ricgem2002 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 I never disagreed with you that in the past it helped people. But you were arguing that there are subsidies available today. Do you know of any? So you should be able to win the lottery, but keep the council house, the person recently homeless in the meantime has nowhere to go. Is that what social housing is supposed to be? I don't believe I said "a little money" at any point, but there should be a point where staying in a council house is wrong as they are in a position to rent privately or buy, just like everyone who doesn't have a council house has to do. Setting council rents to the market norm and giving out HB on a sliding scale (as already happens I think) would solve the problem. the government are talking about what you earn not winning the lottery (stop trying to change the goalposts)are you a landlord by the way ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 the government are talking about what you earn not winning the lottery (stop trying to change the goalposts)are you a landlord by the way ? No, the government are talking about people's financial situation improving. And that isn't always because they earn more. They could win or inherit money. Where one person has been earning in a family, their income can double if two adults work. There are many ways in which someone's financial situation can change, not just by earnings. No firm decisions have been taken on the length of tenancies, and there are still decisions to be made about permanent tenancies being allowed in certain circumstances. Some information here: http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/housing-management/lifetime-tenancies-to-be-axed/6512604.article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 No, the government are talking about people's financial situation improving. And that isn't always because they earn more. They could win or inherit money. Where one person has been earning in a family, their income can double if two adults work. There are many ways in which someone's financial situation can change, not just by earnings. No firm decisions have been taken on the length of tenancies, and there are still decisions to be made about permanent tenancies being allowed in certain circumstances. Some information here: http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/housing-management/lifetime-tenancies-to-be-axed/6512604.article so are you happy that the government has the right to you tell you what to do with your life should your circumstances change ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 so are you happy that the government has the right to you tell you what to do with your life should your circumstances change ? I think the point you are missing is that you are only renting the house. The landlord is the one who makes the decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 so are you happy that the government has the right to you tell you what to do with your life should your circumstances change ? That wasn't the point of my reply and the government aren't telling anyone what to do. The proposal is that NEW tenants will understand that their social housing tenancy may be for a fixed term They can then decide if they wish to take the tenancy. Its not ideal, but the choice will be theirs. And that will only be if their local council choose to introduce those flexible tenancies after they have consulted with landlords and community organisations. Some housing associations currently offer help to people on low incomes - should that stop, and housing be allocated regardless of wealth? You may recall I said I don't agree with short term council tenancies, but if they are introduced, I will at least attempt to understand how they are implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 I think the point you are missing is that you are only renting the house. The landlord is the one who makes the decisions. no the point you are missing is that the government will be able to set a limit on what they think acceptable .should you reach that level then they are saying you should move on .if people are only comfortable at the moment and have a sudden gain in their wealth (we dont know as yet what this will be )the higher rent they will be paying could push them to where they were before but with less money to be able to do things they want:huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 the government are talking about what you earn not winning the lottery (stop trying to change the goalposts)are you a landlord by the way ? You realise that interest payments count as earnings... So even a modest win, say £1 million, and a modest rate of return, say 5%, will provide an annual income of £50k. No, I'm not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 no the point you are missing is that the government will be able to set a limit on what they think acceptable .should you reach that level then they are saying you should move on .if people are only comfortable at the moment and have a sudden gain in their wealth (we dont know as yet what this will be )the higher rent they will be paying could push them to where they were before but with less money to be able to do things they want:huh: Because you are only renting a house, a house which is designated as being for the less well off, the ones who are struggling. Improve your situation and expect to move out of that house to make room for someone else. It doesn't seem unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omen666 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 well if people ever needed a excuse to to get a job they have one now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted November 28, 2010 Share Posted November 28, 2010 Because you are only renting a house, a house which is designated as being for the less well off, the ones who are struggling. Improve your situation and expect to move out of that house to make room for someone else. It doesn't seem unreasonable. just answer me this could the extra in rent put them back to where they were in the first place ?other than paying more out in rent their circumstances have stayed the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.