Should 'Social Housing' be re-branded 'Taxpayer-supported Housing?

Loughton_Monkey

prepareathome wrote: »

Can you explain what that has to do with everyone in social housing is scum, its like saying all single mums must have slept around not looking at the true facts that a lot might be widows with young children, some divorced.

All those in social housing are not scum.....the reasons they are there are many and varied.

How can I explain it? I never said it!

prepareathome wrote: »

Are you implying I think someone earning a fortune should have a social housing property if so you have totally misread what I have put. I am not agreeing with it at all

I never even mentioned social housing! I assume you can read?

prepareathome wrote: »

Its very easy to put a limit on under what level an income a family/person can have social housing. It will not be easy and each area would have to have their own level (area being part of town, city, village not the whole place) and be updated as private rents go up.

Do you happen to have a chip on your shoulder, perhaps?

prepareathome

Me no but as this thread is about people in social housing being scum I was trying to fit in what you said to the thread, if you want start a new one to discuss the way we view things be my guest

Loughton_Monkey

The_White_Horse wrote: »

social housing/council housing - whatever it is called these days should be renamed: Housing for Scum. The people who live in it should be rebranded as Scum (or grasping filth)......

Do you understand how such statements get other people into trouble?

john539

Rinoa wrote: »

Grant Shapps believes it should.

Mr Shapps certainly likes to stir up debate.

That's why he is now Tory Chairman of hot air and achieved nothing as Housing minister.

john539

Own_My_Own wrote: »

A friend of mine is always complaining that her family get no help with their rent (council house). I rent privately and have tried on many an occasion to explain that even with HB I pay as much as she does . But she wont have it.
She still thinks that I get more benefits than her.

People are stupid & believe all sorts of nonsense they have been fed through tabloid media.

Some of them seem to be on this thread.

john539

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

I don't care what it is called but I personally think it should be controlled more strictly and not be essentially a home for life which can be brought or passed onto family or under occupied.

I hate seeing local council properties full of people who have never worked a day in their life because they are bone idle, whilst people who work hard have to pay high market rents whilst struggling to save for their own home. I should probably point out there are those who are deserving and in need of a council home - I have no qualms with them.

You mean you'd like to point this out, until you've got one of these houses.

Are you seeing these houses yourself or is this all in your head, believing myths & tabloid media,

The_White_Horse

i was being nice. fair enough, £9k MAX.

in fact, why anything? why not just Zero?

Just get rid of all benefits.

ILW

john539 wrote: »

You mean you'd like to point this out, until you've got one of these houses.

Are you seeing these houses yourself or is this all in your head, believing myths & tabloid media,

I would love one of them houses, keep it for a few years and then either rent it out or buy it. Trouble is that I am not eligible. If I got myself a drink or drugs problem or decided to produce a load of kids that I could not or would not support would probably be OK though.