have decent jobs (I know we are lucky) and pay a huge amount in tax. We have no problem with people getting what they need but some seem to live well above the average working family and that doesn’t seem right. Is this the answer? Don’t know! Something has to be done xxx

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Of course there needs to be a long overdue welfare cap, but let us not take our eye off the ball here....

Not the case I'm afraid Wishy. The destruction of the Council Housing stock was a lot to do with social engineering (though there was the veneer of industriousness). Thatcher expected that if people had a mortgage to pay, not rent, that they would not be able to go on strike.

Industriousness has nothing to do with the city and the interest of the landed and propertied classes and Nicholas Van Hoogstraten had much more of an influence than Trevor. Governments of all stripes are influenced by individuals of wealth and Thatcher none the less so. Why, otherwise, were the Tory councilors indicted for profiteering and jerrymandering. The fact remains, that without social housing 'en mass' with large scale building programs, there will be a scarcity of housing (it is not in the interest of private organisations to build the 10 million houses needed, as the price for those houses will fall on completion, reducing their margins) and both the price of housing and of rent will rise, to the benefit of the landlords and detriment of the renter.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The average wage for a couple is £26,000. "

No wishy, I think that you will find that this is the Median (most commonly ocouring) rather than the average. The average wage is £25k where the median wage is around £16k.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ah, Nicholas Van Hoogstraten.

What a delightful chappie he is. Best mate with Robert Mugabe these days.

Despite all I have said in my posts above,it does frustrate me that the media focus on the likes of Karen Matthews, the mother of Shannon Mathews, rather than the equally vile von Hoogstraten and his kind.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice"

nice post

good luck and I hope you secure a role soon.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Ah, Nicholas Van Hoogstraten.

What a delightful chappie he is. Best mate with Robert Mugabe these days.

Of course they do, most of the media is owned by the rich, the BBC has to follow the crowd or the Tories will cut it's funding......

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I won't even make that if I put in full time hours!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice"

Sounds like you are not getting any benefits at all for the children if you have to do it on only 3K I would seek advice.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice"

People on min wage with families will often be claiming supplementary benefits, council tax rebates, free prescriptions .... bla bla.

Thing is if you make this a minimum wage you will put some small employers out of business.

If you ask me the whole system needs to be approached quite differently.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Ah, Nicholas Van Hoogstraten.

What a delightful chappie he is. Best mate with Robert Mugabe these days.

Of course they do, most of the media is owned by the rich, the BBC has to follow the crowd or the Tories will cut it's funding......"

I seem to recall Labour's attack dog Alistair Campbell wanting to chop off the BBC's bollox.

For every person who says the BBC is pussyfooting to the current government there is someone else claiming it is a bed of lefties.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sorry, I keep taking the thread slightly off-topic.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"One thing that always seems to be forgotten is that every penny the government pays out comes from money paid in. They don’t just print what they need. We both have decent jobs (I know we are lucky) and pay a huge amount in tax. We have no problem with people getting what they need but some seem to live well above the average working family and that doesn’t seem right. Is this the answer? Don’t know! Something has to be done xxx"

Raise the tax threshold to the same amount? huh, fat chance.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Ah, Nicholas Van Hoogstraten.

What a delightful chappie he is. Best mate with Robert Mugabe these days.

Of course they do, most of the media is owned by the rich, the BBC has to follow the crowd or the Tories will cut it's funding......

I seem to recall Labour's attack dog Alistair Campbell wanting to chop off the BBC's bollox.

For every person who says the BBC is pussyfooting to the current government there is someone else claiming it is a bed of lefties."

Unfortunately, they have to pussy foot around everyone.

I have been listening to the Beeb for many years, through at least 4 governments now and although they are able to stick it in, they very rarely keep things goin as they are accused of being prejudiced by all sides by turns.

It can be said, though, that when you are unpopular with everyone, you are close to telling the truth....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice

Sounds like you are not getting any benefits at all for the children if you have to do it on only 3K I would seek advice.

all i get is jsa.

i have my kids from friday to sunday. i'm not entiteled to anything else nor do i want anything else apart from a job.

i dont know how to play the system but i just wish the system would help in my very very very rare time of need.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

so sorry on this for 2 things ... firstly for earlier saying i wouldnt post ... secondly for the copy & paste from another thread i posted to on minimum wage.

on this thread, again, people keep mentioning raising the minimum wage, we wish we could, our staff deserve so much more money, but, the reason we cannot pay them more is here.

once again, sorry for the copy & paste.

