George Osborne considering freeze on benefits to save £4.4bn

MissMoneypenny

Niche wrote: »

Sounds like a great idea.

I know someone who was renting privately and paying £725 per month, the landlord wanted her out so he could get £895 from the council.

The whole benefits system has to change, and about time too

People on other forums are also saying that their childcare charges too have soared since the government starting paying these costs (tax credits).

Wages are held low too as they know welfare tops up the wages.

It is not just the people who claim these benefits that rely on this money to live. Childminders, landlords and business have learned to live on the proceeeds of welfare payments in the last few years. It's going to be interesting times ahead.

The_White_Horse

not only is this correct, they should actually be cut.

MrsE_2

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't call them all lucky living in some of those hellholes :eek:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov/30/housing.uknews

A five-year-old boy in a ripped coat and dirty trousers hammered on the front door of his council estate flat at 11pm last Wednesday. 'Come on, you smackheads,' he shouted to his parents inside. 'I know what you're doing.'
By the boy's feet sat a plastic bag with bread and milk. The only shop open at that time is on the opposite side of a busy motorway, a 15-minute walk away. According to neighbours, it is a journey the child regularly makes on his own.

Jesus Christ:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

I think the selling off & closing down of industries started this decline & drugs have made it run out of control like a run away train.

michaels

Of course there is a range but the only council place I have lived in the council rnet was 300 and the private rent of the rtb'd property next door was 1100; I also have first hand knowledge of other 3 bed places where a lodger in 1 room was more than covering the entire council rent.

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't call them all lucky living in some of those hellholes :eek:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov/30/housing.uknews

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

Of course there is a range but the only council place I have lived in the council rnet was 300 and the private rent of the rtb'd property next door was 1100; I also have first hand knowledge of other 3 bed places where a lodger in 1 room was more than covering the entire council rent.

A few are in desirable places, that is why RTB was such a disgrace, I suggest that most of the ones that are left after the RTB joke are not very desirable (note I say most not all).

ILW

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't call them all lucky living in some of those hellholes :eek:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov/30/housing.uknews

I said similar properties in similar areas, obviously a place in a sink estate would pay a lower rent than a house in a nice area. Just like private rentals and purchases. Many council properties are still in nice residential streets and the rents are less than half the house next door.

MrsE_2

ILW wrote: »

I said similar properties in similar areas, obviously a place in a sink estate would pay a lower rent than a house in a nice area. Just like private rentals and purchases. Many council properties are still in nice residential streets and the rants are less than half the house next door.

I think the problem is not that council rents are too low, but private rents are too high.

Rent (& fear of managing to earn basic living costs) traps many people on benefits.

We don't need to raise council rents, we need to bring the HB or LHA down to council levels to stop landlords milking tax payers money.

icefall

StevieJ wrote: »

I wouldn't call them all lucky living in some of those hellholes :eek:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/nov/30/housing.uknews

Just read this

· A lone 18-year-old woman with a child is more than five times more likely than the average victim to suffer from crime.

I was very surprised to read that.

michaels

Film 4 showed a movie called 'Ideocracy' last night - you would have loved the basic premise

The_White_Horse wrote: »

no, this is what happens when you let smack head scum raise kids. they should, as i said in another post, have the child taken into care and they should be put in jail for child cruelty. this is a crime.

Generali

icefall wrote: »

Just read this

· A lone 18-year-old woman with a child is more than five times more likely than the average victim to suffer from crime.

I was very surprised to read that.

I wonder how many more times than the average she is to receive her entire income from the state too.

Lone 18 year-old women shouldn't be having children they expect everyone else to pay for. I have no problem with 18 y/os having kids whether lone or otherwise, I just don't want to pay for it.

Surely the cure for the housing benefit thing is just to make a payment for everything and let the recipient decide whether to spend the money on Special Brew or a flat.