is social housing subsidised?

GracieP

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Absolutely. Social tenants should be forced to crawl on their bellies when they leave the house, tugging forlocks as they go. Those in the private sector should only be addressed as "Sir" or "Ma'am" at all times and direct eye contact should be avoided. A few lashes with the riding crop should put them in their place.

Yes that's what I said.

No matter how you dress it up, one way or another taxpayers pay for social housing. You seem to have a real problem with admitting that, especially of your quoted comments are anything to go by. I'm not sure why. Do/did you live in social housing and find it hard to accept that others subsidise/have subsidised you? Does it impact on your pride to admit it so you have to justify it in complex ways which ignore basic facts? I don't get it.

I lived in social housing for just over 4 years and have no problem with admitting we were in subsidised housing. All the fancy maths in the world doesn't change the fact that we were very lucky to live in a country which helps the lower paid get a leg up if they need it. We got to move from a small, privately rented, one bed flat into a nice 3 bed house with gardens at a very cheap rent but we could only do that because it was being subsidised by the state. I don't see what's wrong with admitting that.

tomstickland

squinty wrote: »

You do realise that a Housing Association would buy these properties. They are not gifted.

Where do Housing Associations raise the funds from?

tomstickland

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Of course, if we are talking taxpayer subsidy, a far larger amount goes towards the private sector in the shape of rents, which encourage and support the buy to let market, which inflates house prices enabling owner/occs to realise that extra capitol in their property and convert it into a tacky new kitchen. Perhaps those people should be equally grateful.

BTL and house price growth makes life difficult for first time buyers. It's a bad thing.

And, of course, lets not forget that anyone paying a mortgage prior to April 2000 was recieving taxpayer subsidy in the form of MIRAS. Perhaps anyone who benefited from this taxpayer subsidy should have to identify themselves via a badge of some kind, so that they can have every opportunity to demonstrate just how grateful they are.

That's 10 years ago now. Recent FTB's have no benefited from it.

neverdespairgirl

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

The developers are accepting a cost on their developement.

They are indeed. The subsidy.

squinty

tomstickland wrote: »

Where do Housing Associations raise the funds from?

From the very first post .........

New Build needs more explanation. If a HA are building new properties for rent, they need to know that the rents will be affordable and fit within the government calculations - i.e. to produce an affordable rent for a certain property type in an area there is a maximum value they can pay for the property - this is usually less than the market value or build cost of the property.

The gap between what is affordable to the association and the cost of the property can be filled in a number of ways:

• The local authority may give land to the association at little or no cost.
• The association may cross subsidise schemes from within their own costs and/or from commercial activities
• There may be grant available from the Homes and Communities Agency (previously the Housing Corporation).

It is very unlikely that the HCA will provide all the gap funding, unless the local council and housing association both also make contribution. Not all developments receive HCA funding.

neverdespairgirl

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

And, of course, lets not forget that anyone paying a mortgage prior to April 2000 was recieving taxpayer subsidy in the form of MIRAS. om

As I understand it, it was abolished in 1990, and only older mortgages carried on? I could be wrong, though.

Wee_Willy_Harris

tomstickland wrote: »

Where do Housing Associations raise the funds from?

You do know that they charge rent?

Wee_Willy_Harris

tomstickland wrote: »

That's 10 years ago now. Recent FTB's have no benefited from it.

With many parents releasing equity, and even inheritances, to help FTBs it'll be many decades before the benefits of MIRAS wear off.

Wee_Willy_Harris

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

They are indeed. The subsidy.

Cost and subsidy are two very different things.

Wee_Willy_Harris

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

As I understand it, it was abolished in 1990, and only older mortgages carried on? I could be wrong, though.

It was abolished in 2000, and many current homeowners enjoyed the subsidy, the bebefits of which are, in many cases, being handed down to their children to help with FTB deposits.