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice

Sounds like you are not getting any benefits at all for the children if you have to do it on only 3K I would seek advice.

all i get is jsa.

i have my kids from friday to sunday. i'm not entiteled to anything else nor do i want anything else apart from a job.

i dont know how to play the system but i just wish the system would help in my very very very rare time of need.

I assume your ex gets the family allowance then and any other benefits, maybe she could pass a ;little on to make life easier.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED"

I'm with you on this, sitting on my hands

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

"think i'll give this thread a miss i might end up getting BANNED

I'm with you on this, sitting on my hands"

are they warm as i've got some cold bits that could do with something warm on them lol

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice

Sounds like you are not getting any benefits at all for the children if you have to do it on only 3K I would seek advice.

all i get is jsa.

i have my kids from friday to sunday. i'm not entiteled to anything else nor do i want anything else apart from a job.

i dont know how to play the system but i just wish the system would help in my very very very rare time of need.

I assume your ex gets the family allowance then and any other benefits, maybe she could pass a ;little on to make life easier.

you obviosly dont know my ex lol

i'm a simple person with simple needs so no matter what happens i'll cope and do what i can for my kids.

the point is that its the others out there that have never worked that think they are owed something from the tax payer.

why not change the system to a contribution one, if you haven't put anything in you cant take anything out?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"if benefits are to be 26k then shouldn't minimun wage be the same ?

or benefits should be the same as the current minimum wage ?

up untill last year i've worked all my life since leaving school at 16 and never earned anything close to 26k a year.

i'm now on benefits at just over 3k a year with the help of my family and take care of my 2 kids at least 3 days a week.

i make do and am greatful for what i have.

i see others on benefits with trainers that would feed me for a month.

dont penalise the needy, penalise the greedy in all walks of life as some of us are not here by choice

Sounds like you are not getting any benefits at all for the children if you have to do it on only 3K I would seek advice.

all i get is jsa.

i have my kids from friday to sunday. i'm not entiteled to anything else nor do i want anything else apart from a job.

i dont know how to play the system but i just wish the system would help in my very very very rare time of need.

I assume your ex gets the family allowance then and any other benefits, maybe she could pass a ;little on to make life easier.

you obviosly dont know my ex lol

i'm a simple person with simple needs so no matter what happens i'll cope and do what i can for my kids.

the point is that its the others out there that have never worked that think they are owed something from the tax payer.

why not change the system to a contribution one, if you haven't put anything in you cant take anything out?"

You will be able to claim Housing Benefit and council tax if you live on your own, even if it's a shared house (though if you wil with ur parents you won't be able to claim as you need to have a tennancy agreement.)

Claiming what you are entitled to is not playing the system and if you have worked (and paid council tax) you are entitled to every penny you get.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"why not change the system to a contribution one, if you haven't put anything in you cant take anything out?"

erm, not sure you have thought that particular point through m8..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

what about permanently disabled people? Why penalize them?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Damn Adolph Hitler. He set euthenasia back by around 80 years........

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Damn Adolph Hitler. He set euthenasia back by around 80 years........"

What?!?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *kyblue2681Woman
over a year ago

manchester

well im gonna be impressed if the new max benefit thing actually happens cause i don't see why the people who just breed and NEVER work should have more money than some one like me. i only had one child as that is all I! can afford even though i wanted 4 because i loved being 1 of 4 children. there are benefits of working over being at home such as the pride in the fact i earnt every penny i have and im setting a good example for my son. the only down fall is the shifts i have to work means that some weeks i hardly see my son but he understands as he's only ever known me to work .

i personally went back to college when my son was 2 weeks old and back to work at 6mths and other than 12mths of being unemployed and almost topping myself cause i was soooo depressed not working I've always worked

this is how the country should be ran before the whole country is on the dole!

sorry just my opinion

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Let's look at this minimum wage bollocks for a few minutes. I've been doing some calculations on the amount of man hours I'll need to generate for my new business to keep 8 men in full time employment and make a decent profit.

Firstly, some ground rules. I believe in paying a good wage to keep good employees as the headache I don't want is continually looking for new staff to replace those who've left for better wages elsewhere. So on that basis I'll be setting an annual wage of £30k for 8 electricians. But can I afford to provide such a wage?

To cover that wage bill alone, without all my overheads on top, or my own salary, I'll need to ensure that 16,400 hours of work is generated. (8 x 40 x 52)

The going rate up here in the north east for electrical work that I can charge my clients is between £15-£20 per hour. £15ph will cover my wage bill alone, as outlined above. £20ph is at the top end I can charge and I'll struggle to get enough work to keep 8 men fully employed. So I need to go in at £17-£18ph. Let's do the maths:

8 x 40 x 52 x £18 = £299,520

..and minus the wage bill:

8 x 40 x 52 x £15 = £249,600

leaves a balance of £49,920 to cover everything; my wages, VAT, tax, bills, utilities for the business etc etc etc..

