We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Gay asylum seekers from Iran and Cameroon win appeal
Comments
-
I do agree with you about the need not to incentivise. But very hard to put into practice, though.0
-
Eh? I hardly think I'm with the White Horse on starving them to death!
I don't recommend people on benefits being unable to afford essentials - certainly not. I'm not in favour of them 'earning' more than people in work, though, no.
So you're saying that a family on benefits should receive less income than a single person who works, regardless of their needs? I assume not, so could you please quantify your point?"I can hear you whisperin', children, so I know you're down there. I can feel myself gettin' awful mad. I'm out of patience, children. I'm coming to find you now." - Harry Powell, Night of the Hunter, 1955.0 -
Harry_Powell wrote: »So you're saying that a family on benefits should receive less income than a single person who works, regardless of their needs? I assume not, so could you please quantify your point?
They should receive less income after essentials, such as basic housing, clothing and food.0 -
They should receive less income after essentials, such as basic housing, clothing and food.
Hi carolt.
How can you know which part of their income is spent on essentials and which part (if any) is spent on luxuries?"I can hear you whisperin', children, so I know you're down there. I can feel myself gettin' awful mad. I'm out of patience, children. I'm coming to find you now." - Harry Powell, Night of the Hunter, 1955.0 -
It is pretty simple to price up the cost of a weeks food for a certain size of family, rent is a known figure and a fair clothing allowance can be made.Harry_Powell wrote: »Hi carolt.
How can you know which part of their income is spent on essentials and which part (if any) is spent on luxuries?
What is the difficult bit?0 -
It is pretty simple to price up the cost of a weeks food for a certain size of family, rent is a known figure and a fair clothing allowance can be made.
What is the difficult bit?
The difficult bit is the statement "A person on benefits should not 'earn' more than a person who works". As you've just displayed, it's not possible to do this because it's based on necessity, not just a capped figure.
A family obviously has a greater necessity for food and clothing and bedrooms than a single person, so would require more income. If we then quantify the statement by saying a single person on benefits should not 'earn' more than a single person who works, a family of 4 should not 'earn' more than a working family of 4, then it's still not possible because perhaps the family of 4 on benefits is on benefits because the parents can't work due to some disability or injury that requires additional income to pay for associated costs.
TBH, I think you'd find it very difficult to find a family or individual on benefits who 'earned' more than a comparable working family or individual anyway, so the whole argument is moot."I can hear you whisperin', children, so I know you're down there. I can feel myself gettin' awful mad. I'm out of patience, children. I'm coming to find you now." - Harry Powell, Night of the Hunter, 1955.0 -
I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with house prices, the economy, etc....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
-
neverdespairgirl wrote: »I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with house prices, the economy, etc.
Asylum seekers need to be housed, they also need money to live on. Who pays for them to do so?0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with house prices, the economy, etc.
are you stupid????? its because the gay cameroonians will be here offering 500k for bog standard houses, to indulge in some fisting which is not allowed in the cameroon.
if you want to know the full feeling towards gays in Uganda, go on you tube and look up "eat da poo poo". there are lots of remixes of it now, so you may have to look hard to find the original.0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with house prices, the economy, etc.
Oh we stopped debating houses and the economy ages ago.
It's frothers, football and baking now. 0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards