Do you support social housing?

CLAPTON

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

70% of people born in UK own their own home.

There are 17 times more people in social housing who were born in the UK than those arrived in the last 10 years.

Probably only extraordinary if you subscribe to the Daily Mail.

Assuming you have more than two brain cells then that statistic is, whilst a statement of fact, but is deliberately designed to mislead and is therefore what I usually call a lie.

JencParker

Hooloovoo wrote: »

Shame people don't think about this sort of thing BEFORE having expensive children.

While I agree that people should think of the financial implications before having children, at today's rates, the low paid would never have children.

Are you proposing that the only people that should have children are the middle class and wealthy?

Kennyboy66

gazter wrote: »

All of the above i know, and have made specific reference to several in this thread alone.

The main government subsidy is *not* the capital spend, but the rent subsidy paid to councils and RSLs via the housing revenue account and its equivalents.

The housing revenue grant was scrapped in April 2012.

Hope this helps.

The subsidy to tenants is through housing benefit, at least 40% of which goes to private landlords.

Kennyboy66

CLAPTON wrote: »

Assuming you have more than two brain cells then that statistic is, whilst a statement of fact, but is deliberately designed to mislead and is therefore what I usually call a lie.

Follow the link for your daily dose of bile.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

JencParker

N1AK wrote: »

It's a pretty stupid question Kennyboy66. If there was a waiting list to be handed £10,000,000 then how many people do you think would be on it

If there was a large waiting list for gastric band surgery the 'smart' thing to do isn't just to plan to get as much of it done as possible, it is to look into why people are in such a desperate situation to begin with.

Well, I'd thought that was pretty obvious. The low paid cannot afford the high rents demanded (at least in London and the SE).
Minimum wage, working a 40 hours week, provides a take home pay of just over £11,000 per year. Rent alone in the SE exceeds this amount. Affordable housing is required for the many low paid workers who contribute to our society even though many on here seem to think they don't deserve a decent life.

mayonnaise

JencParker wrote: »

Are you proposing that the only people that should have children are the middle class and wealthy?

You shouldn't have children when you can't afford the have children.

Simple as that.

JencParker

mayonnaise wrote: »

You shouldn't have children when you can't afford the have children.

Simple as that.

So you think only the middle class and wealthy should have children!

Hooloovoo

JencParker wrote: »

While I agree that people should think of the financial implications before having children, at today's rates, the low paid would never have children.

Are you proposing that the only people that should have children are the middle class and wealthy?

People should only have children if they can afford to house them and raise them without financial assistance, irrespective of what "class" they may be.

Having children is not a right.

mayonnaise

JencParker wrote: »

So you think only the middle class and wealthy should have children!

Don't put words in my mouth.
My post was clear enough.

JencParker

Hooloovoo wrote: »

People should only have children if they can afford to house them and raise them without financial assistance, irrespective of what "class" they may be.

Having children is not a right.

No it is not a right - I agree, but with today's low wages and high cost of living that excludes those on low wages without some help whether that be through low cost housing or child benefits.