Titanic99 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 He's earning more now, you said so, so he uses his higher income to secure a mortgage or rent privately. What's wrong with this sequence of events? You are pushing him back to being poor again, he's unlikely to be able to afford a mortgage and he'll then be losing more of his disposable income for the additional rent. Once again, the not so well-off working people get attacked whilst the well-off landlords get richer. The other factor of course is the administration costs, how much work is going to be involved in checking all these people out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 I would try to keep it tidy, decorating etc. but I would not do any major repairs. The advantage of renting is that someone else (landlord or council) is responsible for this. I technically am the same because I know the rights concerning tenancy (private and council, e.g. same), but I am very proactive about it, because as soon as a few little things build up all of a sudden it's a big problem and your living in an almost or actual slum and other things start happening. This is also true of certain problem people / families. TBH, that's a worse situation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 The other factor of course is the administration costs, how much work is going to be involved in checking all these people out. They already have access to most of the information anyway, even if in some of it is in a restricted way. But the one thing no-one's mentioned is all the people who NEED social housing but there isn't enough available? (Just like energy... Bloody Labour!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulgarian Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 he'll then be losing more of his disposable income for the additional rent. Too bad, that's how it goes, council houses are there for people who are desperate not for people who want somewhere cheap to live so they can spend all their wages on nice things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 We are in this state because of Labour. Please see point 3. http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6911906&postcount=13 This is simple maths 1 on 1. The debt was way higher after 1945, it was 200% of Gdp. As council house building took off, the debt fell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 You are pushing him back to being poor again, he's unlikely to be able to afford a mortgage and he'll then be losing more of his disposable income for the additional rent. Poorer, not poor and still better off than the unemployed guy you strangely don't seem to give a stuff about. I take it you already have your council house, and this is really all about you, not about the people who'll benefit? Once again, the not so well-off working people get attacked whilst the well-off landlords get richer. What landlords? The other factor of course is the administration costs, how much work is going to be involved in checking all these people out. £10 to equifax or experian or some other credit check agency I'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 We live in a bizarre world, where people buy houses with debt. Pay them off and them sell them to a person who buys them with debt. A house is paid for once in £ and again in interest, it is then sold and paid for again in £ and again in interest. We are renting the entire UK from the banks at more than the market rate. It's mental. A £5k council house from the 60s will have probably had £500k spent on the ownership of it come 2010. And some fool will buy it again in 25 years. Paying once in £ and again in £interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 The debt was way higher after 1945, it was 200% of Gdp. As council house building took off, the debt fell. But there was more industry and other influencing factors. Are you really trying to say that re-building houses after the war was the only reason why the debt fell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 20, 2010 Share Posted November 20, 2010 We live in a bizarre world, where people buy houses with debt. Pay them off and them sell them to a person who buys them with debt. A house is paid for once in £ and again in interest, it is then sold and paid for again in £ and again in interest. We are renting the entire UK from the banks at more than the market rate. It's mental. A £5k council house from the 60s will have probably had £500k spent on the ownership of it come 2010. And some fool will buy it again in 25 years. Paying once in £ and again in £interest. So what is the solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.