FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Universal Benefits
Universal Benefits
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I read in the paper this morning that the payment of universal benefits, that is child allowance and the state OA pension cost about £25b per year. If these benefits were means tested and if for instance child allowance was cut from those earning £50k or more and the OAP was removed from those with private pensions in excess of £30k per year the cost to the exchequer would be £12b. Would this be accetable as a contribution to the deficit? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
Indeed!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
Couldn't have put it better myself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
No as a high rate tax payer I would be a little peeved but mark my words this was a policy paper prepared by the Conservative think tank and its being considered
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy?
No as a high rate tax payer I would be a little peeved but mark my words this was a policy paper prepared by the Conservative think tank and its being considered "
If this is the case then all those who are being automatically put into a work place pension over the next few years might as well opt straight back out. What is the point in saving now only for the government to then say you are not eligible to receive an old age pension? You might as well have your money now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Is Uk PLC in debt ? The money we apparently owe was created out of thin air by the banks.so if the magic money we borrowed is illusory then the debt is also an illusion. I have no idea why peeps look to politicians to sort stuff out. They dont call the shots, big business does. westminster and the uk were sold off long ago.
Praps i should also point out that last year HMRC let vodaphone off an 8 billion tax bill. Yes thats right 8 billion. Vodaphone is just one of a long list of major corporations who are let off tax owed to HMRC. These arnt tax avoidance schemes, this is actual money they owe. Its your money so i hope you all agree that these corps should be allowed to get away with it.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Your right.
As one way to look at the uk isnt a shortage of jobs, but just over population. Unfortunately mainly from the poorest sector of society who then put pressure on services etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is Uk PLC in debt ? The money we apparently owe was created out of thin air by the banks.so if the magic money we borrowed is illusory then the debt is also an illusion. I have no idea why peeps look to politicians to sort stuff out. They dont call the shots, big business does. westminster and the uk were sold off long ago.
Praps i should also point out that last year HMRC let vodaphone off an 8 billion tax bill. Yes thats right 8 billion. Vodaphone is just one of a long list of major corporations who are let off tax owed to HMRC. These arnt tax avoidance schemes, this is actual money they owe. Its your money so i hope you all agree that these corps should be allowed to get away with it.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Money, it's a crime, Share it fairly
But don't take a slice of my pie!
We have you don't so tough luck. The rich want more and the poor can just suffer and go without this is Britian today and we should all hang our heads in shame.
The goverment has the audacity to say we need to cut this and cut that to save money, well heres one for them stop giving money away in " Foreign Aid" I for one don't give a "Flying F*** at a rolling doughnut" about other countries and their needs when we are being told that we are broke!!! Also get us the hell out of the EU one of the most Corrupt and money wasting Organisation you could think of!!!
Rant over I feel better for that, Im know off to check my stock value!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Praps i should also point out that last year HMRC let vodaphone off an 8 billion tax bill. Yes thats right 8 billion. Vodaphone is just one of a long list of major corporations who are let off tax owed to HMRC. These arnt tax avoidance schemes, this is actual money they owe. Its your money so i hope you all agree that these corps should be allowed to get away with it.
"
Praps you should get you figures straight. Vodafone reported operating profits of £11bn of which the taxable rate of 24% is applicable, making Vodafone's tax liability to the treasury £2.64bn (you don't pay tax on turnover, only profits). Ok, accepted that Vodafone didn't pay £2.64bn in tax to the treasury and that's mainly because of Vodafone's complex, but legal, tax arrangements on a global scale. The Rep of Ireland offer 12.5% corporation tax to attract businesses to relocate their accounting affairs to the Republic (Apple Europe operate out of Rep of Eire) and if Vodafone find more favourable rates elsewhere than in the UK they have a duty to their shareholders to utilise that. The British Govt are never going to order them to pack up their business and leave if they don't pay tax on money earned in the UK to the Treasury so the onus is on the Gvot to offer better tax incentives to large corporations to report their accounts here in the UK. It's better than the £0 we're getting now, isn't it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't think Mr Millionaire Cameron would agree with you about the EU budget because although he is in favour of making budget cuts here, he is wanting to increase the EU budget. "
Isn't he about to reject the EU's proposed £1trn budget?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't think Mr Millionaire Cameron would agree with you about the EU budget because although he is in favour of making budget cuts here, he is wanting to increase the EU budget.
Isn't he about to reject the EU's proposed £1trn budget? "
Financial Times 1st November article. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Praps i should also point out that last year HMRC let vodaphone off an 8 billion tax bill. Yes thats right 8 billion. Vodaphone is just one of a long list of major corporations who are let off tax owed to HMRC. These arnt tax avoidance schemes, this is actual money they owe. Its your money so i hope you all agree that these corps should be allowed to get away with it.
Praps you should get you figures straight. Vodafone reported operating profits of £11bn of which the taxable rate of 24% is applicable, making Vodafone's tax liability to the treasury £2.64bn (you don't pay tax on turnover, only profits). Ok, accepted that Vodafone didn't pay £2.64bn in tax to the treasury and that's mainly because of Vodafone's complex, but legal, tax arrangements on a global scale. The Rep of Ireland offer 12.5% corporation tax to attract businesses to relocate their accounting affairs to the Republic (Apple Europe operate out of Rep of Eire) and if Vodafone find more favourable rates elsewhere than in the UK they have a duty to their shareholders to utilise that. The British Govt are never going to order them to pack up their business and leave if they don't pay tax on money earned in the UK to the Treasury so the onus is on the Gvot to offer better tax incentives to large corporations to report their accounts here in the UK. It's better than the £0 we're getting now, isn't it?"
How about telling Vodaphone to pay what they should or pull out of the country completely and take your network with you? Do you think they will want to give up a huge market like the UK? The Government need to grow a pair. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
How about telling Vodaphone to pay what they should or pull out of the country completely and take your network with you? Do you think they will want to give up a huge market like the UK? The Government need to grow a pair."
And I'm sure the opposition (Labour or the Tories, whoever isn't in power at the time) will capitalise massively on why millions of people have ot find new mobile and internet deals elsewhere. The disruption would be hugely embarrassing to the govt and they'd lose votes because of it. Vodafone know this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
How about telling Vodaphone to pay what they should or pull out of the country completely and take your network with you? Do you think they will want to give up a huge market like the UK? The Government need to grow a pair.
And I'm sure the opposition (Labour or the Tories, whoever isn't in power at the time) will capitalise massively on why millions of people have ot find new mobile and internet deals elsewhere. The disruption would be hugely embarrassing to the govt and they'd lose votes because of it. Vodafone know this."
So what you are saying is “because a lot of people would have to find a new mobile and internet deals” we should let vodaphone off with their tax bill? Have you thought of going in to politics? You would make a fortune for Multinational companies with an attitude like that! As for me I would tell Vodaphone and Starbucks to pay up or ship out of Britain and never darken our doorstep again. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
How about telling Vodaphone to pay what they should or pull out of the country completely and take your network with you? Do you think they will want to give up a huge market like the UK? The Government need to grow a pair.
And I'm sure the opposition (Labour or the Tories, whoever isn't in power at the time) will capitalise massively on why millions of people have ot find new mobile and internet deals elsewhere. The disruption would be hugely embarrassing to the govt and they'd lose votes because of it. Vodafone know this.
So what you are saying is “because a lot of people would have to find a new mobile and internet deals” we should let vodaphone off with their tax bill? Have you thought of going in to politics? You would make a fortune for Multinational companies with an attitude like that! As for me I would tell Vodaphone and Starbucks to pay up or ship out of Britain and never darken our doorstep again."
Then you would cost your party the very next election. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I would rather buy a new phone than allow Vodaphone to continue in the same vein. Why are our taxes and NI contributions so high? Because WE are paying their share! And you want to carry on helping them? Not for me, I'm no mug. Look at the long game and not just your phone bill. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I would rather buy a new phone than allow Vodaphone to continue in the same vein. Why are our taxes and NI contributions so high? Because WE are paying their share! And you want to carry on helping them? Not for me, I'm no mug. Look at the long game and not just your phone bill."
Vodafone are not breaking any laws. Tax avoidance is not the same as tax evasion, so why should a company operating within the law be penalised for it when it's the system that is letting them do it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
I joined a private pension at 21, and also pay my NI. I am 47, and do not think for a second that I will be getting a State pension at retirement. anyone under 50, expecting an un-meanstested State pension is living in a dream-world |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I would rather buy a new phone than allow Vodaphone to continue in the same vein. Why are our taxes and NI contributions so high? Because WE are paying their share! And you want to carry on helping them? Not for me, I'm no mug. Look at the long game and not just your phone bill.
Vodafone are not breaking any laws. Tax avoidance is not the same as tax evasion, so why should a company operating within the law be penalised for it when it's the system that is letting them do it?"
That is tantamount to arguing the case of murder over manslaughter. Either way someone killed someone. Evasion and avoidance are synonyms, the only people that see any difference are lawyers and accountants. And they are hardly renowned for their moral fibre in this day and age. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I would rather buy a new phone than allow Vodaphone to continue in the same vein. Why are our taxes and NI contributions so high? Because WE are paying their share! And you want to carry on helping them? Not for me, I'm no mug. Look at the long game and not just your phone bill.
Vodafone are not breaking any laws. Tax avoidance is not the same as tax evasion, so why should a company operating within the law be penalised for it when it's the system that is letting them do it?
