If it's so fair and just, why have they had to introduce a list of exemptions and completely undermine their justification for a 'one-size-fits-all universal benefit'?
Bedroom tax
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
If it's so fair and just, why have they had to introduce a list of exemptions and completely undermine their justification for a 'one-size-fits-all universal benefit'?
It's unfair, there's not enough 1 bed properties (for example) so people will obviously accept a 2 bed (high turnover in my area) or bigger rather than waiting ages for the 'correct' property for their needs. Blame clearly falls to a certain previous torie government for allowing the supply of houses to be sold off without building more/enough to balance it out.
I know people that work in that area (Housing Officers etc.) and they all call it 'bedroom tax'. Wouldn't exactly consider them ignorant people.
I know people that work in that area (Housing Officers etc.) and they all call it 'bedroom tax'. Wouldn't exactly consider them ignorant people.
Last edited:
Not everyone on benefits are lazy scum. I am on a low payed job and therefore claim h.b.I will have to shell out £12,a week even though, I have two young girls and a partner in a three bedroom house. How does that make me want to work? .I should just get my bird up the shoot ,stop working at my crap job and suck even more money off the tax payer! I also know a couple of people whom are on benefits and let me say they do not lead the life that them Tories or gutter press have us belive!
An alternative argument could have been maybe you should have tried a bit harder at school, college, uni, or in finding a decent job so you aren't stuck in a low paid one. You not achieving these things probably does make you lazier than those who did, at least on average.
Of course thats a bit of a stupid argument because there aren't enough good jobs to go round and following that logic creates a race to the bottom, but superficially you still get the worlds smallest violin.
Indeed, and despite the government's demonisation of those on benefits, it turns out this week that welfare spending on the unemployed accounts for only 2.5% of the bill. The rest is spent on people on low wages (essentially taxpayers subsidising employers so they don't have to pay the living wage) and pensioners.
I've been pointing this out for a long time. Nobody listens.
Still not a tax... and while its hitting some poor people who have surplus rooms its aimed at helping other poor people who require those rooms. There is a long waiting list out there - anyone winging about this 'tax' needs to get a sense of perspective, stop moaning and GTFO.... you're only liable for it if you're fortunate enough to be currently getting state funding for more housing than you require.
+10000000000000
/thread
it just appears that all the OCUKers have fallen for the tory propaganda, time to pay a living wage, like ive been saying for years
Where did you read that?
I've been looking for it. I remember reading it but have not been able to find it again.
Just for my ten peneth the whole "Austerity" measures being used to justify quite nasty policies is wearing a bit thin.
You're as bad as the daily mail as far as stats are concerned... 2.5% might well be the amount spent on JSA... its certainly not the total amount of welfare spending on the unemployed...
It was on Sunday Politics last weekend (may have been BBC South only).
Thanks
You're correct 2.5% is JSA. That doesn't much change the overall picture, however. Benefits to the unemployed do not make up a big portion of the welfare budget. The majority goes to pensioners; after that there is a big chunk of in-work benefits (including the majority of child benefit) and then there's money for the disabled (both in work and out) and money for maternity benefits, etc.
It changes the overall picture quite a bit... Yes obviously pensioners are the largest recipients but there isn't much you can do to change that (aside from introducing euthanasia). The other large chunks of the budget are for child benefits and housing benefits... Only 1/5 housing benefits claimants are in work... it takes up 20% of the budget if we're including pensions or 30% if we're excluding pensions.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,432
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Problem with living wage is it will just push everything up.
Paying more isn't the solution to a situation where supply is the issue. I still see the number one problem by some considerable way the lack of housing in this country, forget the affordable tag its simply not enough housing being built for some decades now.
Its the same fundamental failure to understand that the last labour government had, "lets top people up with benefits so they can afford more" ... "oh everythings gone up, housing madly why could that be?"
Paying more isn't the solution to a situation where supply is the issue. I still see the number one problem by some considerable way the lack of housing in this country, forget the affordable tag its simply not enough housing being built for some decades now.
Its the same fundamental failure to understand that the last labour government had, "lets top people up with benefits so they can afford more" ... "oh everythings gone up, housing madly why could that be?"
How many of them are pensioners? How many of them are disabled? How many of them are in work but on low hours?
Housing benefit does not only go to the unemployed, in fact JSA claimants make up just one in eight claimants. Although, it's arguable whether that equates exactly to "unemployed" (see fullfact.org), it's very much the case that housing benefit does not principally go to the unemployed.
I didn't say it did... I merely pointed out that only 1/5 claimants are in work...
someone can point out that only 2.5% of benefits are spent on the unemployed... when in reality they mean 2.5% is spent on JSA if we're including pensions in the total figure
Right, and as I said they would be wrong. The real figure is higher; but it's still a small proportion of the benefits budget; probably less than 10%. Tory ministers like to lob around the £200 billion figure without explaining that actually, the biggest chunk of that goes to people in pensions, followed by people in work and the unemployed probably only receive roughly a tenth of it.
Polling figures indicate that the UK population typically think that two-thirds of the benefits budget goes on the unemployed; but this is grossly inaccurate.