barleycorn Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 As stated before, I'm addressing the problem that is effecting people RIGHT NOW! We allowed people on benefits to settle in London where they have happily lived and settled with their families for years. So on that basis, people on 35k in the past could afford to buy in London. To be honest, anyone earning £35k who plans on settling anywhere is probably a bit dim if they don't own a property but that's another matter. So in the past people on £35k could afford property in London. Think of those who bought property in London in 1997. Think of those who moved their families on benefits to London in 1997. If both were now forced to move, and we are talking about the £500 pw cap that is going to negatively impact families right now, who's laughing and who's going to be screwed? That's my point and there's no arguing it. It's worth considering that if you moved to London in 1997 on benefits and you are still on them now 16yrs later a move may well be in order to improve your job prospects. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 As stated before, I'm addressing the problem that is effecting people RIGHT NOW! We allowed people on benefits to settle in London where they have happily lived and settled with their families for years. So on that basis, people on 35k in the past could afford to buy in London. To be honest, anyone earning £35k who plans on settling anywhere is probably a bit dim if they don't own a property but that's another matter. So in the past people on £35k could afford property in London. Think of those who bought property in London in 1997. Think of those who moved their families on benefits to London in 1997. If both were now forced to move, and we are talking about the £500 pw cap that is going to negatively impact families right now, who's laughing and who's going to be screwed? That's my point and there's no arguing it. Your point was that kids of families on benefits would be devastated if they had to move to a different area.. yet you don't think the effect of moving would be the same to kids of families who have to move due to work.. are you moving the goalposts..? ---------- Post added 06-11-2013 at 13:43 ---------- It's worth considering that if you moved to London in 1997 on benefits and you are still on them now 16yrs later a move may well be in order to improve your job prospects. jb According to FACEBOOK these families are incapable of change.... Of course they're incapable, that's how they got there in the first place and government allowed it. It's wrong to punish children for the attitudes of their parents. At least give the children already in this position a chance to grow up in their homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FACEBOOK Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 are you moving the goalposts..? You mean like the government? No I'm not, I mentioned this exact point back in post 81. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 You mean like the government? No I'm not, I mentioned this exact point back in post 81. You were talking about the kids waaay before post 81...in fact as far back as #24.. Try telling young children distraught they will have to leave their schools, friends and close family because a change of government has made it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FACEBOOK Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 To compare a family on £35k to that of a family on benefits is completely ridiculous anyway for so many reasons which must be very obvious to most sensible people. I get it, this is the internet, lets all argue the toss on every literal point being made but nothing anyone says will make the forceful removal of a family especially with minors in place. It's wrong. Stop it from happening but don't destroy the lives of families already in place. That will never be ok. NOT COOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 To compare a family on £35k to that of a family on benefits is completely ridiculous anyway for so many reasons which must be very obvious to most sensible people. I get it, this is the internet, lets all argue the toss on every literal point being made but nothing anyone says will make the forceful removal of a family especially with minors in place. It's wrong. Stop it from happening but don't destroy the lives of families already in place. That will never be ok. NOT COOL! Their income is the same.. the effects on the kids (you were concerned about that, remember) would be the same ,yet you see no problem with one set of families having to move but it'd be devastating for the other...you have no consistency.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FACEBOOK Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Their income is the same.. the effects on the kids (you were concerned about that, remember) would be the same ,yet you see no problem with one set of families having to move but it'd be devastating for the other...you have no consistency.... No truman, the effects would not be the same which I have explained previously in detail. Look back, its's all there. The HUGE difference is that the £35k family have a completely different mindset, a mindset that can proactively fix problems, find solutions, get back up like Loob did. The children won't be damaged from the experience. A family or single mother with kids on benefits will not have a positive mindset or the skills to get out of the mess she finds herself in. She won't have a property with massive equity and OPTIONS! This is happening right now, people on 35k in the past were able to buy property now with huge gains. They have the education and skills to climb out of any whole. Not so for the benefits family. They are absolutely screwed and so are their children. I don't agree with that. This is very obvious. Are you trying to make me smash my face into my keyboard trueman? do you want me to have a letter K for a front tooth? Is that what you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 To compare a family on £35k to that of a family on benefits is completely ridiculous anyway for so many reasons which must be very obvious to most sensible people. I get it, this is the internet, lets all argue the toss on every literal point being made but nothing anyone says will make the forceful removal of a family especially with minors in place. It's wrong. Stop it from happening but don't destroy the lives of families already in place. That will never be ok. NOT COOL! Come on, moving house is not the end of the world. There are plenty of people who work and rent in the private sector who face being forced to remove at moments notice due to the dictates of fickle landlords and the complete lack of long term assured tenancies. People in social housing should thank themselves lucky that they have far more security than those in the private sector. The real problem is when benefits are capped and nowhere can be found to move to, but this is more of a problem for people who work AND receive benefits as they are truly limited to places to move to due to the requirement to be near their workplace. The full time unemployed could in theory move anywhere. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 To compare a family on £35k to that of a family on benefits is completely ridiculous anyway for so many reasons which must be very obvious to most sensible people. I get it, this is the internet, lets all argue the toss on every literal point being made but nothing anyone says will make the forceful removal of a family especially with minors in place. It's wrong. Stop it from happening but don't destroy the lives of families already in place. That will never be ok. NOT COOL! It's a perfectly valid comparison which you don't like because it means you don't have a point any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FACEBOOK Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Come on, moving house is not the end of the world. There are plenty of people who work and rent in the private sector who face being forced to remove at moments notice due to the dictates of fickle landlords and the complete lack of long term assured tenancies. People in social housing should thank themselves lucky that they have far more security than those in the private sector. Moving is not a problem if you can move to somewhere just as nice or better or at least where the children won't lose their schooling, friends and family. A single mother on benefits with 3 kids should not be forced out when she has no options. The children are the ones who will suffer. It's so wrong and cannot be compared with a family on £35k which is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.