That is tantamount to arguing the case of murder over manslaughter. Either way someone killed someone. Evasion and avoidance are synonyms, the only people that see any difference are lawyers and accountants. And they are hardly renowned for their moral fibre in this day and age."
IF you had £1m and the UK govt said they were going to take 24% of all the interest you get on your £1m (let's say it earns 10%pa, so that's £100k and the govt snatches £24k of it), and then a bank in the Rep of Eire contacts you and offers you a deal that will only take £12.5k on the same interest and tax rates. You'd be a damned fool not to move your money where it will earn you the maximum interest whilst reducing your tax liability.
That is tax avoidance.
Tax evasion is not moving your money abroad but then lying to the UK treasury about how much you earned on it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If you are not prepared to pay the going tax rate, then you should not be operating in the country. End of. Why should Joe public foot the corporations bill? Because that is what we (and that includes you, I presume) are doing. If they payed what they SHOULD, then our taxes would come down or at least less services would be cut. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If you are not prepared to pay the going tax rate, then you should not be operating in the country. End of. Why should Joe public foot the corporations bill? Because that is what we (and that includes you, I presume) are doing. If they payed what they SHOULD, then our taxes would come down or at least less services would be cut."
You're completely missing the point. They ARE paying what they are legally required to. It's the tax system that needs to be overhauled.
For example, for companies who base themselves in other countries but operate in the UK they should pay a nice hefty licence fee to operate here.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So if we all decide to set ourselves up as companies and move our money to Eire, that's fine then? I didn't say they COULDN'T do it. I said they SHOULDN'T do it. A company sets up a UK subsiduary, then merely moves the money out. Yes, the tax loopholes need closing, and the money needs collecting retrospectively. 7 years at least, they seem happy enough to look at my tax payments going back that far, and I pay a damn site higher rate than Starbucks or Vodaphone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I read in the paper this morning that the payment of universal benefits, that is child allowance and the state OA pension cost about £25b per year. If these benefits were means tested and if for instance child allowance was cut from those earning £50k or more and the OAP was removed from those with private pensions in excess of £30k per year the cost to the exchequer would be £12b. Would this be accetable as a contribution to the deficit?"
You forgot to factor in the £21b it would cost to means test all of this! OK some savings could possibly be made.
I would think child benefit needs to be looked at... it originated when society was very different. but taking the 50k limit... that would require that you know what proportion of the 50K goes into the child's household so can't be done by a straight tax calculation with separated parents etc. you would be employing lots of people to work out what was in the child's household income which on such a small amount of money per child would soon swallow all savings t could make. Same as the £200 heating allowance, if it was means tested then it would cost considerably more not to pay everyone than it does to just work on age. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By * starr -Woman
over a year ago
Burton on Trent. |
i am currently unemployed (but looking for work) have just got a whole new load of medical issues, and im living on £142 PER FORTNIGHT.its ridiculous!! i get the same amount as younger people do who live at home who dont have to pay the househhold bills like i do.i am struggling to even pay my normal bills with out even having any luxuries.
i think money should be shared out more equally, or take some from the richest people like millionaires etc and give to the poor.some mums go without food to feed thier kids in this country, why is it being allowed to happen??
i suppose if and when i get a job, i wont be any better off either.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"i am currently unemployed (but looking for work) have just got a whole new load of medical issues, and im living on £142 PER FORTNIGHT.its ridiculous!! i get the same amount as younger people do who live at home who dont have to pay the househhold bills like i do.i am struggling to even pay my normal bills with out even having any luxuries.
i think money should be shared out more equally, or take some from the richest people like millionaires etc and give to the poor.some mums go without food to feed thier kids in this country, why is it being allowed to happen??
i suppose if and when i get a job, i wont be any better off either. "
Life is pretty unfair in general, there is so many different directions things could go on benefits but raising them is unlikely to happen. Under 25's living at home on benefits well I wouldn't say have it easy but there is less incentive sadly.
I think people who have paid in to the system in taxes should get a little more though as it is only fair, people who are sick should get help and the rest should be actively helped to get out of the benefit trap into work that pays more. It after all has to be worth it for everyone and help should be given so people can do this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By * starr -Woman
over a year ago
Burton on Trent. |
well i have a long standing back problem from when i was 16, i cant get disability for it, i have been treated for depression and now have discovered an underactive thyroid, almost aneamic and have liver problems (which is going to be assessed soon), and still, they say im capable of work.when i sleep for most of the day due to low iron levels, how could i hold down a job for goodness sake.and i cant stand for long periods either.
life does get me down most of the time but i do still try to smile. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Don't forget that these Companies might not be paying what you think is a fair corporatioon tax - they are contributing massively by generating VAT, personal taxation and national insurance.
Corporate taxation is a particularly unpleasant tax anyway - a tax that punishes a company for being successful. Corporation tax does need reviewing but not in the way most people on this thread would hope for. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
When I saw universal benefits as the title, I thought E.T and the rest of his clan were signing on 
If it wasn't for all these foreigners coming over and stealing our jobs and women we'd all be better off.
My Burt went to work at 5 o'clock every morning and didn't come home til gone 8 at night.
He wasn't a hard worker, he used to go to the pub after his shift and then go and shag that Myrtle Bigglesworth from the next village.
Mind you, I didn't bother me, I was having it away with the milkman for free powdered egg and satsuma.
Eeeeh! I tell you, you kids don't know you're born.
It was all different back then, I'm 93 y'know!
Yes powdered egg and satsumas.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"When I saw universal benefits as the title, I thought E.T and the rest of his clan were signing on
If it wasn't for all these foreigners coming over and stealing our jobs and women we'd all be better off.
My Burt went to work at 5 o'clock every morning and didn't come home til gone 8 at night.
He wasn't a hard worker, he used to go to the pub after his shift and then go and shag that Myrtle Bigglesworth from the next village.
Mind you, I didn't bother me, I was having it away with the milkman for free powdered egg and satsuma.
Eeeeh! I tell you, you kids don't know you're born.
It was all different back then, I'm 93 y'know!
Yes powdered egg and satsumas. "
Myrtle always was an old slapper!!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"When I saw universal benefits as the title, I thought E.T and the rest of his clan were signing on
If it wasn't for all these foreigners coming over and stealing our jobs and women we'd all be better off.
My Burt went to work at 5 o'clock every morning and didn't come home til gone 8 at night.
He wasn't a hard worker, he used to go to the pub after his shift and then go and shag that Myrtle Bigglesworth from the next village.
Mind you, I didn't bother me, I was having it away with the milkman for free powdered egg and satsuma.
Eeeeh! I tell you, you kids don't know you're born.
It was all different back then, I'm 93 y'know!
Yes powdered egg and satsumas.
Myrtle always was an old slapper!!! "
She's had enough cock to make a hand rail to go round the Isle of White. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
It looks like the delivery mechanism for Universal Credit has gone tits-up.
"The government is to scale back some of its plans to test a radical new reform to the welfare system.
Ministers planned to allow people to claim the new Universal Credit in four areas of north-west England from April.
But it has emerged that three of the pilots will not start until July."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21972026
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ucky_LadsCouple (MM)
over a year ago
Kidderminster+ surrounding areas. |
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (i.e. the high rate tax payers) get nothing out in the end. My wife and I have both paid N.I. since the day we started work, if the government don’t pay us a pension when we retire are they going to give us all contributions back? If you saved all your life and then the bank told you they were not giving it back at the end would you be happy? "
sounds like our NHS service when people who paid in all their lives cannot get op's for things hip replacements nor cancer cures but girl who wants bigger boobs jumps straigh to the top of the queue!,only in mad britain!. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"sounds like our NHS service when people who paid in all their lives cannot get op's for things hip replacements nor cancer cures but girl who wants bigger boobs jumps straigh to the top of the queue!,only in mad britain!. "
Whilst I'm no fan of elective cosmetic surgery, the boob job, the oncology patient and the hip replacement aren't actually in the same queue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It looks like the delivery mechanism for Universal Credit has gone tits-up.
"The government is to scale back some of its plans to test a radical new reform to the welfare system.
Ministers planned to allow people to claim the new Universal Credit in four areas of north-west England from April.
But it has emerged that three of the pilots will not start until July."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21972026
"
Better to trial it in one area and iron out any glitches than to roll out in many areas and have more to sort out later. I wonder if the NHS hit the ground running without any problems back in 1948. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"It looks like the delivery mechanism for Universal Credit has gone tits-up.
"The government is to scale back some of its plans to test a radical new reform to the welfare system.
Ministers planned to allow people to claim the new Universal Credit in four areas of north-west England from April.
But it has emerged that three of the pilots will not start until July."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21972026
Better to trial it in one area and iron out any glitches than to roll out in many areas and have more to sort out later. I wonder if the NHS hit the ground running without any problems back in 1948. "
It certainly didn't hit any computer problems and had the added advantage of being something most people actually wanted.
The game's up for IDS and this is just the first of many backward steps his 'flagship' policy will take before running aground on rocks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
The game's up for IDS and this is just the first of many backward steps his 'flagship' policy will take before running aground on rocks."
if that is what you really think.. i have a nigerian prince with money he want to put into your bank account.....
see.. the reforms are coming... the flat rate pension, universial credit and the rest... and you see labour isn't actually fighting these hard because they know something needs to be done, and the actual ideas are not the worst in the world...
means testing child benefit... there was a storm, now it just the way it is implimented that people argue about and that is fair, not the actual policy...
the actual theory behind universal credit isn't the worst in the world.. and isn't disputed by labour at all, it is just working out how to impliment it which is the issue...
the flat rate pension is coming.. and the reason why labour wont fight it when it goes thru parliament is that it simplifys the system.. and helps those at the bottom.... again, it is the way it is implimented that will be the issue.. not the actual policy itself.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"I think the four London pilot areas are going ahead next week..........
I don't think that's the case."
I have been keeping away from the news today. I thought it was the ones outside of London that were in question. I hope they don't go ahead as it's going to be mayhem with the Housing Benefit bedroom fine starting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"well i have a long standing back problem from when i was 16, i cant get disability for it, i have been treated for depression and now have discovered an underactive thyroid, almost aneamic and have liver problems (which is going to be assessed soon), and still, they say im capable of work.when i sleep for most of the day due to low iron levels, how could i hold down a job for goodness sake.and i cant stand for long periods either.
life does get me down most of the time but i do still try to smile. "
Join the club hun, MS, no thyroid, arthritis, made redundant 2yrs ago, the list goes on. No-one wants to employ me coz of the health issues and you have to declare disabilities by law. Job Centre insist on making me apply for jobs which are under 16hrs a week, wanting someone to spread those hrs over 4 or 5 days, minimum wage and 20 miles away from home, which all told would cost me more to travel to and from than I'd be getting paid but no matter how many times I talk to them, the jobs-worths say I MUST apply.
I worked for 27yrs paying into the system and now that I need to get a little help back it's not fair the way they wheedle their way out of paying.
I have a mortgage on top of the disability and the DWP pay £19 a week towards it and even that's capped at a 2yr time limit, but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
"
sounds like our NHS service when people who paid in all their lives cannot get op's for things hip replacements nor cancer cures but girl who wants bigger boobs jumps straigh to the top of the queue!,only in mad britain!. "
Theres a cure for cancer?
Gawd, they kept that quiet!!!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Would be a better idea to give child benefit for the first child half for the second and no more after that that would cut the bill(and possibly the population growth) significantly."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years? "
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No. Why should those who pay in the most (
sounds like our NHS service when people who paid in all their lives cannot get op's for things hip replacements nor cancer cures but girl who wants bigger boobs jumps straigh to the top of the queue!,only in mad britain!. "
What an imagination you have.....
There is only one thing mad about Britain, and that's some of the people who live here..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord."
Not sure what your point is here |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord."
Maybe not but the interest alone on my mortgage is almost £400 and the DWP is contributing less than £80, so guess where the remaining £300+ has to be found from ... yeah, you guessed it, my pocket, ie, my pathetic state benefits and that's to say nothing of the capital that the mortgage lender is expecting every month too. I'll bet the hypothetical teenage mum isn't panicking every day about whether the courts will grant repossession of her home to the bank and leave her homeless ... I am!!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord.
Not sure what your point is here"
Your post suggests the £500-600 a month is somehow part of the teenage Mum's income to spend on booze n fags.
It isn't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"Your post suggests the £500-600 a month is somehow part of the teenage Mum's income to spend on booze n fags.
It isn't."
If that's what you think I was suggesting then you couldn't be more wrong. Housing costs for both the hypothetical teenager and myself (as well as the rest of the people living in this country) are pretty high, but our teenager doesn't have to contribute anything at all, the rest of us do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord.
Maybe not but the interest alone on my mortgage is almost £400 and the DWP is contributing less than £80, so guess where the remaining £300+ has to be found from ... yeah, you guessed it, my pocket, ie, my pathetic state benefits and that's to say nothing of the capital that the mortgage lender is expecting every month too. I'll bet the hypothetical teenage mum isn't panicking every day about whether the courts will grant repossession of her home to the bank and leave her homeless ... I am!!!!"
So how much of your mortgage do you expect the DWP to pay.....and for how long?
All of it and for the full term of the loan? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"The problem with DWP mortgage payments is it would be totally abused if they were to pay the whole of the mortgage.
"
I'm not saying they should pay the capital, just the interest, as they told me when I was made redundant that they would, but it turns out that they don't, then they don't pay anything at all to the lender for over 18 months, causing arrears to build up and court cases to be set up
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord.
Not sure what your point is here"
For starters, she is a teenager! So comparing her to someone who has paid into the system for many years is hardly fair!!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord.
Maybe not but the interest alone on my mortgage is almost £400 and the DWP is contributing less than £80, so guess where the remaining £300+ has to be found from ... yeah, you guessed it, my pocket, ie, my pathetic state benefits and that's to say nothing of the capital that the mortgage lender is expecting every month too. I'll bet the hypothetical teenage mum isn't panicking every day about whether the courts will grant repossession of her home to the bank and leave her homeless ... I am!!!!"
