To ask what's the beef with benefits?

[mytartanscarf]

Do people think they are too little? That they should be more?

There's always a lot of upset on here about them - about how wrong the government are and how awful life is on benefits. I've never been on benefits so obviously can't judge. But what are the solutions?

I suppose I am asking what should the government do?

[53Dragon]

I used to go out with someone who's parents lived in a housing association house. (that's the new name for a council house). NO - it's not. Housing Associations are non profit-making businesses where the operating profit is ploughed back into the business. The rents are often slightly higher than Council homes and the tenants have slightly different rights. There's even an organisation called ARCH - the Association of Retained Council Housing for the few councils in England that haven't sold their housing stock to a new housing association.

[BreakingDad77]

Commercial rents don't work the same as private rents, the market is very strange. lots of the landlords involved outright own property (as a lot of high street retail spaces in market towns are what were family businesses) there is no money lost, (it's not like loans or mortgages are still being paid)

Also don'y you have rates to contend with as well? Cant the leaseholder also hold rents by expecting the council to reduce its rates?

There needs to be more social housing, (corrupt) local authorities need to stand up to developers and stop the social housing % being cut/removed from new developments, but that is another thread.

[writtenguarantee]

Commercial rents don't work the same as private rents, the market is very strange. lots of the landlords involved outright own property (as a lot of high street retail spaces in market towns are what were family businesses) there is no money lost, (it's not like loans or mortgages are still being paid)

I know commercial rent is different.

rent not being paid is money lost. You said the battle has been going on "for years". something is off. even at minimal rent that's a ton of money down the toilet.

[notauniquename]

but at the end of the day she shouldn't be able to pay for things like that, loans or no loans, fair enough have a tv, fair enough have an xbox, but all 3 kids don't need one each.

I used to go out with someone who's parents lived in a housing association house. (that's the new name for a council house).
Essentially, they couldn't afford private rent, and so have a subsidised lower rent house provided for by the government.

(as it happens, they ex's parents both worked).

but in applying for and living in a housing association house they were "on benefits"

My ex, and siblings each managed a TV in their own room, as well as a games console.

You do understand the difference between being able to save up to get something that costs £100 (such as a TV) and being able to find a spare £100 or £300 every month for rent?

Not everything is as crystal clear as it may seem from the outside.
Not everyone who receives benefits gets everything provided for them
I suppose it's probably just as important to say that not everyone on benefits wants everything to be provided for them.

[RufusTheReindeer]

Oh god ghost

Good point well made!!!

[ghostspirit]

rufus she could have known all the facts... all the teenagers i know. know everything and they are never ever wrong..

[RufusTheReindeer]

kitty

I didn't call you a liar, I said you weren't in possession of all the facts...which at 14 I don't believe you were

[YetAnotherHelenMumsnet]

Evening all,
Well, now seems like as good a time as any to remind everyone of our Talk Guidelines?

[ghostspirit]

kitty why would it matter that she had a gastric band?

[Dawndonnaagain]

Because Kitty you're believing everything the Daily Mail tells you to believe. Whether there was a need or not for those people to have a television each, it's not for you to judge. Her parenting is different from that of others, unless she is harming the children, it's not for you to judge. So she wanted to keep up with the jones', or just wanted her children to not look like their Mum was on benefits. So what. Trust me, she was in debt up to her eyeballs and is probably still paying to this day.

[ilovesooty]

Read properly before you get so angry and work on your comprehension skills.

[kittykat7210]

how am i being childlike? i am being accused of lying left right and center, and i'm saying it how it is, she did speak to me about her gastric band, my god she made the whole world aware of the bloody thing. maybe she did take out loans, but at the end of the day she shouldn't be able to pay for things like that, loans or no loans, fair enough have a tv, fair enough have an xbox, but all 3 kids don't need one each.

the only reason i got angry was the cancer comment. it is not something that you joke about.

[ghostspirit]

why are people so bothered about what others get... oh they get benefits. they have a flat screen tv. sob sob. so bloody what

[Dawndonnaagain]

Kitty we are adults. You are being childlike. You were fourteen when you went out with this chap. I don't discuss my finances with fourteen year olds, nor my illnesses. I daresay his mother didn't either.

[ghostspirit]

something needs to be done about rents. my rent is 250 a week. council can house 2 familys for that.

[HelenaDove]

Saw this article about cancer survivors in the i newspaper today.

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/cancer-survivors-can-cause-unmanageable-crisis-for-nhs-9959106.html?origin=internalSearch

[notauniquename]

something doesn't make sense about this explanation. if units are empty, landlords should reduce their price,
You'd think.
but they hold out in the hope of getting the higher rents.
Lowering the rent on one "retail unit" sets a market expectation.

Commercial rents don't work the same as private rents, the market is very strange. lots of the landlords involved outright own property (as a lot of high street retail spaces in market towns are what were family businesses) there is no money lost, (it's not like loans or mortgages are still being paid)

As it is the town has plenty of empty retail units, so there is clearly not a supply issue, according to council minutes plenty of people have applied for permission to open xyz shops, (granted) but pull out when they find that the landlords are greedy.

[writtenguarantee]

Why not both? Worked until the mid-80s, when Thatcher decided to tamper.

did it really work? Was the country (or London) facing the same housing shortage?

[writtenguarantee]

when you think about it, if rental prices could be controlled or reduced, then less people would struggle, less people would be in debt, less people would need housing benefits, the benefits cost could therefore be better distributed.

if you have a hotly contested good, it's scarcity will drive up prices. putting price controls on will just reduce the incentive to make more of the good. lots of places have tried this with disastrous effects. in the long term it can make the problem much worse.

council meetings (minutes published online) show that the reason for this is that rent is too high, and that private landlords won't bring down rents,

something doesn't make sense about this explanation. if units are empty, landlords should reduce their price, otherwise every month they are losing money. over a couple of years, that's a lot of money. it's possible, however, that your high street gets so little traffic that rent might really need to be rock bottom in order to survive and such low rent may not even cover the landlords' expenses. it could be that it's just not a good place to do business. suburban stores might be sucking all the business away.

[ArsenicFaceCream]

kitty you don't sound very analytical.