chem1st Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 In less than a year, anybody aged 26-34 will have their housing benefit cut down to the SRR, which is considerably lower than the 1 bed rate. In Sheffield these figures are £60 and £88.85. These people are looking at a £28.85 drop in income because of their age. Whilst cuts to housing benefit may be a good thing, age discrimination wrt the cuts is not. Certain people will be exempt from these changes, namely those with children, and those coming from care. However, many organisations are calling for others to be exempt from the SRR. Shelter is one for example. They call for the following groups to be exempt; Former rough sleepers Ex-offenders People fleeing domestic violence Parents with caring responsibilities Pregnant women Other vulnerable groups, to be defined via consultation The question I am asking is, should rapists be exempt from the SRR and thus be entitled to a higher rate of housing benefit. The idea is for all people under 35 to live in shared accommodation (forcing our children and the current generation of taxpayers into sub standard accommodation, and severely restricting their ability to get on in the world, have a family etc.). However, by doing so, people with mental health problems, sexual offenders, violent offenders, drug addicts, low wage workers, young women & men will be forced to share housing with each other. Some young women will end up having to share HMO housing with rapists. Is this fair? Surely rapists should not be encouraged to share housing with potential victims? Maybe it would be better to give them higher rates of housing benefit in order for them to live on their own... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andikay Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 No, just, no! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Yes. They should also be given a lump sum of 50k as most are innocent victims of false cries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Yes they should,as ex-offenders new a fresh start in a decent palace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 i think you need to get some professional help because you seem to have an unhealthy obsession with housing benefits. as regards your post then the situation will be no different than what it is now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted July 20, 2011 Author Share Posted July 20, 2011 i think you need to get some professional help because you seem to have an unhealthy obsession with housing benefits. as regards your post then the situation will be no different than what it is now More people are going to be forced to share housing. Safeguards should be in place. The benefit system shouldn't discriminate based upon age. Housing benefit is going to be used to price housing at different rates for people of different age. Much like tax credits, that increase wage with age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 More people are going to be forced to share housing. will that, in general, be such a bad thing. i've lived in shared housing with all sorts of people, from all walks of life and had many experiences mostly good and none really bad. Safeguards should be in place. i'm sure that they will be, anyone convicted of a sexual offence will be subject to a management regime enforced by the probation service and police. The benefit system shouldn't discriminate based upon age. why not? Housing benefit is going to be used to price housing at different rates for people of different age. is that such a bad thing? Much like tax credits, that increase wage with age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denlin Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Yes. They should also be given a lump sum of 50k as most are innocent victims of false cries. I hope you are not serious, the OP said convicted rapists. Would you want one to share house with your sister and be given 50k because he's done his time. If you are serious you need help big style, if not I apologise:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted July 20, 2011 Author Share Posted July 20, 2011 A person with mental health problems, might have difficulty living amongst others, shared housing could cause this person problems by putting even more pressure on the NHS, and create an even worse economic effect, one of a greater magnitude than the money saved in housing benefit payments by making them move into shared housing in the first place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.