I'm confused. My reading of DWP regs suggests mortage support runs to the full interest for two years. Have I misunderstood that?
I appreciate your point about worrying about the future but nobody should ever have believed home ownership was a 100% guaranteed route to happiness. There was (and is) always a risk and, if you come through this, the house will be yours, supported in part by the rest of us.
The teenage Mum's house will never belong to her.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"But the DWP will pay rent in full and for as long as the claimant is claiming
"
Yes, but she doesn't get to keep the money. It often ends up in the coffers of a modern day Rachman who's building a property portfolio at the tax payer's expense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her....."
This government and the benefits system basically tells young girls to go out, get pregnant, get given accommodation and that they will pay for everything. Then, when it comes to those of us who have worked for many years, experience relationship break-ups, get made redundant, have spent years trying to maintain homes, raise children, etc, they tell us to basically get stuffed.
As much as my posts in this thread prove that I disagree with this course of action, maybe we all should have got pregnant at 13 and got the state to pay for everything for us all our lives |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her.....
This government and the benefits system basically tells young girls to go out, get pregnant, get given accommodation and that they will pay for everything. Then, when it comes to those of us who have worked for many years, experience relationship break-ups, get made redundant, have spent years trying to maintain homes, raise children, etc, they tell us to basically get stuffed.
As much as my posts in this thread prove that I disagree with this course of action, maybe we all should have got pregnant at 13 and got the state to pay for everything for us all our lives"
But you are happy for people like me to contribute towards paying your mortgage indefinitely? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"But the DWP will pay rent in full and for as long as the claimant is claiming
Yes, but she doesn't get to keep the money. It often ends up in the coffers of a modern day Rachman who's building a property portfolio at the tax payer's expense."
You're missing the point, I know she's not actually getting it in her pocket but wherever the rent ends up, she's not had to pay a penny towards it, whereas anyone with a mortgage, still has to find the capital repayment, I totally agree with that part, the interest goes to the bank anyway, so not into my pocket, but those of us who've worked hard to get into a position where we are trying to provide for our families, still come off worst in the end coz we have to pay the majority of the interest depite DWP contributing a fraction. Maybe those in my position should sell our houses and move into rented accommodation and get the rent paid in full for us |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
They pay for roof over their heads and given just enough money to live on...
Jeez...What you want them to do?
Remove their children and throw them out on street??
Im not surprised single parent get the right hump with people like you....You cant band them all together! They are not ALL unemployed and living off benefits! Most of the ones I know have part time jobs at least..... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"........ but if I was a teenage, single mum, never worked a day in her life, in rented accommodation, they would be paying the full rent, sometimes as much as 5-600 a month, where's the justice for those of us who have paid into the system for many years?
But the teenage single Mum isn't actually getting to keep the £500-600 a month.
It goes to her landlord.
Not sure what your point is here
Your post suggests the £500-600 a month is somehow part of the teenage Mum's income to spend on booze n fags.
It isn't."
It wasn't my post, but the postee was pretty much saying that she paid her own rent, while a single mum would have hers paid. Nor was there any mention of how the said single mum spent her income. However, as the rental money is coming out of the public purse, ie my pocket, I do object to the relative ease that some seem to be given it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"But the DWP will pay rent in full and for as long as the claimant is claiming
Yes, but she doesn't get to keep the money. It often ends up in the coffers of a modern day Rachman who's building a property portfolio at the tax payer's expense.
You're missing the point, I know she's not actually getting it in her pocket but wherever the rent ends up, she's not had to pay a penny towards it, whereas anyone with a mortgage, still has to find the capital repayment, I totally agree with that part, the interest goes to the bank anyway, so not into my pocket, but those of us who've worked hard to get into a position where we are trying to provide for our families, still come off worst in the end coz we have to pay the majority of the interest depite DWP contributing a fraction. Maybe those in my position should sell our houses and move into rented accommodation and get the rent paid in full for us"
Perhaps you should sell your house then?
You are unable to maintain that lifestyle after all.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"But the DWP will pay rent in full and for as long as the claimant is claiming
But they won't own their home outright in the future will they?"
Neither will I unless I find another job where I can actually afford to pay off the capital loan.
And having been a full taxpaying citizen of this country, I just feel that those who have contributed for many years should be in a better position to get the help when they need it than those who walk out of school thinking it's their god-given right.
If I didn't have the disability or been made redundant, I would still be amongst the tax-paying majority of British citizens and believe me, that's where I would much rather be. My current position is definitely NOT through choice, but where my hypothetical teenager is, usually is by choice, and it's WRONG !!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They pay for roof over their heads and given just enough money to live on...
Jeez...What you want them to do?
Remove their children and throw them out on street??
