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.
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.
How Bloody Much?!
Comments
-
Which one is you?0
-
Jennifer_Jane wrote: »Isn't it used, though, for things like my local park, which is of benefit to only the inhabitants of a small market town? Lottery money has restored it to its Victorian splendour which allows enjoyment to a group of people. There would be an outcry, however, if money were to come from the Government or the Council for this. There are more pressing things to use Council Taxes for.
I don't disput that but I wonder who funded the park and maintained it all those years ago. Life and priorities have changed I accept."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »The lottery is not a stealth tax, the act of buying a lottery ticket is deliberate, discretionary spending. It could only possibly be described as a tax if it was compulsory to play. By your logic premium bonds are a stealth tax as well!
The "bedroom tax" is also not a tax and anyone calling it a tax is just buying in to labour's spin. Reducing benefits is not a tax. Furthermore, what is currently going on is not even reducing benefits as it is simply requiring people to move house - unless they refuse, they will continue, in substance, to receive the same net amount because their rent will reduce accordingly.
By your logic we should describe that rent reduction as a "windfall".
Strictly all true but it does depend on how you define a stealth tax. Most people would say its a Government collecting money from individuals in an indirect way that they do not think of as a tax. If you or I buy a lottery ticket or a premium bond we do so knowing something of the odds on winning. For a lottery ticket we know its a high risk bet that is almost the same as putting the cost of the ticket into a collection tin. But many people buy them without understanding this, including some people on benefits in some vague hope that it will change their life. The fact that the proceeds go to good causes is wonderful but it also enables Government to spend less on those areas.
Of course its not a tax but you can understand why people call it one. Of course its political but that is how the public will regard it.
Ask people if they are in favour of the principle we will all agree its a fair policy. Present them with examples of how its being applied to disabled people with special fittings they are less convinced.
The disabled person affected will not see the logic of moving either, especially if they rely on special equipment or neighbours helping them. They will just see it as a tax. Even some Tories who voted for the Bill are now concerned about its impact.Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
-
It's a fascinating idea and certainly much better than the ridiculous idea that poverty can be measured as 60% of median income.
I guess the debate could be framed in terms of, should a person who won't work receive the minimum income standard at the expense of those that do work?
This debate only seem to occur at times of economic downturn when there is a relatively high level of unemployment - so I think it's unfortunate that you want to frame the debate in terms of those "who won't work" rather than who are currently without work.
This article from the Telegraph (‘Scramble for jobs intensified in 2012’) reports research showing that:
“Over the year, an average of 18 people applied for each empty job in Britain, up from 17 people per job in 2011, according to an annual survey by recruitment site Totaljobs.com”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9756828/Scramble-for-jobs-intensified-in-2012-research-finds.html
While this report: ‘Are ‘cultures of worklessness’ passed down the generations?”:
http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/cultures-of-worklessness
concluded:
“New research found that 'cultures of worklessness' was not a good explanation for unemployment.
A new JRF study investigates the concept of 'intergenerational cultures of worklessness'.
The idea of 'three generations of the same family who have never worked' appeals to many, including politicians and policy-makers, to explain entrenched worklessness in the UK. Researchers in deprived neighbourhoods in Glasgow and Middlesbrough found that worklessness was not the result of a culture of worklessness, held in families and passed down the generations.
It found that:
Even two generations of complete worklessness in the same family was very rare.
There was no evidence of 'a culture of worklessness' – values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependency – in the families taking part in the research.
Working-age offspring remained strongly committed to conventional values about work and were keen to avoid the poverty and worklessness experienced by their parents”.
0 -
Even better
Just think of our global productivity stats though.
No need for unskiled immigrant workforce if they brought back the poorhouse. Some socialist would whine about minimum wage though and make it uneconomic.
Isn't this the old equivalent of working for a supermarket anyhow?0 -
"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Jennifer_Jane wrote: »Can people not share houses - like my partner does in private, unsubsidised housing - or like I've done in my own "owner-occupied" houses, which have helped pay off my mortgages?
Why should people have a property all to themselves, what a luxury? It's a luxury that people not on benefits don't have.
What an odd thing to propose ?
Could you imagine a private landlord knocking at his tenants door and suggesting the family move in with another down the road as he still wants their rent ..but has sold half his houses off ..
We would have plenty of money to build state housing with ...If we didn't pass it along to private landlords due to ...oh yeah ..selling off our original housing stock ..0 -
Just out of interest, what if there is nowhere to move to (e.g. lack of one bedroom properties)?
If there was such a shortfall then it would potentially be a benefits cut- but there is no such shortfall. Even if there is insufficient social housing of a certain type there is plenty of suitable property in the private rented sector (which can be funded by housing benefit).0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »If there was such a shortfall then it would potentially be a benefits cut- but there is no such shortfall. Even if there is insufficient social housing of a certain type there is plenty of suitable property in the private rented sector (which can be funded by housing benefit).
Do the same restrictions exist for the private rented sector? Will we simply free up the space and then pay the same or more in HB to slot someone into a smaller property?
If the amount of HB paid is irrelevant and it helps relieve pressure on the stock then I guess it doesn't matter."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 346K Banking & Borrowing
- 251.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 451.1K Spending & Discounts
- 238.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 613.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 174.5K Life & Family
- 251.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards