Bedroom tax.

[LarryUK]

This is more for those outside the UK. What do you think of this policy here in the UK?

It's a charge for 'excess' bedrooms for those in social housing. Roughly £14 per spare bedroom.

Tax

My view is, is it morally right to charge people for a room they may not use if you don't have a smaller house for them to move into?

Rough figures are 120,000 want to downsize but there're only 3,000 empty smaller homes.

No politics, just views and adult chat.

My view is..the poor are being made to pay for the rich messing up and it's wrong to charge someone for something they can't change.

[capmaster]

We have such stupid superordinate regulations here in Germany, too. It often causes local authorities having to pay higher benefits for people forced to move to a smaller but more expensive dwell. My assumption is that this regulation has been induced by large houseowner associations to keep the rents up high. They are still increasing and eat up most of a worker's income here nowadays.

 

Many people can't move here, too, due to appropriate dwells missing. So I think you are right that the poorer ones have to pay for something they obviously can't change.

[jdgm]

It is just mean. Compared to the money being thrown about at the top end - millions go to not-so-good causes (and private landlords) every month - it doesn't generate much income anyway. One person already committed suicide because of it.

[IanHenry]

It seems like the complete opposite of the Window tax England had during the 1600's, whereby you were taxed on how many windows you had. Windows were very expensive then, so the more windows you had, the more you paid!. This is why you see a lot of old building with bricked up windows.

Maybe the poor should consider bricking up there unused rooms (in their rented property of course!). Well look on the bright side, at least it will help pay for the bankers folly and ensure they will still get their bonuses.

 

Ian.

[pippy]

Yes. it's an unfair tax.

 

It will be hard to keep politics completely out of this one though, I fear.

The Secretary of State who brought in this new legislation is Iain Duncan Smith - famously Margaret Thatcher's preferred candidate for the top job in her party and one which he actually held between late 2001 to the end of 2003.

He's married to the daughter of an hereditary peer, lives in a £2 million Tudor period house which is in the grounds his father-in-laws ancestral estate and currently earns £134,565 ($217,968) per year - paid for by the taxpayer - not including any extra pocket-money he can get from the after-dinner-speech circuit.

Clearly he's the right man to look after those people who are in unfortunate circumstances, knowing so well the financial difficulties they face on a day-to-day basis. Yup.

 

But his party won the last election so who can we, in the UK, blame but ourselves?

 

P.

[Versatile]

Social housing has many inherent inequalities and long term bones of contention... :blink:

 

I believe what sparked Ian Duncan Smith's reflected public ire...were the true facts of families costing the UK taxpayer £100,000+ per annum in benefits...some of them even high profile extremists... :blink:

 

So a 'broad' strategy seemed in order at the time...time has told that there are more practical problems in it's implementation than could have been foreseen

 

Obviously the initial brief was to cease to provide subsidised housing with more bedrooms than needed...without sufficient research into whether alternative accommodation could be provided

 

The broad brush perception seems to be that the (loosely) Conservative government are fat-rich looking down their noses at the hoi polloi below

 

The alternative Socialist Labour unlikely-to-be's offer kindly largess without bothering about who will pay...they can always borrow more...

 

V

 

[IanHenry]

Yes. it's an unfair tax.

 

It will be hard to keep politics completely out of this one though, I fear.

The Secretary of State who brought in this new legislation is Iain Duncan Smith - famously Margaret Thatcher's preferred candidate for the top job in her party and one which he actually held between late 2001 to the end of 2003.

He's married to the daughter of an hereditary peer, lives in a £2 million Tudor period house which is in the grounds his father-in-laws ancestral estate and currently earns £134,565 ($217,968) per year - paid for by the taxpayer - not including any extra pocket-money he can get from the after-dinner-speech circuit.

Clearly he's the right man to look after those people who are in unfortunate circumstances, knowing so well the financial difficulties they face on a day-to-day basis. Yup.

 

But his party won the last election so who can we, in the UK, blame but ourselves?

 

P.

 

Didn't Iain Duncan Smith recently claim that he could live on £50 per week?

[pippy]

Didn't Iain Duncan Smith recently claim that he could live on £50 per week?

Yes.

http://www.telegraph...3-per-week.html

 

Of course it's easy to claim such a thing as long as you know you'll never actually have to do it.

 

FWIW my fare to get to work (if I could use public transport) would be £11 per day. If I was on £53 per week......well, I'm sure we can all do sums.

Yet Iain Duncan Smith could manage! Bloody magician, that man!

 

P.

[btoth76]

Didn't Iain Duncan Smith recently claim that he could live on £50 per week?

 

 

Hello Pippy!

 

Are these politicians are cloned somewhere?!? We had a same scandal here: one of our brains told the public that one can easily make a living on 46.000 Forints (£128) a month. Although, He never tried...

 

Cheers... Bence

[LarryUK]

The 'Workfare' scam is just as bad. You have to work for free and pay your own transport costs too. There are 'Poundland' stores that have been reported that only the manager is paid. All the staff are on 'Workfare'. Surely it's slave labour in all but name?

[LarryUK]

Come back Guy Fawkes. All is forgiven.

[retrosurfer1959]

don't really know what social housing is sorry here in the US at least on the west cost it's all about supply and demand no government housing really and the market sets the price on rentals. finally people are getting wise and realizing you don't need a 5 bedroom home for a family of three so smaller homes are starting to be more popular. I downsized dramatically a few years ago and love the smaller home but can't really add to your discussion.

[pippy]

The 'Workfare' scam is just as bad. You have to work for free and pay your own transport costs too. There are 'Poundland' stores that have been reported that only the manager is paid. All the staff are on 'Workfare'. Surely it's slave labour in all but name?

Google the words A4e; Emma Harrison; scandal. I'd post the link but it would get this thread closed-down tighter than a very tight thing.

 

By an unbelievable co-incidence, who should appear saying "there was no wrong-doing" but our old friend, Iain Duncan Smith! Who would have thought it? It's A Small World, Eh?

Well, no. It is, after all, DWP (again) and IDS is the Secretary of State for that department. So no; no real surprise.

 

P.

[IanHenry]

Google the words A4e; Emma Harrison; scandal. I'd post the link but it would get this thread closed-down tighter than a very tight thing.

 

By an unbelievable co-incidence, who should appear saying "there was no wrong-doing" but our old friend, Iain Duncan Smith! Who would have thought it? It's A Small World, Eh?

Well, no. It is, after all, DWP (again) and IDS is the Secretary of State for that department. So no; no real surprise.

 

P.

Well, it's not what you know, it's who you Know! Seriously, I know of people who can't afford to take a job, even if they could find one because the wages are so low, they wouldn't be able to pay their rent and feed their family's! Interestingly, there's an article in todays Independent saying that Rickets is making a comeback due to lack of nutrition. So you've got a choice here, starve to death or freeze to death, well at least that's democratic. Welcome to Dickensian Britain.

 

Ian.

[pippy]

...Welcome to Dickensian Britain.

Careful, Ian. We'd be heading off in Michael Gove territory if we went down that route.

 

Moot that you mention Dickens, though.

By another odd coincidence (or not) those of my friends' children who are roughly the same age as mine (9) are currently all studying 'Victorian Times' at school.

Last week my daughter's class were on stage after assembly performing a small play which included the famous 'Food! Glorious Food!' routine from the musical version of Oliver Twist.

Chloe was cast in the workhouse. Her best friends were all Street Urchins/Chimney Sweeps etc. except for one who was the stick-wielder in the aforementioned workhouse.

In class they had been learning all about the lives of these poor wretches; what they would be expected to do and how long they could hope to live/survive.

 

Is it too cynical of me to imagine they might just be preparing our offspring for the 'Life Which Is Yet To Come'?...

 

LOL!

 

I hope.

 

P.

[IanHenry]

Careful, Ian. We'd be heading off in Michael Gove territory if we went down that route.

 

Moot that you mention Dickens, though.

By another odd coincidence (or not) those of my friends' children who are roughly the same age as mine (9) are currently all studying 'Victorian Times' at school.

Last week my daughter's class were on stage after assembly performing a small play which included the famous 'Food! Glorious Food!' routine from the musical version of Oliver Twist.

Chloe was cast in the workhouse. Her best friends were all Street Urchins/Chimney Sweeps etc. except for one who was the stick-wielder in the aforementioned workhouse.

In class they had been learning all about the lives of these poor wretches; what they would be expected to do and how long they could hope to live/survive.

 

Is it too cynical of me to imagine they might just be preparing our offspring for the 'Life Which Is Yet To Come'?...

 

LOL!

 

I hope.

 

P.

 

Philip,

I've just escaped from Michael Gove Territory, having recently jumped ship and taken early retirement from teaching. I'd become totally disillusioned with what is going on in education at the moment. The powers that be have an expression that they like to use "Every Child Matters", this is a lie, it's every statistic that matters.

The whole system has become corrupt, Teachers are no longer allowed to tell the truth on school reports, one teacher that I worked with was called into the Head Teachers office and made to change a report. His mistake? He told the truth! Have you noticed the amount of parents who believe that there children are "above average"? As a rough off the cuff estimate I recon about 90% of school age children must be "above average"! Someone is not telling the truth.

 

Ian.

[deeman]

So how does this social housing work. Is it like the poorest 1-5% living in it?

 

I can see if you're getting subsidized housing and you're in a really large house you don't need i can understand the government not wanting to pay for the extra space. But i have a feeling i'm not understanding how the system works or who is recieving the benefits.