Im not surprised single parent get the right hump with people like you....You cant band them all together! They are not ALL unemployed and living off benefits! Most of the ones I know have part time jobs at least....."
They do now. Purely down to Family credit. Its a gold-mine for part-timers with kids |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"......... Nor was there any mention of how the said single mum spent her income. However, as the rental money is coming out of the public purse, ie my pocket, I do object to the relative ease that some seem to be given it."
It ISN'T her income. Until now it hasn't even passed through her hands. It's been paid by DWP directly to her landlord. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
If you lose your home you will have the support of your local council, paid for by the taxpayer, of emergency housing and eventually council housing. They/we will help to house you because it is the right thing to do for society as a whole, who wants to see people homeless or living in slums as they do in other parts of the world where they haven't got the welfare system we have? It's for the good of society, not just the individual, that we help those in need. But as for helping you to one day own your own home...well no, that goes too far. If you lose your job and can't afford to pay your mortgage then you have to sell your house because you are no longer living within your means. I know that sounds harsh, but it's the brutal reality for many people these days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
You going to have a go at everyone that claims working tax credit also?
You complain about teenage single mother and now you complain if she gets a job she gets child tax credit?
Be grateful you dont need the benefits system to help you....and hope you never do... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"They pay for roof over their heads and given just enough money to live on...
Jeez...What you want them to do?
Remove their children and throw them out on street??
Im not surprised single parent get the right hump with people like you....You cant band them all together! They are not ALL unemployed and living off benefits! Most of the ones I know have part time jobs at least....."
If you read the thread properly you will see that I have already said that I personally am an unemployed, disabled, single parent with a mortgage to pay, so I don't get any more benefits in my hand than the hypothetical teenager, but I AM expected to find a very large proportion of the interest on my mortgage (not even taking into consideration the capital)out of my meagre benefits, interest alone could be considered the equivalent of 'renting' the property if I never repay the capital, but because it's 'mortgage' and not 'rent' DWP can get away with paying a fraction of it. THAT is my point, to quote you ...
DWP PAY for the roof over the heads of the teenager ...
but those of us who've worked and contributed for years are lucky if the DWP pays to keep a few of the tiles over our heads, never mind the whole roof |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
According to DWP website there's "no limit to how long you can get SMI (support for mortgage interest) if you’re getting:
Income Support
income-related Employment and Support Allowance
Pension Credit
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"......... Nor was there any mention of how the said single mum spent her income. However, as the rental money is coming out of the public purse, ie my pocket, I do object to the relative ease that some seem to be given it.
It ISN'T her income. Until now it hasn't even passed through her hands. It's been paid by DWP directly to her landlord."
Again, you need to read & digest before posting. I never said the rent was 'her income'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ussypussWoman
over a year ago
South Birmingham waiting for the bf to come back after crimbo |
"You going to have a go at everyone that claims working tax credit also?
You complain about teenage single mother and now you complain if she gets a job she gets child tax credit?
Be grateful you dont need the benefits system to help you....and hope you never do..."
I'm not complaining about tax credits at all and I DO need the benefits.
As for another poster who said about helping me to own my own home, surely as I've previously said, paying the interest only on a mortgage is fundamentally the same as paying rent, but renters get a far larger proportion of their rent paid than those who are getting minimal contributions to their mortgage interest. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
I did read it properly....
The focus was on teenager..
You said it yourself...."Teenage girls"
You cant compare the problems you are having with your mortgage to a young girl on her own with a child having to live in private accommodation...
If you had been talking about a woman your own age, not worked a day in her life, then I would probably be agreeing with you.....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
"You going to have a go at everyone that claims working tax credit also?
You complain about teenage single mother and now you complain if she gets a job she gets child tax credit?
Be grateful you dont need the benefits system to help you....and hope you never do...
I'm not complaining about tax credits at all and I DO need the benefits.
As for another poster who said about helping me to own my own home, surely as I've previously said, paying the interest only on a mortgage is fundamentally the same as paying rent, but renters get a far larger proportion of their rent paid than those who are getting minimal contributions to their mortgage interest."
That post wasnt to you...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
".......... surely as I've previously said, paying the interest only on a mortgage is fundamentally the same as paying rent,.........."
Not at all.
Mortgage interest support benefits you.
Housing Benefit benefits the landlord. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her.....
This government and the benefits system basically tells young girls to go out, get pregnant, get given accommodation and that they will pay for everything. Then, when it comes to those of us who have worked for many years, experience relationship break-ups, get made redundant, have spent years trying to maintain homes, raise children, etc, they tell us to basically get stuffed.
As much as my posts in this thread prove that I disagree with this course of action, maybe we all should have got pregnant at 13 and got the state to pay for everything for us all our lives"
I don't know about your council but my council do not give you a house just because you get pregnant, you have to wait on the list like everyone else, my friends daughter had 2 kids and still lives at home with her mum because the council will not re home her, getting pregnant does not get you to the top of the list anymore |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her.....
