AIBU about Tax Credits cuts,

[Weathergames]

Commons back Osborne plan for tax credit cuts
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34260902

I don't claim anymore because I now earn enough to support myself - because I could work and progress my career as well as my life while being a single parent.

AIBU to think this is a total travesty and so many single parents are going to have their life's devastated by this - and what about people in domestic abuse situations who will now be more unable to leave?

Maybe I some benefits scrounger - but the tax credits enabled me to be a good parent and role model to my kids - without their feckless father affecting that .... AIBU?!

so, don't you see the missing piece of information? How do poor people on HB live in south kensington? The cap will kick in. So, they somehow must make the shortfall. How?

Obviously from there none HB income.i expect a lot of food bank usage a fair few days with out electric that sort of thing.

Cases of in work sanctioning under Universal Credit.

www.scottishhousingnews.com/5776/blog-universal-credit-has-landed/

HelenaDove I read one line of the article and it broke my heart I had to stop reading. I feel so sorry for anybody affected. This is why I am trying desperately hard to get some little savings together as a working single parent before it hits me too. :(

Osborne has been doing good work in China with a lot of Northern Businessmen to try to get back our Northern Powerhouse. My ancestors moved to the NE for work just as I moved to London for work. If we could create more real jobs in outside the London that would be a good start. The economy is the key to all this and ensuring those without much money have more. We are almost back to historic levels of "full employment" now and wages are rising a bit.

No, the key is reducing the price of housing so that people aren't spending the majority of what they do earn paying rent/mortgage and not needing extra benefits on top of what they earn to survive. The elephant in the room is the cost of housing. It pushes up the price of everything else.

Obviously from there none HB income.i expect a lot of food bank usage a fair few days with out electric that sort of thing.

so, if the benefit is the same in salisbury and south kensington due to the cap, you are saying that given a certain amount of income, people are discovering that it's expensive to live in zone 1, and that for the same income they can live in salisbury (or milton keynes) and pay less in rent and have more money for food and electricity?

This thought process is familiar to me... oh, maybe everyone I have ever spoken to has done this?

I can't see how the cap isn't working then. You lower the amount of benefit available in expensive areas (saving money). the benefit is then not enough to live in those expensive areas, so people move to cheaper areas.

So why do you need to be getting all cross about HB being paid to people in Kensington?

Because its a jealous fantasy in her head. The scroungers are all living in beautiful houses in while others scrape around working hard and can't live there.

In reality, there probably are an extremely small number ( I'd reckon less than 100) people living long term on benefits in the richest borough in the country, maybe even less than that. In reality as well, the people on benefits who live there are likely to frictionally unemployed, so for a breif period between jobs or long term sick. Those that get HB will get some of it paid not all. The whole move to MK and commute thing is just mumsnet parlance: " its not fair that I can't live there".

The whole "welfare dependency" thing is a fantasy when you find the data produced by the Rowntree foundation and even the governments own data.

Deluded posters who buy the propaganda and have the green eyed monster on their shoulder because of the nice houses and flat screen tvs that all have need to have a bit of a reality check.

It doesn't matter how small the number poeple should not be subsidised to live in expensive areas. And lots of people in London are subsidised by Housing Benefit . While other people are locked out of the housing there by virtue of not qualifying for housing benefit.

I don't know anyone locked out of housing here because they don't qualify for HB. The type of properties that are available with the boundaries placed on HB would be available to most people who are on the London average wage.

Its those on low paid wages that are getting the support. You may think that London's street cleaners, shop workers, nursery nurses etc should be commiuting from MK ( which could be fine if we were talking about just working centrally), but I disagree, I'd prefer them to be able to get home to their families in less than 2 hours.

HB isn't causing rents to rise, buy to leave, the fact that every new property built is "luxury" etc means that the availability of reasonable housing is limited. Build more of it and HB will come down.

I'm more surprised that people are shocked that this is happening.

The Tory's have always disliked the poor.
And the sick.
And disabled.
And foreigners.
And women.
And children that aren't in the traditional family setup.

Twas ever thus.

Because its a jealous fantasy in her head. The scroungers are all living in beautiful houses in while others scrape around working hard and can't live there.

Or, I could be motivated by a sense of fairness. that most other people don't get to play and win this lottery, and for some reason that is not an issue for you. that other people would also like access to the same deal and can't, seems to not be an issue.

By the way, I never called them scroungers. That's you painting me that way. As with your other ridiculous caricatures.

The whole "welfare dependency" thing is a fantasy when you find the data produced by the Rowntree foundation and even the governments own data.

what data? are you saying people don't live off HB for years? it's entirely baked into the system.

