SevenRivers Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 That's the biggest bull poo argument I've ever heard for the tax payer subsidising buy to let scroungers. Image if there was no such thing as public sector social housing and it was all provided by private landlords. All the landlords would be responsible for the upkeep of the properties. The taxpayer would not have the burden of maintaining any of them. The council would not have to employ an army of people to maintain them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted April 6, 2013 Author Share Posted April 6, 2013 Image if there was no such thing as public sector social housing and it was all provided by private landlords. All the landlords would be responsible for the upkeep of the properties. The taxpayer would not have the burden of maintaining any of them. The council would not have to employ an army of people to maintain them. In your world the state would be paying housing benefit to scrounger landlords to subsidise their silly little businesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elumof96e Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 509 days between posts, have you been doing some porridge? how many days between this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 how many days between this one Not a real sentence; doesn't make sense. ---------- Post added 13-07-2014 at 21:38 ---------- I'm looking forward to the headline "child killer assaulted in gay shower attack" the prisoner said " i only dropped the soap. Are you a sexual sadist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Se7enhills Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 In your world the state would be paying housing benefit to scrounger landlords to subsidise their silly little businesses. What is so silly about renting houses out for people to live in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 What is so silly about renting houses out for people to live in? you only against councils doing it then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Se7enhills Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 No, but people in council houses are entitled to buy them, and I was thinking of the different situation between council house tenents and those who rent privately. The former tend to wish to live there for some time, private renters are often starting off in life, and/or are transient due to the nature of their employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 What is so silly about renting houses out for people to live in? Not what I said is it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elumof96e Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Not a real sentence; doesn't make sense. ---------- Post added 13-07-2014 at 21:38 ---------- Are you a sexual sadist? no but i like a good laugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 ....private renters are often starting off in life...... Babies rent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.