Bypassblade Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 What so doleys can spend all their benefits on smack and not pay their rent? So I suppose that you have it on the BEST authority that ALL people on the dole are smack heads, me thinks you got a hole in the head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 In the long term it might but in the short term it would mean landlords would no longer be able to afford their mortgages so would default... mortgages would go unpaid leading to masses of bad credit with the banks... leading to a collapse of the banking system... sinking us deeper into recession... jb Short term pain long term gain. We need to stop subsidising these parasites. We can implement both currency and land reform and improve living standards rather than nominal GDP. GDP is becoming increasingly irrelevant as it bears no relation to real trade (increasingly black market - both labour and consumption, even housebuilding - sheds with beds etc and hidden homes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 So I suppose that you have it on the BEST authority that ALL people on the dole are smack heads, me thinks you got a hole in the head he summarised, what he meant to say was that some claimants have sunstance abuse issuses and others have non-drug related but equally chaotic lives and putting a sum aside to pay the rent is going to be beyond some of them. this is a separate issue but i believe that these benefits will be paid monthly, which again is going to cause loads of budgeting problems for anyone on a low income, regardless of their financial management abilities. housing benefit used to be paid to the claimant and they didn't pay the rent causing all sorts of problems to the landlord, extra work (& cost) for the court system to process the eviction orders, and to local councils when faced with a load of needlesly homeless people to deal with. that's why the option of paying it directly to the landlord was brought in. also, it won't encourage landlords to accept tenants on housing benefits, which again will result in homelessness increasing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 he summarised, what he meant to say was that some claimants have sunstance abuse issuses and others have non-drug related but equally chaotic lives and putting a sum aside to pay the rent is going to be beyond some of them. this is a separate issue but i believe that these benefits will be paid monthly, which again is going to cause loads of budgeting problems for anyone on a low income, regardless of their financial management abilities. housing benefit used to be paid to the claimant and they didn't pay the rent causing all sorts of problems to the landlord, extra work (& cost) for the court system to process the eviction orders, and to local councils when faced with a load of needlesly homeless people to deal with. that's why the option of paying it directly to the landlord was brought in. also, it won't encourage landlords to accept tenants on housing benefits, which again will result in homelessness increasing. I agree Andy; when people go to monthly paid it will cause hardship for a lot, also the temptation with the rent coming to them could be to overspend on bills & shopping, you know the essential things, not all on benefits are low life's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted October 25, 2012 Share Posted October 25, 2012 The government should not be propping up rents.Yet you approve of council housing. What is that if not government subsidised rents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Councils will only pay up to a certain amount of rent anyway, you cant just claim rent for any amount it is capped on certain properties. The only way rents go up is in private rental and if that person is willing to pay a high rent then that is their personal choice, nobody makes them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 People should be free to choose whether to spend their money on smack, crack, food, clothes or rent. The government should not be propping up rents. I'm hardly a Daily Mail reader but I could understand why people might baulk at giving their taxes to smackheads and crackheads. The government doesn't prop up rents. It helps low-paid people put a roof over their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 I heard someone chatting about the new Universal Credit Benefit system that’s coming out soon? Obviously my ears picked-up, the nosey sod I am. Well what I was told, was that people whom qualify for Housing Benefit, will under the new system have this rebate sent directly to them, within their payments. It is then up to the person themselves to pay full rent out of the benefit sent to them, rather than the reduce rate of rent, they pay now. It was also said they knew of people being sent new estimated amounts due to receive under the new system with the rent rebate given directly to them, these amounts sounded rather impressive. Any truth in this, or just a drunken chat, spinning a yarn, as was at a social gathering that involved lots of the falling over liquid and plenty of verbal diarrhea. Its nothing new. My OH and I had a couple of months in the early 70s when he was unemployed and we were on benefits. We got a sum of money every two weeks to pay for everything including the rent. We had to be regimented and took the rent money out before we spent anything. It wasn't easy, and we were fortunate to get back on our feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.