I don't know anyone locked out of housing here because they don't qualify for HB.

you must not know many people than. Almost everyone I know lives in substandard housing. Most are professionals and don't qualify for HB, so must share with random people to live centrally.

You may think that London's street cleaners, shop workers, nursery nurses etc should be commiuting from MK ( which could be fine if we were talking about just working centrally), but I disagree, I'd prefer them to be able to get home to their families in less than 2 hours.

do you feel that way about the many people not on HB who have to commute from MK as we post on this thread? If so, what's your plan to help these people access the same deal?

HB isn't causing rents to rise,

then you are at odds with most studies on the topic. In fact, it's quite obvious why it will drive rents up: it creates more competition for central London properties.

there probably are an extremely small number ( I'd reckon less than 100) people living long term on benefits in the richest borough in the country, maybe even less than that

I'll bet central London has significantly more than that on HB. That's just you making numbers up.

The whole move to MK and commute thing is just mumsnet parlance: " its not fair that I can't live there".

I live in central London and own here. So that does not apply to me. So it's not I can't live there, it's lots of people I know that can't. And I certainly do deem it unfair that some people get this lottery and others don't.

I live in central and own here too Red, in factm (shhh) I own two properties and rent one out, oh and yes, I would pay higher tax if required to, currently though my flat is rented out at a reasonable rate, below the market value to someone who needs it, tbf we could get a lot more but I'm quite happy helping someone out in a litte way like that.

No one I know who gets housing benefit just chose to come live here and said: "OK, I'll move to South Ken and get the government to pay for it." In most cases they were already in the area, living and working, circumstances changed and therefore they get HB.

I'm sorry I realise that you didn't call them scroungers, I'll recind that, but you do go on about people claiming benefits in Kensington. Oh btw the link to the Rowntree report (I'm sure you have heard of them) is here
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/14/worklessness-culture-myth-exposed
www.jrf.org.uk/report/are-cultures-worklessness-passed-down-generations

I'm not sure I do caricature people, I see lots of people complaining on here that someone else gets something that they don't and its not fair, what other ones do I do? I see an awful lot of right wing bilge here, a lot of Edwardian values, very an Inspector Calls.

I know lots and lots of people red, in fact I'm well known for my sociability and the fact that I have a large and varied social circle, everyone from MPs, bankers and QCs to people who have been down on their luck for a while, and just nice folk with very ordinary jobs (I have one of those myself being a teachers).

I would also imagine that there are VERY few people able to claim HB in Kensington because of the average rent for a 1 bed flat there is nearly £2,000 a month which would not be covered by HB for most.

I'm aghast that you consider sharing property "sub standard" virtually all the younger people I know share, virtually all of them though ( being young professionals) could if they wanted to live somewhere on their own, that was maybe a bit nicer, but this would make them curtail their lifestyles, no more nights out, or drinks down the local etc etc.

Those on HB that i know tend not to have the lifestyle that the sharing young professionals have.

Sorry if I offended you btw

I have to ask again, how do you expect people on minimum or low wage to commute from Milton Keynes? It's £5812 for an annual travelcard, the cheapest way to travel, although that only includes Milton Keynes Central to Euston, nothing either side. Minimum wage after tax and NI is £12,199 for 40 hours pw. Especting someone to work that long for just over £6k a year is bad enough - it's unlikely to cover Milton Keynes rent, let alone anything else - but if they couldn't get their employer to fund the annual travelcard and they had to get a daily travelcard, at least for a while, which is £45, they would literally be taking home £1.92 a day after tax, NI and travel costs.

And that's assuming they don't need to pay for childcare.

It is just not going to happen. With the best will in the world, people would just not be able to afford that.

I also wonder where, exactly, you think the money would go to if the housing associations sold off their central London properties (South Ken, I know, is almost all Housing Association). They are private companies (third sector). They would keep the money. This is not money that would somehow go into the national pot. It would be private companies making some more money in the short-term.

Local councils would make more money, helping with their squeezed budgets, but then they'd also lose the revenue stream from their properties and would presumably have to share some of their property sale profits with the councils that they send their poor people to, who will then need to pay to house them. It's not a magic source of everlasting money at all.

Could I afford £1K rent. No. So why should a person on benefit get that amount to rent a flat. I just think it's not on.

There you go Viv, its "i don't get it so why should anyone else." If thats the crux of your argument its pretty poor.

I'll recind that, but you do go on about people claiming benefits in Kensington. Oh btw the link to the Rowntree report (I'm sure you have heard of them) is here

that link is all about the myth that there three workless generations, so I am not sure why you are posting it here (or at me). I never claimed that.

But I take issue with one of the claims in the report: "There was no evidence of 'a culture of worklessness' – values, attitudes and behaviours discouraging employment and encouraging welfare dependency – in the families." if this thread is any indication, the whole country is dependent on some forms of welfare (HB in particular). And make no mistake, I don't claim that it is a benefit for the feckless. I know that most people collecting HB are in work. My point is that it isn't an effective way to battle the most pressing problem in (this part) of the country: housing cost. And it disproportionately benefits the few.

I'm aghast that you consider sharing property "sub standard" virtually all the younger people I know share, virtually all of them though ( being young professionals) could if they wanted to live somewhere on their own, that was maybe a bit nicer, but this would make them curtail their lifestyles, no more nights out, or drinks down the local etc etc.

I find it odd to hear this. What I am seeing is that people seem to have one standard for social housing (people suggesting those in social housing should have to share residences, or commute from MK get completely jumped on), when people in the private rental sector do this all the time. So, why don't we have people in social housing share if others are expected to do this?

I think you need to think about the intangible benefits of HB as well as those that are tangible. The people are able to live and work reasonably close to home, this means their childcare costs are lower, they see more of their children etc etc. Young people are close to their social networks and family support, all the examples of moving people out of their home areas foricbly in things like housing projects show that there is often massive social breakdown because all these things that formerly existed are gone.

It does us some good, there are issues, but they are not solved by removing it or getting jealous that someone else has it.

Tax BTL more, regulare rents, bar no UK residents from buying more than 1 property ( or just at all I think), regulate firms that landbank, reduce planning red tape. Its strange that with housing the only real interventions we have are subsidies for both renters and owners, we should be combining a few more in order to correct this massive example of market failure. But again the reason for it is the vested interests of those in power.

But nobody expects people in private rentals to commute from Milton Keynes on minimum wage! And TBH if the people in social housing are on a good wage, good enough to cover commuting costs of nearly £6k, then there are pretty good odds they'll move out and buy (in a place like Milton Keynes anyway).

Actually, a friend of mine does commute from Northampton, paying £6k a year for travel, and only earning £25k, and I think he's insane (I know other people who commute that far but their pay's a lot better). At least he doesn't have childcare costs and does both live and work near the stations, but it's a very strange decision.

But long that is virtually why the Tories won the election - that we all saw people who don't work as hard as we do being given things that some of us can only dream of - rights to live in Central London, rights to live near mother, rights to a whole flat rather than having to live with parents or flat share. IN a sense this was one of the main issues which won the election - the people spoke.

Also I had to buy in zone 5 and endure the commute into London like most normal workers but benefits claimants don't. Outer London is not a utter hell hole. We can endure it and long commutes and yes it is expensive but a lot of people cycle these days which saves a lot of money.

If you commute by tube from where I live it is about £200 a month (about £46 a week) . You can cycle it although it's 60 minutes so you need to be fairly fit. Not cheap but less than the additional cost of renting closer in.

Sorry but the answer is not to give people more housing benefits so they can afford to live. The answer is to lower the price of housing. Housing benefits is an artificial prop and a subsidy to the rich which distorts the market and puts a floor under rents. All the billions spent on housing landlord benefit should be slowly diverted into building genuinely affordable housing. A win win for the economy and for society.

The tory voters have to stop using statements like "the people spoke" they didn't you got 27% of the turn out vote.

The problem is Grazia is that you say things like the above and then the economic data does just not match up to it. There are very few people on benefits long term, less than 2% of those claiming JSA which is around 50,000 people. I will decline to include people on incapacity.

If we are discussing HB, if you are so poorly paid maybe you would be eligible for it. If we are discussing CT than only the poorly paid are eligible. Like I said previously people don't just pop up in central London and choose a flat and then get the Govt to pay for it, it just doesn't work like that.

I know very few people who, where there are two incomes in a household would have to share for anything other than lifestyle choices (unless they are entitled to benefits), most that I do know share because actually it allows them to do things like, have holidays, enjoy London life etc etc. As previously stated the HB people tend not to be doing any of those things, just plodding on and keeping a roof over their heads, cause in most cases HB doesn't cover all the rent.

All the things you discuss, the benefit cuts will not actually sort out any of the problems, you realise that? You will not be better off for it? Stop being jealous of what other people have, or if you are be jealous of the wealthy cause they are the ones who are getting the biggest benefits from society and contributing the least.

25% of Kensington residents live in social housing - about 30,000 people.

But social housing doesn't mean you get hb

but it does mean you get subsidised housing