BobF_ Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Here's a goal every country should aim for - a true measure of compassion for sure! http://tinyurl.com/l6l4d9q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartsPvt Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 ..I thought bedroom tax was something one paid in divorce.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pin Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 In terms of Right and Left I am 30 light years to the right of Genghis Khan so it is not difficult to imagine where I stand on the non-existent "bedroom tax". The idea of calling it a "tax" when it isn't one is just something the Left do to orchestrate social outrage. If you are resident in social housing and your family are occupying more rooms than you need for your family's size then you should either pay a supplement for the unused room space or move to something smaller and let a family more "in need" move in to that space. It is as simple as that and it is fair. There is a massive shortage of social housing in the UK (and ALL shades of Government have failed to address this issue since the middle 1980s) which will take years to address if and when the UK can afford it and currently it cannot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 If you are resident in social housing and your family are occupying more rooms than you need for your family's size then you should either pay a supplement for the unused room space or move to something smaller and let a family more "in need" move in to that space. It is as simple as that... Apparently it's not that simple as that; Rough figures are 120,000 want to downsize but there're only 3,000 empty smaller homes. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marvar Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Let me tell you how it will be, There’s one for you, nineteen for me, ‘Cause I’m the Taxman, Yeah, I’m the Taxman. Should five per cent appear too small, Be thankful I don’t take it all. ‘Cause I’m the Taxman, Yeah, I’m the Taxman. (If you drive a car ), I’ll tax the street, (If you try to sit ), I’ll tax your seat, (If you get too cold ), I’ll tax the heat, (If you take a walk ), I’ll tax your feet. Taxman. ‘Cause I’m the Taxman, Yeah, I’m the Taxman. Don’t ask me what I want it for (Haha! Mister Wilson!) If you don’t want to pay some more (Haha! Mister Heath!), ‘Cause I’m the Taxman, Yeah, I’m the Taxman. Now my advice for those who die, (Taxman!) Declare the pennies on your eyes, (Taxman!) ‘Cause I’m the Taxman, Yeah, I’m the Taxman. And you’re working for no-one but me, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobF_ Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Housing cost ... yeah, housing is expensive for everybody. What about f-in Bacon?! Have you seen the price of Bacon lately?!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHenry Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 Housing cost ... yeah, housing is expensive for everybody. What about f-in Bacon?! Have you seen the price of Bacon lately?!! Yes, but that's easily cured. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pin Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Apparently it's not that simple as that; P. No, I appreciate what you say about that. It is a function of the social housing fiasco which has persisted for years in the UK and which started of course with the Thatcher sell off of Council Housing. To this day, I find myself in an uncomfortable situation about that sell off because a part of me supported it but another part acknowledges that it represented a massive diminishment of the social housing stock which has never recovered. It is true that no Government since has addressed the issue in the way needed to meet the social housing requirement and because of immigration that situation is worse now than it has ever been (even if the Thatcher sell off had never happened). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryUK Posted October 27, 2013 Author Share Posted October 27, 2013 If you are resident in social housing and your family are occupying more rooms than you need for your family's size then you should either pay a supplement for the unused room space or move to something smaller and let a family more "in need" move in to that space. It is as simple as that and it is fair. If it's fair. Why do you have to pay it if your child goes to university? If you have two children under ten they have to share? If you are divorced, why does one of the parents have to pay when they split the care of the children? You shouldn't have to pay if there isn't a smaller home available. It's a tax on the poor. Why don't they tax empty rooms for the rich? Like MP's and millionaires that have just two people living in a 50 bed mansion? I've never been bothered by our leaders as much as I am now. I really believe it's being done too make an underclass that is cheap labour for the rich. America is going the same way too. No one should be cold or hungry in this world now. It's all down to corporations and greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobF_ Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 If it's fair. Why do you have to pay it if your child goes to university? If you have two children under ten they have to share? If you are divorced, why does one of the parents have to pay when they split the care of the children? You shouldn't have to pay if there isn't a smaller home available. It's a tax on the poor. Why don't they tax empty rooms for the rich? Like MP's and millionaires that have just two people living in a 50 bed mansion? I've never been bothered by our leaders as much as I am now. I really believe it's being done too make an underclass that is cheap labour for the rich. America is going the same way too. No one should be cold or hungry in this world now. It's all down to corporations and greed. No government will ever successfully legislate "fairness" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pin Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 I really believe it's being done too make an underclass that is cheap labour for the rich. America is going the same way too. No one should be cold or hungry in this world now. It's all down to corporations and greed. I could answer all your points but most of them I already answered so it is probably best to agree to differ. As for the two points above: I don't think there is anything new about the first as it is in essence what Marx believed. If you believe Marxism is the answer to the world's problems then that is fine by me but evidence suggests that it isn't. My own belief is that however attractive it might seem (when I was young it seemed attractive to me) it breeds more inefficiency, more corruption and stifles innovation and social progress. As to the second there are many reasons why people in the world go cold and hungry and, yes I would agree that global selfish corporatism is one of them and the world has yet to discover an effective answer to it. But another just as important is the disgusting corruption that persists in many areas of the world where to so-called leaders siphon off huge sums (including charitable donations) to their Swiss bank accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 I think we're getting into a difficulty here in ways "political" because we'll always find ourselves as an entire "body politic" with differing visions of how a community, small neolithic tribe or large modern nation-state, can match its moral and ethical beliefs through various "political solutions." Personally I figure the morality that all should have a roof and food - even medical care - is almost certainly held in common, but only up to a point. It's a matter of very different beliefs of how best to achieve an indefinite utopian vision. Is it the role of "government" to provide anything at all beyond "coordinated infrastructure for commerce" and national defense against threats of both external politics and natural disaster? Come to think of it, if medical care, housing, food and "entertainment" are cultural imperatives, where is it written that government is the only institution to provide it? Is that simply our assumption since the Romans provided housing, bread and circuses to stave off potential revolutions even as government itself grew and with it, corruption both public and private? "We" as a species in our governance have ebb and flow of emphasis on morality division of "wealth." It's easier, IMHO, in times of plenty. It's when various factors, often of our own causation, bring "famine" do we find significant "political division" that then often is couched in terms of ethics. "We" in "Western liberal societies," have long fought as cultures against "bad" things ranging from child labor to slavery in law or practice, etc., and for "good" things from worker safety to transportation, sanitation and the advancement of education and science. One should note that government was not the leader in almost any of that social change. Government responded to majority opinion. Then again, government responds in as many cases that may be dead wrong in retrospect. Immoral - even though they were "successful." Kinda an interesting dilemma, eh? We're fighting over a shrinking resource as opposed to fighting to increase the resource. What will get us more per capital share of the economic "pie?" We can grow the pie or we can cut the numbers of pie consumers - that is, our populations in general. It appears at this point that the preference of our culture is to fight for a piece of the shrinking resource, and to ignore long-term solution that is more difficult to promote in large and diverse populations. Gotta do what the voters want, eh? Yeah, it looks more like a pack of dogs battling over a bone than an idealistic modern culture. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quapman Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Bedroom Tax /bedroom taks/ noun The cost of the gift to relocate myself from the doghouse to the bedroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.