to find this government's treament of middle- income earners offensive but in no way surprising

[LuluJakey1]

Anyone with an income over £30,000 as a couple will hae to pay full market rental value on social housing. (£40,000 in London) BBC described these people as 'big earners'

I don't disagree with the principal but I find offensive the constant hammering of low-middle income earners.

The wealth of the rich is increasing at a faster rate than ever. Why are they not contributing more of that wealth?

I earn between £40-50,000 and pay 40% income tax - it is ridiculous. 45,000 is not wealthy. It is not poor but surely I sould be paying less tax than someone on £95,000

We rent privately and have an income of under 25k to support 4 dc on.

I feel if we are on 40k we would be high earners. As that's a top salary for lots of companies.

Couples I'm not sure about that bit and 40k take the tax away is not really 40k it's more like 35k but it's still enough to afford rent if we manage then I'm sure others could but it's hard and it's pretty close to falling apart with no safety net but I don't think social housing should be available on a 30-40k salary.

I always thought social housing was for the destitute a step up from homelessness for awhile until you were on your feet. I'm not sure how social housing works but 30-40k imho is a good wage.

Two people earning 15k are £250 per month better than one person earning 30k, it's true.

With a total income of 2215 p/m though, it's not exactly dining at the ritz level. In the SE, that income would be breadline level for a family - let's say a 1 child one who aren't budgeting masterminds. Around half - at least - would disappear in rent for a modest family home at 'market rates'. But hey, let's call it 800 and assume they'll make do with a 1.5 bed shithole.

That leaves 1400 for everything else.

Run a car, circa £200 gone all in amortized over car's life.

Gas/leccy/council tax/water - not less than 300.

Food - let's say they are reasonably decent shoppers, and call it 250 p/m. Less than a tenner a day for the 3 of them.

We're down to 600 p/m left already.That needs to cover...

Clothes, cleaning, toiletries, some form of entertainment, child care etc. Hell even the occasional camping weekend.

All this before saving for a pension (best of luck with the tiny amount left), life insurance, dentistry etc.

Not to mention actual savings for emergencies, or god forbid, a deposit on a house (which would never be affordable anyway in the SE).

30k. The stuff of dreams are made off.

I am saying the threshold should be £60/65000 for starting to pay 40% tax. The threshold has barely changed in many years but salaries and cost of living have which means mant more people now cross this threshold of 42000 but are not wealthy the way someone on 95,000 is.

I just see the government hitting middle income earners and the poor and not the wealthy. The really wealthy should be seen to do their bit towards reducing the deficit. The government just make life easier for them and harder for everyone else.

We are a society and bear some responsibility for each other and for improving the lves of the most vulnerable. Health, education and social care should always be properly funded. The Tories are the main cause of the social housing crisis- will we ever be rid of Thatcher's legacy!

I'm surprised by the way the seem to be going about it, it makes no sense to disincentivise earning more.

Maybe they should put everyone's social/council housing rent up and then apply a discount to those that need it instead. The effect would be pretty much the same, but it's less blatant than telling some people that they deserve to be penalised for doing well.

To the posters who say that the extra rent raised will help with council housing that's wrong - it's going to go straight to the chancellor.

Social housing (provided by Councils) historically was always for all levels of earners. Ideally you'd like a good mixture of incomes in an estate otherwise social housing will become a ghetto for low earners and the unemployed which is not good for society overall.

And before anyone jumps on me, I live in an ex-HA house on a social housing estates dating from the 1930s. I have social tenants on either side, one a young family with no working adults, the other sly of the earth types who brought their three children up in the house, one son still lives with them, grandkids regularly visits, they are both still work and may well be hit by this policy.