Why are people on benefits allowed to live in London?!

olly300

careinthecommunity wrote: »

definetly not, but the UK is capitalist, so why should we have to subsidise low paid workers who wish/need to work in the capital?

You can either subsidise them in benefits or subsidise them by higher prices your choice.

Oh and we aren't properly capitalist as the government interferes in lots of things varying from education, health, building regulations and consumer protection.

olly300

ILW wrote: »

If there was not the high level of benefits subsidising low wages, employers would have to increase pay in high cost areas just to get people to do the work.

They already do it's called London weighting.

ILW

olly300 wrote: »

They already do it's called London weighting.

Isn't London Weighting a public sector thing?

careinthecommunity

olly300 wrote: »

You can either subsidise them in benefits or subsidise them by higher prices your choice.

then it should be higher wages [in the context of the op] which would mean that the average business in the capital could not compete as rival businesses from outside the capital could compete more ?

olly300 wrote: »

Oh and we aren't properly capitalist as the government interferes in lots of things varying from education, health, building regulations and consumer protection.

i agree we are sudo capitalist, but as I pointed out why should socialism fund capitialism

olly300

ILW wrote: »

Isn't London Weighting a public sector thing?

Officially yes.

But everyone who lives in London and the home counties can see the wage differences if they take a job in London or a job outside London in the private sector.

Hence lots of private sector employees including PAs, Secretaries and other admin staff will commute into London even if it costs them £3K a year because they will earn more much more than the transport costs in the wage difference.

One reason why busing people into London won't work. Most of the Home Counties have house prices similar to London prices if the road and rail connections to London are good. Your journey has to be 2 hours by rail into London or have more than 2 changes before the prices can be guaranteed to be lower than London.

cashbackproblems

kabayiri wrote: »

Increasingly London has to be a seen as a centre for high value ; high skill professions. It needs to attract high wealth individuals who in turn will attract and pull in wealth.

It's hard to see people on long term benefits fitting in to such an environment going forward. All these low paid cleaners and road sweepers should be bussed in.

Completely agree.

London has to be for people who work, have good jobs and can afford to be there, not benefit scroungers living in West Kensington council houses, theres plenty of areas up North if you want to live cheaply. Same with all those tramps in central london, why dont they just move up north where everythings cheaper??

Also good to see the govt cracking down on incapacity benefits (about the only good thing they will do) most of these ppl are just incapable of getting out of bed due to laziness.

Kenny4315

ILW wrote: »

True, but the vast majority of graduates over the last decade or so do not get an Oxbridge first.

Yes I'll agree with the absolute fact that there are too many graduates with a BA(Hons) degree in Mickey Mouse Studies, from the university of going nowhere fast.

I'd have more good old fashioned apprenticeships rather than some of these courses that on the whole seem fairly pointless and all theory, when the actual subject point is to be hands-on.

I blame alot of the university degree situation of the general lowering of A levels, where every man and his dog can get A levels, so everyone suddenly expects to go to university.

jojo1964

Perhaps its time stigmatise those claiming long term benefits, and get back to when claiming benefits was socially unacceptable, and allow benefits to be a safety net for those who NEED it, not those who CHOOSE it.

Silverbull

ILW wrote: »

There are cheaper parts of London quite often within a few miles of the really expensive areas.

But are they cheap enough for a family to find somewhere to live for less than 250wk rent and council tax?

ninky_2

not all parts of london are that expensive or desirable.

i think it is right to put a cap on what people can get on benefits whilst also raising the minimum wage. saying you "can't live in london" seems far too authoritarian. however, saying you can only get housing benefit of "x" would naturally put some areas out of reach (as they are for the majority).

however i do worry that by having "poor" and "rich" areas we could create a very divisive society. there already seems to be an entrenchment of "them" and "us" mentality (middle class v working class, public v private sector, immigrants v natives). not pleasant.

the real answer is to create more social housing...and not sell it off. ever.

most of this stems from selling off the council housing, leading to greater numbers stuck renting in the private sector either on benefits or from wages, ridiculous private rents, insecurity, jealousy and envy. thanks mrs t.