Clearly I can't afford to be as philanthropic as I'd like to be and I'd have no choice but to pay my guys a lower wage as income is determined by what clients are prepared to pay which is offset by competition going in with lower quotes.

Don't forget, I'm talking about skilled electricians here, but if you have a business providing manual workers it's not so easy to charge £18ph for them so you have to pay them even less, closer to the current minimum wage.

The answer is simple isn't it: Raise the minimum wage!

Easy to say, not so easy to put into practice.

nb* the above is purely illustrative and I'm sure I've not included costs for this or that etc but I'd have an accountant to do all that for me, so please don't put yourselves to the trouble of pointing it out.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ustyAngelWoman
over a year ago

gloucester

If you get a council house around here, then you dont move out & get a mortgage. Your better off in a council house.

People with Mortgages (like me) ar fools

we end up saving in the form of property to pay for our old age.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If you get a council house around here, then you dont move out & get a mortgage. Your better off in a council house.

People with Mortgages (like me) ar fools

we end up saving in the form of property to pay for our old age."

Can one pension one's property so that the gains made by it over 25 years are not subject to Capital Gains Tax?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why people start these forums is beyond me.If you talk politics then you only insight broad indifferent _iews that could be very offensive to hard working people who possible have fallen on hard times and lost there employment.Not every person is a benefit scrounge.In my _iew contempt and arrogance comes with too many years in the same employment.There are many people who get up each morning go to work and are very much non productive and very much become un-sackable because of years spent.Britain needs a clean out of all the people in employment right now who just turn up and spend x amount of hours doing piss all.There are plenty of people on bennifits right now who could do youre job far better..P.s lets stick to sex on this site

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"Let's look at this minimum wage bollocks for a few minutes. I've been doing some calculations on the amount of man hours I'll need to generate for my new business to keep 8 men in full time employment and make a decent profit.

To cover that wage bill alone, without all my overheads on top, or my own salary, I'll need to ensure that 16,400 hours of work is generated. (8 x 40 x 52)

8 x 40 x 52 x £18 = £299,520

..and minus the wage bill:

8 x 40 x 52 x £15 = £249,600

leaves a balance of £49,920 to cover everything; my wages, VAT, tax, bills, utilities for the business etc etc etc..

The answer is simple isn't it: Raise the minimum wage!

Easy to say, not so easy to put into practice.

All i will say Wishy is good luck. I hope your business is more usccessful than your arithmetic/costings.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

"Why people start these forums is beyond me.If you talk politics then you only insight broad indifferent _iews that could be very offensive to hard working people who possible have fallen on hard times and lost there employment.Not every person is a benefit scrounge.In my _iew contempt and arrogance comes with too many years in the same employment.There are many people who get up each morning go to work and are very much non productive and very much become un-sackable because of years spent.Britain needs a clean out of all the people in employment right now who just turn up and spend x amount of hours doing piss all.There are plenty of people on bennifits right now who could do youre job far better..P.s lets stick to sex on this site

Can I just clear one thing up.... no one is unsackable. It is just as easy today as it has ever been to manage someone out of a job if they can't or won't do it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If you get a council house around here, then you dont move out & get a mortgage. Your better off in a council house.

People with Mortgages (like me) ar fools

we end up saving in the form of property to pay for our old age.

Can one pension one's property so that the gains made by it over 25 years are not subject to Capital Gains Tax?"

You don't pay CTG on your own home, you only pay it on the gains from the 2nd home, and then only on the sale of such.

Although your home is an investment, it's not considered as such in the calculation as a 'gain' on capital employed.

In order to avoid inheritance tax on a house large enough to qualify, transfer the asset to a child 5 years before you die (difficult to do retrospectively.....)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

To cover that wage bill alone, without all my overheads on top, or my own salary, I'll need to ensure that 16,400 hours of work is generated. (8 x 40 x 52)

8 x 40 x 52 x £18 = £299,520

..and minus the wage bill:

8 x 40 x 52 x £15 = £249,600

leaves a balance of £49,920 to cover everything; my wages, VAT, tax, bills, utilities for the business etc etc etc..

The answer is simple isn't it: Raise the minimum wage!

Easy to say, not so easy to put into practice.

if the government is willing to pay benefits of up to 26k a year then it should think of subsiding wages to meet that level.

would you rather have someone working for it or someone breeding and demending it as a right ?

it's not about the money but the attitude towards it.

money earnt is more precious than money given.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 24/01/12 22:56:17]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Can I just clear one thing up.... no one is unsackable. It is just as easy today as it has ever been to manage someone out of a job if they can't or won't do it. "
Correct but have you ever tried to get rid of a member of staff who does not move with the times and technology.There are many peebs out there who could do the job far better.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have 3 children, 2 from one relationship, 1 from another.

2 from first relationship live with me, 1 from second relationship lives with his mum.

I work, my children goto nursery (yes I receive Tax Credit benefits to help cover the cost of this) so I can work.

My rent is paid out of my wage, as is every other bill I have, I'm not well off these days (used to have a very well paid job but times change) and on very rare occasions I have to go a few days a week without ANY food! (Only myself, my children are always fed well)

I shop online to get the best grocery deals, and I always buy healthy nice foods, this all on a budget!

Now I have friends who are able to afford to eat takeaways most nights (I dont envy them, I may have a take out once in a blue moon, but much prefer to cook at home) which is particularly expensive, they can afford to go out every weekend, have nice holidays abroad... etc the list goes on.

Some of these friends are able to afford to do such things because they have nice jobs, however the majority can afford to do this because they are being supported through the State!

I've worked out previously that I would be far far better off financially to sit on my arse at home and let all you tax payers fund my life, but I just couldn't bring myself to do so.

So back to the OPs Q... YES I do think benefit capping is a good thing.

This country is on its arse because it is all too often far more rewarding to be out of work than be in work!

Those who EARN the money that is in their bank/pocket should be able to enjoy the finer things in life, it should be more financially rewarding to work than live of the state, and as harsh as this Government may come across to some, they are moving in the right direction rather than trying to earn votes all the time.

Yes the economy is in a difficult rut, we aren't going to see the "golden days" with us for many years yet, but finally the powers that be are making decisions that on a whole aren't generally popular (we are all tightening our belts so to speak because living costs are astronomical right now) but are going to work better for us as a nation in the long term.

We should be thinking of long term benefits and not short term fixes (which evidentally have brought about this whole culture of sit on arse and breed from as early an age as possible!)

OK I tthink that;s my rant over before I piss off toooo many people

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irty_bhamMan
over a year ago

birmingham

don't forget it's not just about benefits.

my sister works for the nhs and to buy a pack of 4 duracell batteries costs 10 times what it would if they were bought at a local bargain shop.

government need to stop wasting the tax pound as they do then we wouldn't even be having this discussion

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If you get a council house around here, then you dont move out & get a mortgage. Your better off in a council house.

People with Mortgages (like me) ar fools

we end up saving in the form of property to pay for our old age.

Can one pension one's property so that the gains made by it over 25 years are not subject to Capital Gains Tax?

You don't pay CTG on your own home, you only pay it on the gains from the 2nd home, and then only on the sale of such.

Although your home is an investment, it's not considered as such in the calculation as a 'gain' on capital employed.

In order to avoid inheritance tax on a house large enough to qualify, transfer the asset to a child 5 years before you die (difficult to do retrospectively.....)"

Yes, of course, what a schoolboy error on my part. My line of thinking was pensioning one's property assets to avoid CGT if it's possible, so I meant 2nd, 3rd or 4th properties etc.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The subject of unemployment and benefits always gets a touchy response, my post last week saw a few being unfriendly.

To sum the topic up, yesterday on Radio 1s Newsbeat there was two sisters, one had two children and had to live off her partners wage alone which was £15,500 and the other had three kids and was THOUSANDS better off on benefits. She then said "if things get short il just have another baby to get more money cause il get by much easier than them that was working" (actual quote)

Benefit caps would be unfair on the loads who ARE trying for work, many of these folks have become unemployed due to employers going bust which is NOT their fault but the country MUST fight these spongers who live for free without any intention of changing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If you get a council house around here, then you dont move out & get a mortgage. Your better off in a council house.

People with Mortgages (like me) ar fools

we end up saving in the form of property to pay for our old age.

Can one pension one's property so that the gains made by it over 25 years are not subject to Capital Gains Tax?

You don't pay CTG on your own home, you only pay it on the gains from the 2nd home, and then only on the sale of such.

Although your home is an investment, it's not considered as such in the calculation as a 'gain' on capital employed.

In order to avoid inheritance tax on a house large enough to qualify, transfer the asset to a child 5 years before you die (difficult to do retrospectively.....)

Yes, of course, what a schoolboy error on my part. My line of thinking was pensioning one's property assets to avoid CGT if it's possible, so I meant 2nd, 3rd or 4th properties etc.

I am not sure to be honest.....I did hear that the govt were relaxing the rules on releasing your pension fund to buy a 2nd property (as the way it's going it would be a much beter return on capital employed).

