Pay off debts quickly or save up for deposit?

poppadum · 8 September 2005 at 3:28AM

paint wrote:

Yet you are happy for the 'nanny state' to pick up the accommodation bill for your household (which has an income of over forty thousand pounds per annum).

Yes I have no moral issues with skimming off the nanny state. Two reasons:

a) The "accommodation bill" wouldn't be so back-breaking if house prices hadn't been so horribly inflated over the years by vested interests. Gross economic mismanagement over the years like the unsustainable manipulation of the market by tweaking lending rates, has put many British families deep in debt and under the poverty line. I'll be honest with you, 40K doesn't sound bad -- but we barely manage to get by on it while trying to keep up a reasonable quality of life. One holiday a year, few new clothes, state schools, an average car and a TV licence. Heck, we don't drink, smoke or do drugs either.

b) Just because I live in the same house as someone I sleep with shouldn't automatically imply that my money is theirs. The government says that they can't give my impoverished girlfriend and her children benefits because I've got enough for myself. What?? Makes no sense to me. Is this some deeply ingrained need for society to punish those who "live in sin"?

paint wrote:

Gosh, it's good to know my income tax is going to worthy causes.

Ignoring the sarcasm, I can understand where you're coming from. Unless you ever claim benefits, you won't see the advantages of paying income tax. On the other hand, it may open your eyes to the reality of life under the poverty line.

If you really care about your income tax, ask yourself how much of what you gave the government last year paid for the illegal war in Iraq. How much was invested in the manufacturing and selling arms to regimes with a poor human rights record? How many billions were spent adding nuclear warheads to already skyhigh stockpiles? What chunk was spent fighting poverty and starvation in third world countries? Lastly ask yourself what percentage went to families claiming benefits who are on the brink of starvation in a supposedly prosperous, developed nation like ours. (Having to eat chips and Tesco economy chicken nuggets everyday :eek: is being on the brink on starvation. )

wisbech_lad · 8 September 2005 at 3:31AM

Heh, reading about chavs like this makes me glad I emigrated... (to Asia, as it happens)

poppadum · 8 September 2005 at 3:46AM

wisbech_lad wrote:

Heh, reading about chavs like this makes me glad I emigrated... (to Asia, as it happens)

Heh, "chav" :rotfl: Either you don't understand what the word means or you haven't read or understood my post fully.

Incidentally, have you visited any slums in Asia?

wisbech_lad · 8 September 2005 at 6:57AM

Many. Though where I am now resident (HK) did a great job in clearing them all, with about 50% of the population in government housing. I grew up in India though, which did have plenty of them. Worked in Japan for a while - they don't have slum problem either.

I'll take back "chav" then, but I have relatives who are skilled in working "the system" and, yes, it does annoy me.

On the original question - go debt free first, then save for deposit. The lower LTV you can acheive (with bigger deposit) the better (lower interest rate/ more flexibility)

As for (b) - the fact that you live and sleep with someone is cohabitation - check out

http://www.advicenow.org.uk/go/livingtogether/index if you live in England.

Does seem a bit odd - you are not responsible for maintenenace/ upkeep/ debst of your partner, but most local authorities will treat you as married for benefits purposes...

margaretclare · 8 September 2005 at 10:12AM

No, it's nothing to do with 'living in sin'. It has to do with the fact that if you live as a partnership, whether married or not, you support each other financially. This is what the Benefits Agency and the local authority Housing Dept assume. It used to be assumed that it was the man who automatically supported the woman, now it can work either way, but the principle still remains, over a certain level of family income you don't need benefits.

Re chips and chicken nuggets - about the most expensive way to feed a family, and the most unhealthy. If you must have chips it's cheaper to buy potatoes and make them, if you want chicken then there are cheaper and healthier ways to eat it than in Tesco nuggets.

You have £40K income and you say you're living in poverty or near-poverty. How then can a retired couple like us, with an income between us of just over £20K, live well and live comfortably with no debts and the ability to do whatever we want - I've just spent over £1K on redecorating and re-carpeting a bedroom (including new bed).

I explained that we had a short brush with the Benefits Agency and the Housing Benefit people - we never actually got any money out of them. Just as well really.

Aunty Margaret

poppadum · 8 September 2005 at 11:16AM

margaretclare wrote:

No, it's nothing to do with 'living in sin'. It has to do with the fact that if you live as a partnership, whether married or not, you support each other financially.

Why? Why should this assertion be accepted without questioning??

margaretclare wrote:

...
Re chips and chicken nuggets - about the most expensive way to feed a family, and the most unhealthy. ... [snip]

Just for the record, I'm vegetarian, so unhealthy food like this isn't a worry. It was just a disparaging example of the depths one's standard of living can fall to when one is near the poverty line.

wisbech_lad wrote:

... As for (b) - the fact that you live and sleep with someone is cohabitation - check out

http://www.advicenow.org.uk/go/livingtogether/index if you live in England. ...

Thanks for the link, though I'm fully aware of where I stand legally. I'm also happy to break/ignore stupid laws without feeling guilty, especially when they have been created or perpetuated by a law making machinery that *I* did not elect into power (i.e., the current Labour government)

This thread is quickly going OT and probably belongs on the Benefits board, so I'll link to it there. I'm interested in a healthy debate about this one.

Thanks for your constructive replies.

madfrenchgirl · 8 September 2005 at 12:16PM

I dont want ot be appearing like insulting or anything, I do not know your real situation, we dnot have all the facts BUT you are actually confessing to intent to benefit fraud here... Are you nutz or are you just plain self-confident?

I mean with 40k a year you are still in debt and your girlfriend and her kids are claiming benefits and living on the edge of poverty but you dont look like you are actually helping them much. You would rather get done for benefit fraud and use taxpayer's money instead of organising your finances? I may be young but when I was a baby my parents were quite penniless, Dad finishing Uni and Mum supporting us on minimum wage. they managed easily and never claimed a damn penny even if times were tough. I myself was on the edge of poverty, living on half a shoestring, paying an awful rent for an awful place in Paris, eating pasta and frankfurters with ketchup, BUT I never got myself overdawn, never claimed any benefits, and my friends (some of them living on the streets, being kicked out by their parents) were always welcome to sleep over no matter how small my studio was. Mind you it was maybe in France, but my point is: you are earning far more than the average and I am surprised you still have 16k of debt astounding, complain about benefits paying 65% of your rent being taken away...

I am sorry but I do not share your point of view and I am not compassionate with you. I just think that you want to get the most out of any given situation. Why dont you actually help your girlfriend and their kids if they are so on the bring of starvation. How can you pretend to love her and not support her more through this?

I might appear a bit sharp on this but you did not give us enough information, and it seems to me that my taxes will be going to paying your rent (oh in fact 65% of it, cos instead of paying 50% which will be fair, you only pay 35%, using all the benefit money from your girlfriend).