Listening to housing debate on Radio 2

treliac

It's the age of entitlement. All the rights without the responsibilities. How did it develop? How were the consequences of social policy not understood? How many of today's problems could have been anticipated with a little understanding of human nature..... but weren't?

Yorkie1

treliac wrote: »

It's the age of entitlement. All the rights without the responsibilities. How did it develop? How were the consequences of social policy not understood? How many of today's problems could have been anticipated with a little understanding of human nature..... but weren't?

A simplistic answer that doubtless only touches part of the true answer, but I grew up with Maggie's approach in my ears "every person has the right to go and get what they want, and stuff the responsibility to the rest".

homelessskilledworker

Just to continue with this some more, and I would love to hear some anecdotes if anyone has some, how much are certain people/families receiving on long term welfare dependancy.

I have no idea if the stories they put in the tabloids about big families being put in £5000 per month properties. But I have come across people who have for years had their rents paid and been living on welfare in one form or another. With a fag packet calculation many of these people in some cases are taking £100,000's out of the system, and I think that in some cases it is possible that some could be going into six figures??

Again I would like to make it clear, I am a massive fan of the welfare state, But!!

Mrs_Arcanum

All I can say is of the number of non working people living on the local ex council estate (now a mix of HA, BTL & owned), I can count the households where no one is working on one hand. The majority of houses are still HA.

jbreckmckye

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

Just to continue with this some more, and I would love to hear some anecdotes if anyone has some, how much are certain people/families receiving on long term welfare dependancy.

But that's the issue, it's all anecdotes.

I have never seen any hard figures on this, or the actual costs.

homelessskilledworker

jbreckmckye wrote: »

But that's the issue, it's all anecdotes.

I have never seen any hard figures on this, or the actual costs.

I know it's not the done thing being able to look at other peoples income, wages, or anything related to peoples money that is coming in.

I never understood this, it has never made sense to me, what people get in wages or in taxes or what they get in welfare should be available to all.

I had an unexpected windfall this year of just short of £7000, it was a great feeling as it seems that I always just put into the system. My perception of getting this money was to think how much work I would normally have to do to get that kind of money, it was like I had been given a headstart on the sum of money I like to aim for in the year.

But then you think of professional welafre claimants as I like to call them, some are getting that amount of money every two to five months, and if the press is to be believed much less, even monthly.

moneyinmypocket

I have seen families who have never worked, always get in trouble with law popping out kids ten to the dozen - they then bring up little monsters who follow the same pattern. They almost look inbred some of them which is a taboo subject as if you have underclass breeding in same areas and never moving you do end up with inbreeding at some point

John_Pierpoint

The average distance between bride and groom 150 years ago was 3.5 miles, after the invention of the bicycle that doubled to 7 miles.

No sure that correlated with a reduction in "village idiots".

yertiz_2

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

I tend to agree, but what I find really insulting to "the poor" is that bad anti social behaviour and having very little money go hand in hand or should go hand in hand.
I even remember in my lifetime where parents with nothing raised their children with ethics and a respect for others, and worked hard. Men have gone to the the grave who stormed the beaches of Normandy in WW2 later to return to work their socks for their remaining life as honest hardworking people who passed away not having two pennies to rub together.

Many of todays "poor" seem to increase the size of their predicament ten fold, they ask the state to help them because they cannot take care of themselves, and what do they do, introduce kids into the equation or a drug or drink problem the list is endless.

This is not being critical at "the poor" by the way, it is more a question of what the hell is going on??

What is going on is that there are no jobs now, not many opportunities to 'work their socks off' . In the not too distant past, hard working families (my parents included) could find work, earn a decent wage and were able to pay affordable rent to their local council, feed and clothe their children and that was usually on one wage because both parents didnt have to work to pay extortionate mortgages or rent. The problem now is that there is no hope for many, some turning to drink, drugs and crime. We are all one step away from joining 'the poor' I feel.

cotleigh

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

Just for the reord....

I am a massive fan of the welfare state, and had I been around when the welfare state was being proposed and then introduced for those who had every intention of supporting themselves or had just been dealt a stinker of a hand in life and were unable to take care of themselves, I would have been overjoyed.

My biggest worry today is that the welfare system will be destoyed by those on the welfare system.
It was never meant as a way of life, it was put in place for those that fell on hard times through no fault of their own.

If you want one example of why I think it has gone so wrong(and there are 100's), why is nobody approaching women/girls who become pregnant while claiming welfare and say "what are the hell are you playing at". There are true poor people in this world like those in the slums of India that would kiss your feet with joy if you gave them a third of what we give our claimants, only ours snatch the money from your hand with a sense of entitlement.

The solution to the problem of young single mums getting pregnant and then being "rewarded" with a council flat, jumping the queue past the responsible-but-poor young couple who put their name down for a council flat so they can start a family is this:

We don't want a world where people end up on the streets, even if they are irresponsible and !!!!less.

So, we must provide something for them.

So, put them up in purpose-build hostels. They get a roof over their heads, maybe support with their baby, some rules to live by, etc.

Not as nice as getting your own flat, but there you go.

Priority for subsidised flats and houses should be given to those who "play by society's rules".

That way, we fulfil our duty to look after people, without seeming to effectively reward bad behaviour, as happens at present.