68,000 homeless in Britain, and it's going to get worse

[*_ash_*]

On paper 16k doesn't equate to poverty to me either (that's just above my yearly salary - howver I'm fortunate in that I'm single and have no children).

 

bold: The problem with using pay rates for poverty stats is flawed entirely based on this don't you think Mister?

 

Like I posted earlier, housing costs are included in the figures (which is a good thing to get a better picture) but also highlights that income level is practically a moot number.

 

If I didn't have a mortgage (i.e bought or paid it off) my spending income would increase by £100 per week, I most definitely wouldn't be 'in poverty' with this! (yet my income hasn't changed)

 

Underlined: fortunate?

 

Is it really fortunate to be single if you are renting or getting mortgage Mister?

 

I think a poster earlier said 'how can anyone buy a home or live/rent on £7.50 an hour?' - being with someone else clearly makes a big difference. If both doing min wage jobs that's £15 an hour (compared to single person on NMW)

 

OK, a bit more in food bills, slightly more elec and gas, but it has to be higher income in the household overall.

[Anna B]

bold: The problem with using pay rates for poverty stats is flawed entirely based on this don't you think Mister?

 

Like I posted earlier, housing costs are included in the figures (which is a good thing to get a better picture) but also highlights that income level is practically a moot number.

 

If I didn't have a mortgage (i.e bought or paid it off) my spending income would increase by £100 per week, I most definitely wouldn't be 'in poverty' with this! (yet my income hasn't changed)

 

Underlined: fortunate?

 

Is it really fortunate to be single if you are renting or getting mortgage Mister?

 

I think a poster earlier said 'how can anyone buy a home or live/rent on £7.50 an hour?' - being with someone else clearly makes a big difference. If both doing min wage jobs that's £15 an hour (compared to single person on NMW)

 

OK, a bit more in food bills, slightly more elec and gas, but it has to be higher income in the household overall.

 

Like you ash, I am only just above the 'poverty line,' but my circumstances are good. I am well established, have a roof over my head which is paid for, and everything I will probably need for the future.

 

However, as Mister M says, I think circumstances are very different for some, especially those who are just starting out with little in the bank and no one to help them.

 

Rents are high, wages low, deposits for mortgages far away in the distant future, bills are increasing and saving for a rainy day very difficult, so a simple domestic emergency can lead to real distress and scupper plans. Many are in debt.

 

It's not just basic everyday costs that do the damage, but the broader picture looks grim. We are increasingly told we have to be more self reliant, as the state cannot support us. A degree leaves them owing the best part of £50,000 and they can no longer take things for granted like health care, (emergency care may be good but more general Health care is increasingly hit and miss so an expensive private health care package may soon be the only reliable way forward.) and Pensions, which are already the poorest in the West, will increasingly be expected to be saved for. Insurances are expensive but will they soon be a necessity? Many things are going beyond their means.

 

I know this is not poverty as such, but with austerity, the trajectory is downwards

[*_ash_*]

Like you ash, I am only just above the 'poverty line,' but my circumstances are good. I am well established, have a roof over my head which is paid for, and everything I will probably need for the future.

 

However, as Mister M says, I think circumstances are very different for some, especially those who are just starting out with little in the bank and no one to help them.

 

Rents are high, wages low, deposits for mortgages far away in the distant future, bills are increasing and saving for a rainy day very difficult, so a simple domestic emergency can lead to real distress and scupper plans. Many are in debt.

 

It's not just basic everyday costs that do the damage, but the broader picture looks grim. We are increasingly told we have to be more self reliant, as the state cannot support us. A degree leaves them owing the best part of £50,000 and they can no longer take things for granted like health care, (emergency care may be good but more general Health care is increasingly hit and miss so an expensive private health care package may soon be the only reliable way forward.) and Pensions, which are already the poorest in the West, will increasingly be expected to be saved for. Insurances are expensive but will they soon be a necessity? Many things are going beyond their means.