[BobF_]

I've heard of this, but I don't have enough direct knowledge to make any certain statements about it. I suspect that the situation can be made to appear however you want it to by choosing different perspectives from which to tell the story, and by carefully choosing which "facts" to include or exclude as you make whichever case you're trying to make.

 

It's too bad politics have been excluded from the discussion by the OP. Directly anyway. Like it or not, this is a political discussion that goes deeper than bedrooms and taxes.

 

It's really about social engineering via politics.

 

The only other thing I could offer to the discussion is a few anecdotal bits twice removed from subsidized housing in the US. But that would be OT ...

[Big Bill]

You guys in the UK need to keep your tax issue to yourselves, you're going to give Obama ideas.

[IanHenry]

You guys in the UK need to keep your tax issue to yourselves, you're going to give Obama ideas.

We could negotiate a swap if you'd like? I think Obama's to busy at the moment, after all, those Germans need some watching!

 

Check this out:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/nsa-revelations-us-ambassador-summoned-over-claims-angela-merkels-phone-was-tapped-as-eu-leaders-meet-in-brussels-8901065.html

 

If your going to stalk someone, I don't think I'd choose Ms Merkel.

[capmaster]

We could negotiate a swap if you'd like? I think Obama's to busy at the moment, after all, those Germans need some watching!

 

Check this out:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/nsa-revelations-us-ambassador-summoned-over-claims-angela-merkels-phone-was-tapped-as-eu-leaders-meet-in-brussels-8901065.html

 

If your going to stalk someone, I don't think I'd choose Ms Merkel.

Yes, it's top news today.

 

However, I think they already know whom they have to watch, and some of those might have called Angela Merkel, too. I don't think I would have erased her words out of the dialogues although she wasn't the very target of watching.

 

Think about Silvio Berlusconi. No matter whom he was talking to, there might have been some interesting details sometimes they should have known somewhat earlier.

[IanHenry]

You've got to give it to Silvio, he always provides a laugh for everyone, he's a bit of an (old) lad.

[milod]

I think the comment about social engineering is rather appropriate.

 

And it's also noteworthy that all of "our" countries have some similar games going on.

 

It's as I saw coming back in the late '60s and has more to do with rapidly expanding populations that then get the pols playing with regardless what their response might be according to more local history and traditions.

 

Frankly I think that "we" miss the point when we gather on two opposing perspectives on handling more people than we have resources. That's that expanding numbers of people at a time of increasing general world productivity means we will have increasing numbers of people who are not being productive. You can accept that and offer governmental food, clothing, shelter and entertainment, or you can try to expand the economy to have enough jobs for a high percentage and for the few unable to work, let institutions such as "the church" cover their welfare.

 

Or, you can do what we see today, muddle around between the two extremes trying to find a middle ground for the symptoms of the problem while nobody does much about the problem itself.

 

The Mansard roof is another tax evasion idea. Y'know, the two or three story houses where the top floor is desinged to carry shingles so it could be a "Roof" rather than a full level on a home since the roof and attic were not taxes. Any tax system will tax the poor as well regardless whether it might be "passive." Any move to improve the overall economy will improve the lot of "the poor."

 

Problem is, as Will Rogers once said some 80 years ago, we're now in a world where people drive to the poorhouse in their own automobiles.

 

m

[BobF_]

Problem is, as Will Rogers once said some 80 years ago, we're now in a world where people drive to the poorhouse in their own automobiles.

 

m

 

I don't remember Will, but I think I like him.

 

It used to be that people who took advantage of public help did so with no small amount of shame. Being able to provide for themselves was the goal rather than being able to do "better" than they can on public assistance.

 

Now days, public assistance is a viable career option.

 

Things are NOT right.

 

I already hear the cries about greed. A coupla things about that. First, the game is NOT a zero sum game. If I achieve a higher amount of wealth, that does NOT take away f4rom what is available for anybody else. Second, give some serious thought to the value of contributions. A common complaint is that it is wrong to replace an existing employee with someone else willing to work for less. If there are that many people willing to work for less, then you might have an over-inflated idea about the value of your contribution.

 

I could go on, but I'll be merciful instead rather than expose you all to my rantings.

[milod]

Will Rogers was one of the best ropers who ever took up the higher levels of cowboyology.

 

He also was on the stage, movies, radio... Born 1879, died 1935 in an airplane crash.

 

He'd open his night club act saying, "All I know is what I read in the papers," then he'd get laughs with his commentary on the day's news.

 

"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."

 

"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts... There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you."

 

"Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate; now what's going to happen to us with both a Senate and a House? ... Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for."

 

"Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators."

 

"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there."

 

Not all the quips are about politics.

 

"I never expected to see the day when girls would get sunburned in the places they do today."

 

m