If you don't scrap the Bedroom Tax Mr Cameron - a Labour government will

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, but there seems to be an assumption that poor people only live in social housing. They don't - as someone pointed out there aren't enough to go around, so there are many poor people who don't get the same sympathy as social housing tenants.

I think the bedroom tax is partly an attempt to make things more equitable for everyone so that council tenants are not seen to be getting more privileges than anyone else.

...it's not a matte pr of sympathy,mots a matter of a severe shortage in council housing stock.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


...it's not a matte pr of sympathy,mots a matter of a severe shortage in council housing stock.

Of course it's about sympathy. How else are they going to get the Government to scrap the "bedroom tax"? Popular demand, that's how.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Of course it's about sympathy. How else are they going to get the Government to scrap the "bedroom tax"? Popular demand, that's how.

So the want and need to scrap a tax that unfairly penalises and targets poor people is just all about sympathy?..

You have a terrible view of vulnerable people.

labour revival wrote:Wouldn't it be nice if those news organisations like the BBC chose not to use the spin language of the Labour party.

It might allow people to debate this topic with less venom. The govt has said it is reducing benefit commensurate with the number of persons living in a property no one is being taxed well unless you are referring to the tax payers who pay the benefit.

Those with special disability requiring wet rooms etc could and should be exempted. People like the child killer Baby Ps mum who has asked for extra room and is complaining her allowance isn't enough should swivel.

The left argue the Labour party will reverse this I don think they should it is a sensible readjustment not an attack on the poor. To suggest that those on benefits should get better properties than the tax payers who provide those benefits insults the workers.

labour revival wrote:Wouldn't it be nice if those news organisations like the BBC chose not to use the spin language of the Labour party.

It might allow people to debate this topic with less venom. The govt has said it is reducing benefit commensurate with the number of persons living in a property no one is being taxed well unless you are referring to the tax payers who pay the benefit.

Those with special disability requiring wet rooms etc could and should be exempted. People like the child killer Baby Ps mum who has asked for extra room and is complaining her allowance isn't enough should swivel.

The left argue the Labour party will reverse this I don think they should it is a sensible readjustment not an attack on the poor. To suggest that those on benefits should get better properties than the tax payers who provide those benefits insults the workers.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Of course it's about sympathy. How else are they going to get the Government to scrap the "bedroom tax"? Popular demand, that's how.

So the want and need to scrap a tax that unfairly penalises and targets poor people is just all about sympathy?..

You have a terrible view of vulnerable people.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:



So the want and need to scrap a tax that unfairly penalises and targets poor people is just all about sympathy?..

You have a terrible view of vulnerable people.

Are these the people you think shouldn't get full time jobs because they can work part time and get tax credits instead?

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Are these the people you think shouldn't get full time jobs because they can work part time and get tax credits instead?

Oh yes, the tax credits that subsidise businesses so they can get people to work full time for the minimum wage, that is so low, they still get tax credits, because even the government recognise minimum wage is not enough to live on.   Take them away and businesses would have to pay out more money.

And the government relies on part time jobs and zero hours contracts to distort the employment figures and make it look as if we are doing ok.

Sassy wrote:Please point me to the post, as it's not on this page.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Oh yes, the tax credits that subsidise businesses so they can get people to work full time for the minimum wage, that is so low, they still get tax credits, because even the government recognise minimum wage is not enough to live on.   Take them away and businesses would have to pay out more money.

And the government relies on part time jobs and zero hours contracts to distort the employment figures and make it look as if we are doing ok.

According to JD, it's better for people to work part time and claim tax credits - ie, he appears to think they should choose that option.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

According to JD, it's better for people to work part time and claim tax credits - ie, he appears to think they should choose that option.

If people work full time they may not get HB and council tax benefit , if they work part time they probably will, working full time on the NMW with tax to come off that does not sound like a good option for many...

Besides ,if  there are all these well paid jobs out there,maybe you can find them for folk!

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:

If people work full time they may not get HB and council tax benefit , if they work part time they probably will, working full time on the NMW with tax to come off that does not sound like a good option for many...

