Changes to Housing benefit how much will rents fall?

ninky_2

chewmylegoff wrote: »

buying property for cash would appear to me to fall into the "spending" category.

well you could say the same about any public spending. it all goes into the economy in some form.

however housing benefit would seem to encourage some landlords to raise rents whilst also paying for some members of society to be economically inactive (on an income earning basis).

JonnyBravo

angrypirate wrote: »

No. It pays off their mortgage which is higher than a buyers mortgage would be as they out bid them, paying over the odds for the property so pricing the FTBers out of the market.

I heard all the potential FTBers were on strike anyway. I thought they were "refusing to buy till sellers price realistically"
:rotfl:

chewmylegoff

ninky wrote: »

well you could say the same about any public spending. it all goes into the economy in some form.

however housing benefit would seem to encourage some landlords to raise rents whilst also paying for some members of society to be economically inactive (on an income earning basis).

you're moaning about LL's hording money, but then saying in response to the point that the money is not taken out of the economy by saying that it is if the LL is a cash buyer - which is of course nonsense as the LL is injecting money into the economy that was sitting in a savings account when he buys the property.

anyway, onto your above point, i agree that either (i) more social good could be done with the same money or (ii) they could tax me less and i could spend the money instead, but i don't think either of those things would result in more money being 'in the economy'.

Graham_Devon

Theres a good in depth look at the statistics of who will be effected on the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12906528

The change to the 30th percentile will effect 775,000 claimants. However, the change from RPI to CPI will effect 1.4m claimints (or 25%).

25% of the nation suddenly having to pay more towards rent is a pretty large change.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Theres a good in depth look at the statistics of who will be effected on the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12906528

The change to the 30th percentile will effect 775,000 claimants. However, the change from RPI to CPI will effect 1.4m claimints (or 25%).

25% of the nation suddenly having to pay more towards rent is a pretty large change.

the average claimant loss per week for the 30th percentile is £9.

the change from RPI to CPI is £5.50 per week.

interesting.

ninky_2

chewmylegoff wrote: »

anyway, onto your above point, i agree that either (i) more social good could be done with the same money or (ii) they could tax me less and i could spend the money instead, but i don't think either of those things would result in more money being 'in the economy'.

however if you encourage even some of the people on housing benefit back into employment then that is putting a currently unused asset (labour) into wealth generation.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Theres a good in depth look at the statistics of who will be effected on the BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12906528

The change to the 30th percentile will effect 775,000 claimants. However, the change from RPI to CPI will effect 1.4m claimints (or 25%).

25% of the nation suddenly having to pay more towards rent is a pretty large change.

Just one thing I noticed it was introduced in the early 80s wasn't that Maggie.

Jazzshed

So they were too afraid of this mass exidus out of London that they kicked the can down the road.

Will they start slowly moving these 'poor' ones out now before the deadline?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

The biggest change on a national basis is moving the eligible rent from the 50th percentile to the 30th percentile.

This impacts 750,000 claimants, but only by an average of £9 per week.

The new maximum housing benefit limit is only really a problem for a few parts of inner London.

wotway

There is a big move by landlords to get out of any DSS letting in any case.Most landlords don't want these people as they are not seen as good tenants.If you disagree fine put your own money up for a deposit! Since it became law that tenant gets paid the money instead of direct to land lords. All very well to snipe at private landlords , but as they have to put 25% deposit in and mostly are making up the biggest part of rentals in averge areas then where is the alternative if local authorities are not playing their part in housing?. So it's easy to say' greedy landlords' they are caned by legislation and lets face it why would they invest without a vision of some profit for all the agro?. If they just bought gold or invested in financial services where are people going to live?. Easy to comment when it's not your hard earned cash gone in. It's an easy equation; private landlords will not exist as charities that's the job of government. It's only private investors using their cash to buy that has stopped the market following Fukashima