Is this right?

Jimmy_31

ukcarper wrote: »

they might be but they could be workshy scum getting thier rent paid by you

Thats ok then because im already used to that. id like them to get a job and not be workshy scum but they usually dont because then they can no longer have all their freebies and have to enter the real world.

I wonder when the government will start punishing them instead of rewarding them.

Graham_Devon

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Hard working people saving for a deposit are already given help with the various tax breaks available to savers. Clearly, having sufficient disposable income to be able to save the 20-30% of the value of a property they need for a deposit would indicate that they really don't need to sponge off the taxpayer. And, of course, any benefit to them would soon be countered by the tax increases needed to fund this act of madness.

Ahh good. You therefore agree many of them don't need council housing then, especially if they have been able to fund other properties. What's more, you seem to have gone one further, and called it "sponging".

Glad to see we are finally in agreement. Not so sure about the sponging bit myself, probably wouldn't go that far, but progress is progress

(would love to know what these tax breaks available exclusively to savers is, btw?)

ukcarper

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Thats ok then because im already used to that. id like them to get a job and not be workshy scum but they usually dont because then they can no longer have all their freebies and have to enter the real world.

I wonder when the government will start punishing them instead of rewarding them.

I wouldn’t hold your breath.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Thats why we build jails, we will just have to build more of them and give out real sentences to discourage crime. eventually the majority will see that its far easier to just get a job and those that dont will stay in jail.

And who pays for those jails? Oh, and jail is FAR more costly than social housing. You seem determined to increase the burden on the taxpayer... why is that?

Wee_Willy_Harris

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You do seem to have the very best pair of blinkers. Where did you buy them if you don't mind me asking, only it seems quality stuff.

You seem to be able to look past and simply ignore the reason WHY they were overcrowded.

You also seem to be able to ignore and look past what they did to help themselves to overcome their situation.

You only seem to be able to tunnel into the fact that they were overcrowded, and everything else seems to just pass you by.

Hopefully you will let me know the manufacturer of your blinkers, as hopefully they make other stuff, and I would be interested in procureing some of ths quality merchandise. It's difficult these days to find such quality goods.

They are overcrowded because the size of their property isn't sufficient to meet the demands of the household. It's really simple maths and the legislation surrounding it is over 30 years old! Do catch up.

chewmylegoff

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Twisty Twisty.

I believe this is what you normally refer to as a "dodge". What is a hard working person. How is it defined?

Wee_Willy_Harris

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Thats ok then because im already used to that. id like them to get a job and not be workshy scum but they usually dont because then they can no longer have all their freebies and have to enter the real world.

I wonder when the government will start punishing them instead of rewarding them.

If it's that good, why don't you join them?

Wee_Willy_Harris

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Ahh good. You therefore agree many of them don't need council housing then, especially if they have been able to fund other properties. What's more, you seem to have gone one further, and called it "sponging".

Glad to see we are finally in agreement. Not so sure about the sponging bit myself, probably wouldn't go that far, but progress is progress

(would love to know what these tax breaks available exclusively to savers is, btw?)

Have ISAs (for example) passed you by?

Graham_Devon

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

They are overcrowded because the size of their property isn't sufficient to meet the demands of the household. It's really simple maths and the legislation surrounding it is over 30 years old! Do catch up.

Well yes. Dictionary definition and all that. Brilliant.

Can we delve into this a little further, or is anything other than dictionary definition to be ignored.

I'll ask again. WHY are they overcrowded?

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Have ISAs (for example) passed you by?

Oh right ISA's. The tax "break" available to everyone in the country who is over 16.

I suppose you'd call the personal allowance a tax break for every worker?

I suppose you'd call the lower rate of VAT on some womens sanitary products as "tax breaks for women"?

Jimmy_31

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

And who pays for those jails? Oh, and jail is FAR more costly than social housing. You seem determined to increase the burden on the taxpayer... why is that?

You seem to think we should just carry on housing sponging scumbags, why is that.

There may be more costs involved doing what i suggested but over time it will eventually save money. constantly giving parasites free money and housing does not save any money.