As a rule you only pay the tax on the return, so when the house is sold you pay it. If you rent the place out you are only subject to income tax (and as I have said in post isn the past, if your accountant can't save you 10 times what you pay him in tax wheezes, either he's shite or you pay him too much.....)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers""
Housing benefit is already capped..

And in most areas will not cover a private rent.. I dont know the exact amounts but I know that should you need a 5 bed ( which I would) you wouldnt get benefit for more than a 4 bed and thats capped at about £600pm I think... you try getting a decent 4bed place for £600pm..

I think that the rate must be for very big families as when I was on benefit I didnt even take that home and I got the highest rate of everything due to having two special needs children and one on highest rate DLA... and even counting her disability I didnt get that.

Cali

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"Yes, they should. Housing benefit should be capped. As the old saying goes "beggars can't be choosers"Housing benefit is already capped..

Cali "

Why would you NEED a 5 bedroomed house?

Do bunk beds no longer exist?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *all-Eddies QosCouple
over a year ago

wirral

My housing benefit doesn't cover the rent. Its £100 i have to find from my handouts. Probably gonna get someone saying "why dont i move to a cheaper home?" private landlords want a months rent up front, deposit plus admin fees.....thats £1000 id have to pull out my arse. Love being on the dole. Life's a doddle.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

I'm thinking of having a baby.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Im having one and dont know how I got pregnant !!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *landPeggyCouple
over a year ago

Holland !

"Im having one and dont know how I got pregnant !!"

Front bottom

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"Im having one and dont know how I got pregnant !!

Front bottom"

Que?;-)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *landPeggyCouple
over a year ago

Holland !

parte frontal inferior

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

inferior .... ?

really ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"parte frontal inferior"

Labia minora?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"inferior .... ?

really ?"

Think I no longer wish to be pregnant!;-)

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why would you NEED a 5 bedroomed house?

Do bunk beds no longer exist?"

because I have children over a certain age that require OWN rooms..

Cali

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why would you NEED a 5 bedroomed house?

Do bunk beds no longer exist?

because I have children over a certain age that require OWN rooms..

Cali "

If they're old enough to require their own room, they're old enough to move out and fund one.

Do people on benefit with children of working age still living at home charge them board money? And, do they declare it to the benefit office?

I bet they don't.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Why would you NEED a 5 bedroomed house?

Do bunk beds no longer exist?

because I have children over a certain age that require OWN rooms..

Cali

If they're old enough to require their own room, they're old enough to move out and fund one.

Do people on benefit with children of working age still living at home charge them board money? And, do they declare it to the benefit office?

I bet they don't."

I think I understand what you are saying here, but I would argue that sometimes children are just NOT ready to leave home at 18?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If they're old enough to require their own room, they're old enough to move out and fund one.

Do people on benefit with children of working age still living at home charge them board money? And, do they declare it to the benefit office?

I bet they don't."

Dont think you kick kids out at 12.. and that is why my youngest two cant share.. my oldest at home is 15 and severely disabled... and my 13 year old cant share with any of the others.. So that means that if I was applying for a council place I would not be allowed LESS than a 5 bed.. I make do with a 3 bed that I have converted into a 4 bed.. and I have to break the rules and have two share.

But yes.. I need a 5 bed.. but not likely to get one..so I make do.

If they were all home then it would be a 7 bed... lol

Cali

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

not read the whole thread but i have to say i am in favour of capping benefits, it riles me so much when i see people on benefits that have more than me when i have worked since i was 15

one girl on news beat on radio 1 had 4 kids and didnt work and said she would happily have another one to up her income - this si what we are fighting against here - career benefit claimants

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

I think Wishy is out of touch with the real world at times....my youngest, at the age of 22 and with a bloody good job, has only just managed to afford to leave home and get his own place.

Chucking kids out at an early age will only see them being a burden on the benefits system themselves...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *all-Eddies QosCouple
over a year ago

wirral

Nah chuck em out at 17 to live in a hostel.....fuck up their educations........no education....no job.....on jsa/hb/ctb or stay at home go college or uni, get good grades....good job....move out and claim you had supportive parents who in turn have broke a vicious circle. Just saying. Rather have a hopeful and give kids a chance

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think Wishy is out of touch with the real world at times....my youngest, at the age of 22 and with a bloody good job, has only just managed to afford to leave home and get his own place.

Chucking kids out at an early age will only see them being a burden on the benefits system themselves... "

Who mentioned chucking them out? Not I.

I'm more of a mind that families should help families out, not the fookin state picking up the tab all the time.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I'm thinking of having a baby."

Behave!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately