Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

My manifesto for a better UK Watch

  • View Poll Results: Would you vote for these polices?
    Yes
    19
    17.27%
    Maybe-( if I was voting tactically)
    11
    10.00%
    No
    80
    72.73%

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You were using a well known extremist tory front for "factual evidence"?
    I don't care about the political affiliations of the publication, I was just disproving your pathetic attempt at a point.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    It's a matter of how much benefit been spent!
    Back to who gets this money aren't we?

    (Original post by a729)
    It's a example of how the welfare state is failing and is breeding a new class called the 'not-working class' who are get to live in such nice accomadtion without paying a penny for it
    What is the "not-working class"? How many jobs are out there? Is there enough council housing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by venenecinema)
    I don't care about the political affiliations of the publication, I was just disproving your pathetic attempt at a point.
    My point was that you're being hysterical. If you want a discussion about the housing crisis, let's have a rational one.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    Back to who gets this money aren't we?



    What is the "not-working class"? How many jobs are out there? Is there enough council housing?
    Check this housing out, and it's discussed in a publication 'without' political affiliation!
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/sh...ound-liverpool

    These could be well kitted out for homeless families at minimal expense, and derelict houses like these exist all over the country.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by venenecinema)
    Check this housing out, and it's discussed in a publication 'without' political affiliation!
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/sh...ound-liverpool

    These could be well kitted out for homeless families at minimal expense, and derelict houses like these exist all over the country.
    I agree that derelict housing should be compulsory purchased , brought under local authority control and turned into council housing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    I agree that derelict housing should be compulsory purchased , brought under local authority control and turned into council housing.
    That's a significantly better long term solution than providing people with temporary housing that's inherently beyond their means - that's helpful to nobody.
    Cases like below shouldn't even be an option
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21362391
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by venenecinema)
    That's a significantly better long term solution than providing people with temporary housing that's inherently beyond their means - that's helpful to nobody.
    Cases like below shouldn't even be an option
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21362391
    This can be traced back to Thatcher's right to buy policy, which stipulated that councils could not use the proceeds to build any more social housing until they had reduced their debt. Westminster council are notorious for housing people out of borough or just not taking homelessness applications.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely nothing on agriculture or rural development... great manifesto you have there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    Your spelling isn't up to scratch- so you're you go and work as the cleaner in Morley's (aka South London's budget answer to Nando's)
    great english pal.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by consumed by stuff)
    great english pal.
    Ditto
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    Ditto
    same
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    Both are the problem but when the welfare state gives multi-million pound houses to benefit claimants something is very wrong!
    The benefit claimants do not own those houses, they are rented by them. If the landlord is willing to put benefit claimants in, then that is not the fault of the welfare state, is it?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    The benefit claimants do not own those houses, they are rented by them. If the landlord is willing to put benefit claimants in, then that is not the fault of the welfare state, is it?
    The fact that the welfare state is in a position where it has no choice or can't be bothered to find an alternative other than to put claimants in a house that costs the taxpayer £8,000 per month is the fault of the welfare state. You can't blame a landlord whose aim is to make money for doing exactly that provided they are within the law. It's called piss poor management of tax revenue and it's totally the fault of the welfare state.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    The benefit claimants do not own those houses, they are rented by them. If the landlord is willing to put benefit claimants in, then that is not the fault of the welfare state, is it?
    That's merely semantics

    It's costing taxpayers 96k a year!

    Most people would have to work nearly 7 years to earn that ( after tax) !
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Would solve next to nothing.
    If you think 4 tiny points are going to fix the economy, you need to go read up on what is wrong with it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by venenecinema)
    The fact that the welfare state is in a position where it has no choice or can't be bothered to find an alternative other than to put claimants in a house that costs the taxpayer £8,000 per month is the fault of the welfare state. You can't blame a landlord whose aim is to make money for doing exactly that provided they are within the law. It's called piss poor management of tax revenue and it's totally the fault of the welfare state.
    A claimant is not "put" in a house that costs the tax payer £8,000. They must have rented beforehand paying their own way, and then lost their job or their inability to pay. The welfare state doesn't hand out million pound mansions to JSA claimants.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    A claimant is not "put" in a house that costs the tax payer £8,000. They must have rented beforehand paying their own way, and then lost their job or their inability to pay. The welfare state doesn't hand out million pound mansions to JSA claimants.
    I didn't mention JSA once. You're putting undue faith in the country's welfare system here; you don't need to have rented prior to being given a house, nor do you need to have lost your job.
    Even if what you're saying was the case then it'd still be ludicrous to PUT a family, regardless of how much tax they've paid, into a house that costs this much.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    That's merely semantics

    It's costing taxpayers 96k a year!

    Most people would have to work nearly 7 years to earn that ( after tax) !
    Whilst that may be true - that it is costing the tax payer that much money - it is still not the fault of the welfare state. The system is not at fault but the decision makers who are slowly helping to throw it into turmoil.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by venenecinema)
    I didn't mention JSA once. You're putting undue faith in the country's welfare system here; you don't need to have rented prior to being given a house, nor do you need to have lost your job.
    Even if what you're saying was the case then it'd still be ludicrous to PUT a family, regardless of how much tax they've paid, into a house that costs this much.
    It is just an example. It could be anyone claiming any kind of benefit.

    You do not get given a million pound mansion. Never. Unless you inherited it then that it a different issue. You don't get given a house. You may rent or bid for a property based upon criteria. You must fill that criteria. If you don't fill it, you don't get it.

    Please give me one example where the tax payer is paying a very large amount of money to house a single person or family, and have not rented that house with their own money (either from wages or other means) beforehand. Just one.

    The set limit for HB for a single unemployed person is something like £60-80 per week. The HB will not pay anymore than this. For families it would be different obviously. No-one gets given an £8,000 per month rent property. They have to bid, then show that they can pay the rent each week without fail. If they are on DSS then they must make up the shortfall. If they work part-time they probably get some of it paid for them but not all of it. If they are working full time they will have to pay the rent in full with their wages, unless they can show that they are going through severe hardship and then ammendments may be made towards HB contributions.

    You lot are amateurs sometimes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    Whilst that may be true - that it is costing the tax payer that much money - it is still not the fault of the welfare state. The system is not at fault but the decision makers who are slowly helping to throw it into turmoil.
    The fact the system doesn't have caps to avoid this situation means the system is flawed just like the expenses system (was/ arguably still is)
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.