Council house rant....

Wee_Willy_Harris

ILW wrote: »

That is exactly my point.
Your mum is suffering due to a lot of people who do not "deserve" the amount of benefits they receive (mainly due to a system that is skewed towards having lots of children). I believe that people with true disabilities should be much better suported, and if that is at the expense of those that CHOSE to put themselves in a position of dependency, so be it.

abbadon3 wrote: »

Spot on ILW.

Benefits should only be there for the people who really need them. And if we cut out all those who either choose to be on benefits or are to lazy to do anything about it, the funds would be available to properly support those that need it.

LOL!!!!!

If anyone seriously thinks for one moment that cutting benefit to one group would lead to a better distribution to another, they must be living in cloud cuckoo land!

poppysarah

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

To keep this on a housing perspective, those who come to the UK on a workers visa have no recourse to public funds and are, therefore, not elligable for social housing.

But eu workers can get it.

abbadon3

Cutting benefits from groups of people will free up more money to be spent on actualy improving the country rather than carrying those that don't deserve to be carried.

tamarto

abbadon3 wrote: »

Cutting benefits from groups of people will free up more money to be spent on actualy improving the country rather than carrying those that don't deserve to be carried.

hahahahahahahaha

abbadon3

True story.

Wee_Willy_Harris

abbadon3 wrote: »

No i've been watching real people.

If you genuinely think there are not thousands of people playing the system, then you sir, are a fool.

Wherever there is a system, there will be those who seek to take advantage of it.

Barclays paying 1% corporation tax.
Philip Green gifting £millions to his Monaco resident wife.
Lord Ashcroft and his non-dom tax breaks.
All those inflated insurance claims.
A few extra miles on your expenses.
The wifes tax free savings.
The white lies about income for the mortgage application.
I could go on, but you get the picture.

abbadon3

So you excuse masses of people taking the country for a ride because you can name previous examples of people who have done things that are dodgey?

Two wrongs don't make a right and all that jazz

Really though thats a poor, poor excuse.

There is a system so people will abuse it? So we should allow that to happen should we?

Benefits fraudsters are scum. Pure and simple. I'd rather see them homeless.

Wee_Willy_Harris

poppysarah wrote: »

But eu workers can get it.

We have certain, recipricol arrangements with most eu countries, yes. But the criteria for qualifying for social housing remains the same for all. And that includes provision for a local connection, recourse to public funds, penalties for worstening own circs and the rules surrounding intentionality.

ILW

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

There is no subsidy. Social Housing providers will easily run at a "surplus" on the affordable rents they charge. Just because something is cheaper, don't assume it is subsidised.

If they had to pay market value for the land and the full costs of building the properties (or buy the properties at market values) then rents would be similar to the private sector in many areas. If they are not, it is a subsidy.

abbadon3

WWH - Please feel free to reply to my comment above and explain what you're point was in listing other times when people have played the system?