To think that the welfare state is too generous if people in council flats have way more stuff than those on middle income can afford (no really lets have a discussion)

[splodge2001]

Maybe it's where I live (central london) maybe it's me (hmm, I don't think so) and It's definitely something that's been ruminating around my head for a while. An argument I've tried to unpick but I always come to the same conclusion.

I'm sure I'm going to be lynched but I'm keen to get other people's perspective on this....Here we go...

Where I live private housing is expensive and intermingled with social housing. It's hard to tell the difference between the social housing and the private dwellings. Certainly on the open market they fetch very similar prices. I'm feeling grumpy because we (DH and I) pay a lot of tax which goes to the people down the road in social housing, of course we should pay tax to support those on low earnings BUT, it does start to grate when though people in subsidised housing seem to have much bigger disposable incomes. eg. everyone I know who lives in the council flats near us can afford a car, we cannot. They can afford several holidays per year, we cannot

Isn't the welfare state just a bit too generous to enable those on low incomes to afford more than those on higher incomes? Surely the point of welfare isn't to subsidise cars or 42inch TVs.

I'm sure I'll be told to move out of London if I want more but this doesn't address the issue that I'm raising. Why should I subsidise people living in central london when I cant afford to live here myself.

Analogy moment....

I have 5k and would like to buy a car, instead I'm forced to give up my 5k to the government, who instead gives it to someone else so that they can buy a car. Boo hoo!!!

Go on let the stoning begin!!!!

But you are wrong splodge because as I already said, the people who have the new cars and foreign holidays are not the people who are solely claiming benefits because that isn't possible.

The people who have all of these things that you want and can't afford are not just claiming benefits.

Splodge, how on earth could you police the "no social housing for those earning more than £45k rule"?
Because I could imagine that people who are on that figure now would pretty much be pointed towards private renting. Those who have managed to get good jobs/incomes since getting into social housing, well, what do you do? Chuck them out onto the street?
I agree that rents from social housing should be aligned to income, those that earn more should pay more (as Reality says, this could then fund the building of more social housing, if they can find anywhere to build them).

Always- have you applied for this?

"no it not mrsmorgan-its that i can do no more than exist and im paying for others to have more. thats what pisses me off"

Hang on, so it pisses you off that you can "do no more than exist", and you are paying for us to have what exactly??? If you are struggling as much as you say then you are in the same boat as people on benefits, but at least you feel able to claim moral superiority.

BoF - sadly the bathroom issue is looking to be more than just a "heating" issue - BF's DH (builder) reckons it could well be a very VERY big job (potentially including someone sitting in the attic space above the bathroom spraying water at the roof to see if there's a crack in the tiles.........and we have a wood panneled ceiling on the bathroom so if it comes to that (that's presuming the actual wall work - possibly involving several thousands of ££'s of work) doesn't stop the problem.

It's 100yr old house with an extension (the bathroom) built at some point in the 60's or 70's (we think?). The ground leve lon the other side of the bathroom wall is about 3/4ft higher than ground level our side.

It's all looking like it's going to be a very very big job that the WarmFront grant won't even touch the sides of.

Oh well - one day we will get it sorted, and replace the ancient ineffecient GCH, and perhaps even one day do my covetted loft conversion

LilyBolero the whole idea of uni loans being paid after a graduate has a job is meant to mean its fair all round. If you work hard, you get the job, you join the richest you are so angry about.
Does it always work this way...maybe not, but one way to ensure it does is to make sure your kids get the good grades and head the top list. If they don't how is uni going to help them anyway?

My friends sister and her DP live in a council house with their 2 kids entirely on benefits-they don't work because...and I quote...they would have less money if they both worked! No they aren't rich and I don't envy them but it does make me angry that my hard working DH gets taxed 40% whilst they rock up to a store and whip out their credit card!

I don't support the 'at least they have to pay back high interest' group. If you can't afford it get a job or don't buy it! Plus part of the banking disaster has been caused by this casual attitude of lending money to those who can't pay it back.

I do however think that council housing is essential in helping those who genuinely require support. It can happen to anyone and I know some really hardworking people in council houses, but thats what it should be-support, there should be a limit. Think council house and on benefits and just council house are 2 very different things.

I agree with the OP. I also think living in London is quite different to living in other parts of the UK. When I was single, living in London, had a good, well paid job at the time, the only thing I could afford was a grotty - and i mean minging - 1 bedroom flat, couldn't swing a proverbial cat, in the absolute arse end of London.

And yet, I knew some people (XH's family ) who had plush new build council maisonettes in Crouch End, drove BMWs; this was before the days of wide screen TVs but they've probably got one now. They afforded it by working for cash in hand and lying to the benefits agency. There's no other way. The people that I know that have genuinely been on benefits and have no other income live very frugally.

I also used to go out with a guy who was a engineer FFS, earning £££ who had a council flat (somehow), bought it under right to buy for about a tenner and then immediately resold it for even more ££££.

I also think the whole concept of social housing has changed. When I was growing up, there were a lot of kids who lived in council houses, their parents were working, not on benefits but perhaps they didn't earn a fortune. Now, council housing stock is so depleted that only the very poor (i.e non working) can really hope to qualify for one. Which is a shame, really.

Warm front did my roof, Riven. I am going to see if they will do the cavity wall insulation too.

Carry on dancing - just a few points

".and I quote...they would have less money if they both worked!".

Unlikely depending on the age of their children, but not totally unheard of. It can be very difficult for someone that is merely existing to then have to take a drop in earning, often even the "pride" of working isn't enough to combat the fear of income dropping.

"If you can't afford it get a job or don't buy it!"

Nice idea in principle - but sometimes needs must and you need to buy something.

"they would have less money if they both worked"

Actually this is a problem with job seekers, you don't have to earn much to be taken off of it. As long as you do more than 16 hours a week you are taken off benefits, even if it is a temp job. So if you temped for a whole week, you'd then have to reapply for JSA, which takes time.

It's an issue the government needs to address.

I was on JSA a while back (couple of years, while still iving with parents) and I was lucky that I found a well paid job. There is nothing more depressing than queueing up at the jobcentre. There are people there who will obviously never want a job, or at least nothing legit. Noone on JSA/income support without any extra (undisclosed) income earns enough to live to a half decent level.

£1200 in benefits a month+money from the business .

LeQueen, surely a vast portion of that £1200 would be maintenance from an ex-partner?

That amount could be right if it includes housing benefit ?? But if you just mean tax credits and similar then that sounds like alot and she might want to check she isn't being overpaid.

we get just over £1550 a calendar month (although it's mostly paid every 2/4 weeks) - and that includes the mortgage interest relief and council tax benefit which we don't actually "get" to spend - ie it goes direct to the mortgage provider and council. That's "full" benefits, for 2 adults and 3 children.

Sounds nice, unfortunately debt from business gone bust and a split, and unemployment eats up 65% of the remainder, with the other 35% going on food and "everyday" bills.

I was only marginally "better off" when I was a single parent (my LHA allowance was higher so that bumped it up - CTC and CB were the same as now).

How on earth was she getting £1200 a calendar month while working as well??? (cost I want that job

Quick comparison

Minimum wage (based on a 16 hour week over the age of 22)
weekly = £92.80

Job Seekers Allowance (based on beihng over 25)
weekly = £64.30

Bearing in mind that if you come off of JSA you also have to pay tax and NI contributions, you also lose access to free prescriptions etc.
So, I'm not sure how much they take in tax and NI, but I'm sure it cuts quite deeply inot that extra £30

Always, I completely agree, my idea is indeed idealistic but not completely impossible. When times are hard an essential purchase on credit may be essential but a very small percentage of items count as 'essential'. Technology and catalogue purchases certainly aren't!

I also understand the psychological and social implications of the 'fear' you refer to. However where do we draw the line, if it starts to sound like an excuse then thats probably what it is. I kid you not, the job centre advised them they will be better off.

On a similar note, my friend who is pregnant has enquired about the benefits her and her partner can apply for and they too were ADVISED they would qualify for more if her OH left his part time job!!

Hmm it might be right then. MOre people are now entitled to help with rent because child benefit is no longer counted as income when making a claim for housing benefit or council tax benefit.

It really, REALLY irks me when I see the ads on telly about "Its not if we catch you, its WHEN we catch you" for those single Mums doing a few hours cleaning to suplement their income support.

I'd love to see an advert aimed at fucking MPS and their poxy second homes when they live less than 15 miles from Westminster. Or the ludicrously wealthy that skip happily through another tax loophole and cost the tax payer MILLIONS!!! Why dont the government shut the loopholes? Oooh...could it be cos they are merrily dancing through the same loopholes?

Not a poor mother of 4 whose partner has buggered off with a younger model, whilst she is left to earn an extra £20 a week scrubbing some wealthy buggers house.

And as for the OP - you CANT afford plasmas or new cars when on benefits. Its impossible. Please read how much you actually get if you are on benefits and then work it out logically. You sound very bitter... Can I suggest you vent to your MP about the vile single parents that dare to earn an extra few bob. But make sure you ask him how much he claimed in expenses and what for....