We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
"London housing benefit claimant numbers soaring..." - The Guardian
Comments
-
That's exactly the reason. London is where the biggest percentage of immigrants head. But it's to be expected, if you offer a far better welfare state to people who live in a country that doesn't have much of a welfare estate, that is what is going to happen.
What it means for the future is though, the dismantling of the welfare state as we know it and I believe it is deliberate. Anybody that has not been to London for 10 - 15 years would be in for shock if they saw it now.
Came down for the cup final.
Good grief. It was a shock from 20yrs ago
State of things to come for the rest of us.
What a prospect!The most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mystical. It is the power of all true art and science.
He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead.
]
Albert Einstein0 -
Probably he is, it's a tool of the Marxists. To stop any discussion about immigration it is deemed racism, and the racism card will be played whenever anyone mentions it. It makes question you yourself if you're a racist and makes you afraid to even discuss it.
Now, being against immigration is nothing to do with racism. The government's on figures show that between now and 2020, the population is going to grow by 5 million, most of which will be in England which is already over populated.
That's 5 cities the size of Birmingham, if anybody thinks that is a good thing, then could they explain it to me. Whilst you're doing it, also tell me how we're going to pay for all the extra infrastructure needed as the country is broke. Tell me where all the extra housing is going to come from, where will all this infrastructure be built, Green Belt? Farmland? The list is endless, it is going to cause massive problems, we've got 2.5 million (plus the extra hidden 1 million) unemployed, what are we going to do with another 5 million?
And after that? The government's figures estimate another 5 - 6 million in the following 10 - 15 years. So between now and the next 25 years, that's another 10 Birminghams.
Thankfully it is london that will bear the brunt of it.
It is a S''' hole that anyone with any sense would get out of and leave them to it.The most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mystical. It is the power of all true art and science.
He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead.
]
Albert Einstein0 -
A new ruling? No, it was a change in the law. Rulings don't allow a change in the law.
Why the emphasis on NuLabour, erm..., because they were the government at the time and they were the ones that changed the law?
Is that okay? Does that seem relevant, or would you like to blame the Tories for something that NuLabour did?
I'm not really a supporter of the Tories, but I do like the way that you try to shift the blame away from NuLabour.
From your link it says'new guidlines on income support' and 'a decision my ministers'
How is that a new law? it is interpretation, how can what is happening now be the responsibliity of NU Labour when the Tories can just change it if they have the inclination. Apologies for trying to blame the current situation on the Tories
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
Wouldn't that, even if true, be £10 million pound too much? Or are you saying it's just small change?
I suppose I have to say yes compared to locking then all up for 7 years then looking after their kids. BTW the £10 million is a Wail number, you know the maximum if every one of them claimed the maximum, when in fact the truth is
So the bill is a small % of £10 million but hey don't let the facts get in the wayA DWP spokesman said 'There are fewer than 1000 polygamous marriages in the UK and only a SMALL percentage are claiming benefit'
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
From your link it says
How is that a new law? it is interpretation, how can what is happening now be the responsibliity of NU Labour when the Tories can just change it if they have the inclination. Apologies for trying to blame the current situation on the Tories
It's called legislation and is a change to the law, so for all intents and purposes, it's anew law. It's not an interpretation because polygamy was illegal, you can interpret the law.
It's not 'happening now', it was done about 4 years ago, by NuLab when NuLab were in power. Why are you trying to shift the blame on to the Tories (who are not much better)?0 -
It's called legislation and is a change to the law, so for all intents and purposes, it's anew law. It's not an interpretation because polygamy was illegal, you can interpret the law.
It's not 'happening now', it was done about 4 years ago, by NuLab when NuLab were in power. Why are you trying to shift the blame on to the Tories (who are not much better)?
OK could you point me at that change in legislation that legalised Polygamy?'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
it is about attempting to change the age profile of the country .
Absolutely correct.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Oooo, were being censored now.
Please, be nice to Hamish.0 -
It's called legislation and is a change to the law, so for all intents and purposes, it's anew law. It's not an interpretation because polygamy was illegal, you can interpret the law.
It's not 'happening now', it was done about 4 years ago, by NuLab when NuLab were in power. Why are you trying to shift the blame on to the Tories (who are not much better)?
No fan of Nu Labour, actually I am not a big fan of any of them but for the sake of clarity it was the Matrimonial Causes act 1973 section 11d to be precise. Basically it means that if all parties are domiciled outside the UK when said marriages take place then they can be considered to be lawful when those parties come to the UK.
There is actually quite a bit in various legislations about it but that is the main one.
The bit about Nu Labour you refer to was a clarification of the Immigration Directorate Instructions to reflect this. I seem to remember the newspapers were up in arms at the clarification without bothering to get to the facts as all papers do. They wouldn't sell newspapers by sticking to facts unfortunately
You cannot be domiciled in the UK and get lawfully married in a polygamous marriage, although you can have a religious marriage which has no basis in law."The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
Bertrand Russell. British author, mathematician, & philosopher (1872 - 1970)0 -
Ilya_Ilyich wrote: »63% of the number claiming it in the previous june-may period
Curiously though the number of people claiming benefits like IS/ESA/IB/JSA in Redbridge has only reduced from approx 20,000 to 19,500 in that year so the massive rise in LHA applicants is a surprise.
Then again most jobs there are paying NMW but the cheapest rent on a small 2 bed flat you'll find here would cost you around £800-850.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards