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.
📨 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!
Redundant on 30/11/12 - what can I claim, and when please?
Comments
-
That suits his anti-welfare agenda. Council housing rents generate more capital per annum than the subsidies they receive, creating a multi-million pound profit for the treasury.
Having vehemently denied that social housing is not subsidised, you have just acknowledged that it is. You seem to be getting a little confused ...
0 -
I agree, but according to Morlock the govt don't subsidise social housing so there won't be any money to build anymore.
"[Councils] say they could build thousands of new council homes if ministers ended the practice by which surpluses on housing accounts are funnelled into central government funds before being redistributed - or kept in a Treasury pot where they could be used on other non-housing services.
Critics of the system point out that last year, more than 150 councils had to transfer around £750m a year from rents to the government while there were about 50 that received around £570m in subsidies, leaving about £180m in Treasury coffers
This sum is expected to rise substantially to nearly £900m in 15 years' time, according to the government's figures, because rents are rising faster than inflation. This has contributed to a situation in which councils built just 245 homes in 2006-07, while housing associations built 22,194."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/03/socialhousing.tenanttax
This system has been in place for decades, where council housing rents are funnelled in to government coffers before being redistributed. The redistributed amount always being far less than revenue received.0 -
"[Councils] say they could build thousands of new council homes if ministers ended the practice by which surpluses on housing accounts are funnelled into central government funds before being redistributed - or kept in a Treasury pot where they could be used on other non-housing services.
Critics of the system point out that last year, more than 150 councils had to transfer around £750m a year from rents to the government while there were about 50 that received around £570m in subsidies, leaving about £180m in Treasury coffers
This sum is expected to rise substantially to nearly £900m in 15 years' time, according to the government's figures, because rents are rising faster than inflation. This has contributed to a situation in which councils built just 245 homes in 2006-07, while housing associations built 22,194."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/03/socialhousing.tenanttax
This system has been in place for decades, where council housing rents are funnelled in to government coffers before being redistributed. The redistributed amount always being far less than revenue received.
Again, even your own evidence states that social housing is subsidised, does it not?0 -
Again, even your own evidence states that social housing is subsidised, does it not?
To be built! From the rents paid LESS what the Government takes out before returning the monies!Love many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
To be built! From the rents paid LESS what the Government takes out before returning the monies!
The govt is allowed to redistribute their incomes as they see fit. If they choose to give back to social housing bodies they may do so in the form of a subsidy, as Morlock now agrees they do exist.0 -
Again, even your own evidence states that social housing is subsidised, does it not?
It subsidises itself from its own profit, and also generates tens of millions in additional income for the treasury.
It is not subsidised at a cost to taxpayers. Which most people here would argue, and if you are honest, is what you would have argued yourself.
In fact, taxpayers directly benefit from its income. Shapps is not keen on this kind of publicly generated profit, he favours the private, entrepreneur landlords.0 -
It subsidises itself from its own profit, and also generates tens of millions in additional income for the treasury.
It is not subsidised at a cost to taxpayers. Which most people here would argue, and if you are honest, is what you would have argued yourself.
In fact, taxpayers directly benefit from its income. Shapps is not keen on this kind of publicly generated profit, he favours the private, entrepreneur landlords.
When is a subsidy not a subsidy? When Morlock realises he has contradicted himself! :rotfl:
You still haven't explained how social housing first came about - these houses just magically appeared overnight, did they? 0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards