housing benefit and social cleansing? what do you think?

[Tortington]

apps.facebook.com/theguardian/society/2011/oct/13/housing-benefit-legal-challenge-fails

But Cogito, as much as I agree with forcing landlords to reduce rents, it's a gamble to rely on that happening and, if effective, would not be immediate but take a while to embed. What happens in the meantime? I think it's unworkable.

I didn't say it was an ideal situation. Trust me I hate living like this. But I think that the answer is not in the HB but in the government investing in social housing a bit more. And I think that we need to move on from the entitlement mentality and sacristy a bit more. By no means am I suggesting the government stop all forms of aid but cuts need to be made and if HB has to be one, then so be it.

'When employers find they can't get staff any more they'll have to up the wages to attract them back (as already happens with London Weighting in higher-paid jobs) and landlords sitting with empty properties will have to reduce rents.'

Cogito, employers are not going to find they can't get staff, with hundreds applying for each vacancy. Also, a lot of the landlords who own empty properties are living abroad, and bought the houses for tax reasons. The government should not allow them to keep these properties empty - especially at a time of housing crisis.

And I agree that more council houses should be built.

• sacrifice. Sorry for the typo.

What happens in the meantime is that some people will end up relocating. However, for the reasons stated earlier, I don't think this is going to be some wholesale exodus. The Daily Mail etc. likes to print stories about giant families pulling down thousands in HB so they can live in Kensington or whatever, but the reality is far less dramatic.

As for the charge that some places could become like ghettos... London already is a series of ghettos. Rich ghettos rub shoulders with poor ones already. Moving from a rich area to a poorer one is often a question of a few streets... not even a tube stop.

"Cogito, employers are not going to find they can't get staff, with hundreds applying for each vacancy."

You can't argue that at the same time as saying everyone's going to have to move out. If someone can't afford to take the job because rent or transport costs are too high, they're not going to apply. And if hundreds are still applying for each vacancy despite the HB changes then they've not had such a dramatic effect as everyone seems to be predicting.

Essex is populated by commuters. Huge numbers travel each day to the Capital because they can't afford to live in London. You live where you can afford to.

By reducing HB subsidies maybe some properties in London will be freed up and the demand for these properties will either reduce or fall onto the open Market. Which can only be a good thing.

Cogito, I am surprised you believe that this cap will impact in such a minimal way.

'Moving a few streets away' will certainly not be the case in most of the inner London boroughs such as Camden, H&F, Islington, K&C, Wandsworth etc.

There are whole communities living here which will be priced out of their area completely.

It's the people who already have jobs, and want to live near them, who are going to have to leave if their housing costs are too high. The HB effect will take time to kick in. Obviously, as you say, no-one is going to apply for jobs in the future if they can't afford to get to work.

Yes, move all low-earners to Essex.

But it's not social cleansing. Oh no.

All HB has done is line the pockets of btl landlords and fuel the unsustainable house prices. Take hb away and landlords will have to expect realistic rents and if that doesn't achieve their desired yield they will have to put them on the open Market - a flood of properties will reduce the scarcity that is an issue in spiralling house prices. Problem solved.

Possibly- but, as I said to Cogito; what happens in the meantime?

Cogito - it's much easier as a young single person to live in a city centre kip and work for minimum wage for a few years. If you want to raise a family you'll have to go. I don't particularly like the idea of the city being solely populated by rich employers, and single minimum wage workers. Surely a mix is desirable. Your Let the Market Fix It solution won't result in a desirable mix.

In the meantime the renters themselves renegotiate the rents. It takes hell and high-water to evict a residential tenant.

Any landlord will see that the writing is othe wall and act accordingly to reduce the rent.

The biggest problem is when the rents stop covering the landlords mortgage on the property. It's straightforward for a bank to reposess a property and boot out the tenant. That is when the evictee becomes the problem of the council.

Essex has already seen "London overspill" after the war or "overswill" as my late great Aunt referred to them.

It was the result of substandard housing being pulled down if it survived the Luftwaffe. We need a mobile population, this is a small country. It's not the biggest deal in the world to live somewhere that you can afford.

It may make London more affordable for average families rather than oligarchs and people in receipt of HB.

It won't be singles or rich people. You've got enormous areas of London already that are cheaper to live in than others and which comply with the new HB rules just fine. The anomalies that the DM likes to report on... the big family on HB in the K&C mansion... are because there isn't enough social housing and councils end up putting residents in B&Bs or expensive alternatives. It's tough to build new homes in a place as crowded as London.

Ironically, the people who have just moved in next door to where I live in Home Counties had a small flat in London and decided they wanted more space and a garden now that they have 2 kids and another any minute. So they traded out. Many people do that all the time.

Not evryone who lives in London have moved there...there are many born and bred Londoners working and unemployed being told (here) and by the govt to leave. Leave the city where they were born,where their parents' and grandparents' were born. I cannot see how that is an acceptable solution.

Too many people do that all the time, Cogito.

Until this is addressed, London will continue to be, as alouise rightly points out, so polarised.

It seems as if we agree on the desired outcome, but disagree on the means by which it should be achieved.

I know many teachers and social workers- hardly low-earners, who live with their families in one bedroomed flats.

It's not that tough to build new homes in London; they are going up all the time. They are just not affordable.

Grumpy i totally agree. I am house hunting in manchester and this is exactly what has happened to our city centre. I used to live in a nice central flat but when i left my x and tried to find a place for dd and myself i was shocked how few properties accepted housing benefit. I am pretty much limited to areas of the city with high crime and unemployment which is not the life i want for my daughter. Anywhere in the city centre or south manchester is out of the question. Even though i am a working mother and can provide excellent references landlords will not even consider me as a tenant because they say HB is complicated and brings the wrong sort of tenant in. I love being tarred with that brush

Oh well, I think there are two main ways of looking at this. Either you see it as the government/Daily Mail? seem to: feckless HB claimants living in luxury accommodation let to them by greedy landlords milking the Social Security system - people (often from ethnic minorities) who are breeding like rabbits and bringing nice neighbourhoods into disrepute, lowering house prices and taking up places in local schools and hospitals, which then start going downhill too ... Or you see it as a social problem that has arisen because of buy-to-let landlords pushing up house prices, lack of council housing, too many empty properties, boom and bust economics, rising social inequality, etc etc.

Either way, it is a poicy brought in as much for ideological reasons as for any others, imo. It's just a huge disgrace (imo) and a shame and a pity that so many children and families are caught in the headlights.

Instead of this they should bring back rent control in the whole of the private rented sector.

quite, Margery. The housing 'market' is failing and has made both renting and buying unaffordable for ordinary families (Shelter's just published research on rentals).

Rent controls and assured tenancies with an ombudsman to settle disputes.