chem1st Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Probably the most sensible post on here. It should actually be slightly less than minimum wage, so people always benefit from finding work. It seems scandalous that someone works 40 hours per week, and the person next door works 0 hours per week yet they are better off... To make sure people always benefit from work, you need to alter the effective tax rates. And benefit should be paid as a citizens income, to all. It doesn't matter how much benefits are when they are withdrawn at a rate of £1 for each £1 somebody earns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 So all that will happen is those who are on housing benefit will have to move. Where to? The Govenerment seem to think that by stopping HB payments "the market" will somehow force down rents but if as you say there are plenty of well paid people in London willing to pay the extortionate rents then that won't happen. All that will happen is benefit claiment will be moved out and affluent people will move in. Didn't Boris Johnson describe that as "Kosovo style social cleansing" So I ask again, where are the people forced out of their homes going to go? Will we have "benefit towns" where rents are low and full of the people shipped out of London? I'm in principle for a benefit cap, but I see the problem being high rents, not housing benefit claiments. Isn't it primarly aimed at those who have a large family with no thought to the cost and then are allocated 8 bedroom mansions in expensive boroughs of London? At the end of the day, why should the rest of us pay for them to live in such expensive properties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdy Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Isn't it primarly aimed at those who have a large family with no thought to the cost and then are allocated 8 bedroom mansions in expensive boroughs of London? At the end of the day, why should the rest of us pay for them to live in such expensive properties? Heaven forbit than anyone should be forced to move out of Knightsbridge. http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/...5875-22923826/ PRINCE Andrew’s bankrupt ex Koo Stark has applied for housing benefit while living in a £2million flat. The one-time model, 54, lives in a luxury six-storey stucco terrace in London’s Belgravia with her 13-year-old daughter Tatiana – but has been declared bankrupt over an unpaid £38,680 hotel bill. Despite her financial troubles, single mum Miss Stark remains resident in one of the capital’s most upmarket streets. The apartment is one of three in the building, close to where celebrities including Charles Saatchi and wife Nigella Lawson, Margaret Thatcher and Sean Connery have homes. It is believed American-born Miss Stark has applied for housing benefit towards the weekly rental cost of her flat so she can stay in the neighbourhood. Renting a two-bedroom flat in the street costs about £1,000 a week. The average house in the area goes for around £16million and flats fetch about £1.9million. It is claimed Miss Stark’s debts, which are thought to total around £250,000, go back six years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 What about the workers who are on benefits? (legally, of course) It's possible to claim housing benefit if you're working in a low paid job in some situations. Some foreign holidays can be not much more than living in this country, late deals to Tunisia or Turkey are under £300 for 14 nights all inclusive, all you can eat & drink included, sunny weather, £20 a day. Housing benefit, or the extent to which it is applied is the biggest clue to one of the key problems. The housing market is completely dysfunctional. Prices are too high. Not enough new building. Not enough social housing. As long as one of the key basics of life remains wildly overpriced then a lot of other problems will not be solved. The basics of shelter and warmth cost way too much in the UK. The benefits system is a reflection of that. Sorry to say but all governments over last 30 years are culpable for letting this situation develop. IMO fix 1 is a controlled house price crash over 24 months of approx 30-50% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 What about people who physically can't work, and have no choice but to live on benefits? Should they be forced to live their entire lives on £13,000? Yes. Some people in work only earn that much - why should somebody who never works be entitled to more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 To make sure people always benefit from work, you need to alter the effective tax rates. And benefit should be paid as a citizens income, to all. It doesn't matter how much benefits are when they are withdrawn at a rate of £1 for each £1 somebody earns. I've heard this before - the Green Party used to bang on about it (maybe they still do). How would you fund it? (It would be extremely costly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 They should be capped to the minimum wage. I work a 40 hour week and earn £17,000 after tax etc: How can it be right that someone on benefits can earn more than people that work to survive? It's wrong, just wrong! It's horribly wrong, but any talk of putting it right is met with mouth-frothing lefties protecting the 'rights' of scroungers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riche Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 My wife works 3 days a week for the NHS and takes home £800/mth. I am in the building trade and have managed to keep working. Last year I earned @£14000. together after tax we pocketed @£20,000. I own my own home and have never missed a payment. My son is doing his A level's with a view to going to Uni. I have no pension as such and no savings. I get sweet FA if I sign on cos my wife works more than 21 Hours. In view of the above I take acceptoin to you having the brass neck to knock a cap on benefits. Me and my family survive on a lot less than £26,000 so do one. It should never be the case that someone on benefits is better off than a worker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 I've heard this before - the Green Party used to bang on about it (maybe they still do). How would you fund it? (It would be extremely costly). Take current benefit expenditure, divide by number of people, pay it to all. If wages and tax takes rise, increase citizens income, if they fall, decrease it. Were all in it together then. You want to be better off, you work. Everybody employed in admin for administration of current benefits can be made redundant and enter the productive part of the economy. You do know we spend more on administration than we spend giving JSA to over 1 million of the unemployed? And by introducing CI in the form of a NIT, and tinkering with the EMTR by introducing one flat tax upon income in the form of wages/profits earned via labour, we stimulate productive work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 My wife works 3 days a week for the NHS and takes home £800/mth. I am in the building trade and have managed to keep working. Last year I earned @£14000. together after tax we pocketed @£20,000. I own my own home and have never missed a payment. My son is doing his A level's with a view to going to Uni. I have no pension as such and no savings. I get sweet FA if I sign on cos my wife works more than 21 Hours. In view of the above I take acceptoin to you having the brass neck to knock a cap on benefits. Me and my family survive on a lot less than £26,000 so do one. It should never be the case that someone on benefits is better off than a worker. The problem is, many working people are on benefits (tax credits - that function as benefits and not as tax credits - doublespeak!). Working people claim more in dole, than the unemployed claim in dole. Parents in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.