 

I know this is not poverty as such, but with austerity, the trajectory is downwards

 

I don't think that hiking wages is the answer though as you do Anna. All this does in hike prices, and make employers find ways of reducing staff. Not to mention puts our products even more expensive than countries that pay $1 day.

 

Look at the 2 outgoings in the bold. Mortgages/housing/rents. Reducing housing costs is the answer. As long as the population is increasing as it is though, there's no chance.

[Anna B]

I don't think that hiking wages is the answer though as you do Anna. All this does in hike prices, and make employers find ways of reducing staff. Not to mention puts our products even more expensive than countries that pay $1 day.

 

Look at the 2 outgoings in the bold. Mortgages/housing/rents. Reducing housing costs is the answer. As long as the population is increasing as it is though, there's no chance.

 

The trouble is society is getting more unequal, and those with high salaries are already hiking prices so that those on low wages are getting left behind. What happened so that some people can earn over £250,000, while the same people are arguing over raising the minimum wage by less than a pound?

 

I agree that reducing housing costs would be good, but there are houses and flats standing empty so you'd think market forces would bring the rents down, but that isn't happening. Rent controls seem to be the only answer short term, and more affordable house building long term. Maybe something could be done to reduce the amount necessary for a deposit too.

[El Cid]

I agree that reducing housing costs would be good, but there are houses and flats standing empty so you'd think market forces would bring the rents down, but that isn't happening.

 

I keep hearing about this, and its a non-statement.

 

What percentage are empty? Is it 'normal' amount, how does it compare with other countries?

There will always be empty houses, council tax has just been changed to discourage it.

[alchresearch]

Maybe something could be done to reduce the amount necessary for a deposit too.

 

I'm not sure that's a good idea, wasn't a low or zero deposit the reason for so many losing their houses?

 

And what about help to buy?

 

https://www.helptobuy.gov.uk/

[El Cid]

In England, according to the government 205,821(2014) homes are unoccupied.

 

There are around 23 million houses in England, so 205,821 is a drop in the ocean.

 

http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns_/why_we_campaign/housing_facts_and_figures/subsection?section=housing_supply

[onewheeldave]

In England, according to the government 205,821(2014) homes are unoccupied.

 

There are around 23 million houses in England, so 205,821 is a drop in the ocean.

 

http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns_/why_we_campaign/housing_facts_and_figures/subsection?section=housing_supply

 

So it's around 1% of all homes being unoccupied.

 

At 205,821 unoccupied homes, with 68,000 homeless people, that's around 3 unoccupied homes for every homeless person.

[ez8004]

The trouble is society is getting more unequal, and those with high salaries are already hiking prices so that those on low wages are getting left behind. What happened so that some people can earn over £250,000, while the same people are arguing over raising the minimum wage by less than a pound?

 

I agree that reducing housing costs would be good, but there are houses and flats standing empty so you'd think market forces would bring the rents down, but that isn't happening. Rent controls seem to be the only answer short term, and more affordable house building long term. Maybe something could be done to reduce the amount necessary for a deposit too.

 

For the love of things that people find holy. Please stop talking rubbish.

 

Let's address your issue with deposits. The amount of deposit you need to put down is not the fundamental problem. How much you want to borrow versus your earnings is! The banks do not dictate this or the amount of deposit that is required. The key requirement mandated by the Bank of England results in this, which is that the maximum a given bank's lending portfolio is allowed to have a lending ratio of 4.5x or above earnings is 15%. Now go and work out how a bank can achieve this and become more educated.

 

Now the more contentious issue with pay. Have you ever stepped back and thought maybe these high earners deserve their pay? Who are you to dictate what an upper pay scale is when you have NO IDEA what a given job truly entails? A lot of well paid jobs demand a level of expertise and specialism that few people can meet. It is a simple supply and demand issue. Anyone can be a cleaner, but not everyone can be a nuclear engineer.

[El Cid]

So it's around 1% of all homes being unoccupied.

 

 

Does that include houses that are being refurbished, houses that are to let; two doors away from my house is a council property thaat has been visited by various trades, its been empty for months.

In your head, all houses will be refurbished and ready the next day.