This government and the benefits system basically tells young girls to go out, get pregnant, get given accommodation and that they will pay for everything. Then, when it comes to those of us who have worked for many years, experience relationship break-ups, get made redundant, have spent years trying to maintain homes, raise children, etc, they tell us to basically get stuffed.
As much as my posts in this thread prove that I disagree with this course of action, maybe we all should have got pregnant at 13 and got the state to pay for everything for us all our lives
I don't know about your council but my council do not give you a house just because you get pregnant, you have to wait on the list like everyone else, my friends daughter had 2 kids and still lives at home with her mum because the council will not re home her, getting pregnant does not get you to the top of the list anymore "
Nope it sure don't.... you don't even get a house you get a 2 bed high rise flat.... you can be on the list for a while and councils now do management bids for those whos only bids on certain types of properties.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"....., getting pregnant does not get you to the top of the list anymore "
I do't think it ever did. Getting pregnant got you lots of points and, at a time of less demand and greater availability, that often ensured a quick offer.
It's not like that any more. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What sort of message would it send out to the people who have a full time job and a part time job to supplement their income so they don't lose their homes?
Because I employ a young girl who does exactly that, she works 36 hours for me and a further four nights a week in a bar to make sure she keeps her home after her man left her.....
This government and the benefits system basically tells young girls to go out, get pregnant, get given accommodation and that they will pay for everything. Then, when it comes to those of us who have worked for many years, experience relationship break-ups, get made redundant, have spent years trying to maintain homes, raise children, etc, they tell us to basically get stuffed.
As much as my posts in this thread prove that I disagree with this course of action, maybe we all should have got pregnant at 13 and got the state to pay for everything for us all our lives
I don't know about your council but my council do not give you a house just because you get pregnant, you have to wait on the list like everyone else, my friends daughter had 2 kids and still lives at home with her mum because the council will not re home her, getting pregnant does not get you to the top of the list anymore
Nope it sure don't.... you don't even get a house you get a 2 bed high rise flat.... you can be on the list for a while and councils now do management bids for those whos only bids on certain types of properties.. "
when I split from my ex I left our home with my 3 kids and the council didn't want to know, they didn't help me at all, I had to stay with a friend till I sorted out a new home for me and my kids, people who think the council just give out homes to people with kids are very wrong, I could have slept on the streets with my children for all my council cared, that's not me saying it was their job to help me or they should have done im just saying they dont |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *riendly foeWoman
over a year ago
In a crisp poke on the A814 |
"
If you read the thread properly you will see that I have already said that I personally am an unemployed, disabled, single parent with a mortgage to pay, so I don't get any more benefits in my hand than the hypothetical teenager, but I AM expected to find a very large proportion of the interest on my mortgage (not even taking into consideration the capital)out of my meagre benefits, interest alone could be considered the equivalent of 'renting' the property if I never repay the capital, but because it's 'mortgage' and not 'rent' DWP can get away with paying a fraction of it. THAT is my point, to quote you ...
DWP PAY for the roof over the heads of the teenager ...
but those of us who've worked and contributed for years are lucky if the DWP pays to keep a few of the tiles over our heads, never mind the whole roof"
So why not sell your house, move into a council one and get the DWP to pay your rent?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
If you read the thread properly you will see that I have already said that I personally am an unemployed, disabled, single parent with a mortgage to pay, so I don't get any more benefits in my hand than the hypothetical teenager, but I AM expected to find a very large proportion of the interest on my mortgage (not even taking into consideration the capital)out of my meagre benefits, interest alone could be considered the equivalent of 'renting' the property if I never repay the capital, but because it's 'mortgage' and not 'rent' DWP can get away with paying a fraction of it. THAT is my point, to quote you ...
DWP PAY for the roof over the heads of the teenager ...
but those of us who've worked and contributed for years are lucky if the DWP pays to keep a few of the tiles over our heads, never mind the whole roof
So why not sell your house, move into a council one and get the DWP to pay your rent?
"
the difference is they pay rent, you have a mortgage so in effect your asking them to buy your house for you, they wont buy houses for people they will pay rent |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".......... surely as I've previously said, paying the interest only on a mortgage is fundamentally the same as paying rent,..........
Not at all.
Mortgage interest support benefits you.
Housing Benefit benefits the landlord."
Rubbish! They are quite similar, in that they allow the occupants to live with no accomodation costs. Following your own argument, the MI support goes straight to the bank. The owner benefits no more than the tenant does through rent. I have a couple of properties, so am technically a landlord, but do not see housing benefit as benefitting me. I generally get lower than market value off councils, and would rather rent to those working, as they tend to take better care of the properties |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