Besides ,if  there are all these well paid jobs out there,maybe you can find them for folk!

Well if they deliberately avoid full time jobs, I have no sympathy for them if they lose some or all of their housing benefit. Perhaps they could work more hours to pay for that spare room.

You said on another thread that immigrants come here and work - British people could do those jobs.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well if they deliberately avoid full time jobs, I have no sympathy for them if they lose some or all of their housing benefit. Perhaps they could work more hours to pay for that spare room.

You said on another thread that immigrants come here and work - British people could do those jobs.

..a lot of folk have kids who work part time and have to there for them after school, and childminding is not 100% funded, around 70 % I think! down form 80% under Labour, so that's another extra cost folk can do without ,ken?

Maine coon lover wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


..a lot of folk have kids who work part time and have to there for them after school, and childminding is not 100% funded, around 70 % I think! down form 80% under Labour, so that's another extra cost folk can do without ,ken?

The whole thing could be resolved if there were decent paid jobs and a decent cost of living , but there isn't so the average man has to rely on top up benefits .

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I call it that for ease of reference. I sometimes use inverted commas but other times I can't be bothered.   

What about tax credits? Are they called that because they take tax from some people and give it to others?

Ah, but you're not a Labour politician, a left wing newspaper or a trade union conducting a campaign against a change in housing benefit by brainwashing people into calling it a tax and, more importantly, into believing that it is a tax.

It isn't...it's a reduction in the amount of money that a claimant [b]receives, not an increase in what he pays out.

Of course people now routinely call it "bedroom tax" - because they have been programmed into thinking that's what it is. Labour managed to brainwash people into calling community charge "poll tax" by using the same smoke and mirrors tactics.

OK, so all political parties do it; I don't dispute that. Nor do I think that the change in housing benefit should not be open to challenge, and some perfectly valid points have been made in this discussion and I don't necessarily disagree with them.

I'm particularly uncomfortable, for instance, with the possible penalisation of someone who has a genuine disability, either physical or mental, and needs the use of an otherwise empty room for equipment or for periodic use by a carer or relative.  I would imagine that safeguards exist for such eventuality, but I may be wrong; I don't know enough about the minutiae of the rules.

Equally, I don't see why taxpayers should be obliged to pay tenants for the luxury of occupying  in particular publicly-owned properties which have more bedrooms than they need, even if they want them.

I have to admit to knowing zilch about how tax credits work and I have to confess that I'm too lazy to Google it up because I don't have any particular interest in it. Presumably it means that a taxpayer is "credited" with a certain amount under particular personal circumstances, thereby reducing his total tax bill.

I tend to suspect that it was all part of Gordon Brown's policy of creating a client, Labour-beholden electorate...but I'm sure that Irn Bru will soon challenge that suspicion.

However, interesting though all this may be, I have to get ready to go to the funeral of yet another friend...one of the definite disadvantages of being old.

Sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Are these the people you think shouldn't get full time jobs because they can work part time and get tax credits instead?

Oh yes, the tax credits that subsidise businesses so they can get people to work full time for the minimum wage, that is so low, they still get tax credits, because even the government recognise minimum wage is not enough to live on.   Take them away and businesses would have to pay out more money.

And the government relies on part time jobs and zero hours contracts to distort the employment figures and make it look as if we are doing ok.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well if they deliberately avoid full time jobs, I have no sympathy for them if they lose some or all of their housing benefit. Perhaps they could work more hours to pay for that spare room.

You said on another thread that immigrants come here and work - British people could do those jobs.

..a lot of folk have kids who work part time and have to there for them after school, and childminding is not 100% funded, around 70 % I think! down form 80% under Labour, so that's another extra cost folk can do without ,ken?

Maine coon lover wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


..a lot of folk have kids who work part time and have to there for them after school, and childminding is not 100% funded, around 70 % I think! down form 80% under Labour, so that's another extra cost folk can do without ,ken?

The whole thing could be resolved if there were decent paid jobs and a decent cost of living , but there isn't so the average man has to rely on top up benefits .

Raggamuffin wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

The whole thing could be resolved if there were decent paid jobs and a decent cost of living , but there isn't so the average man has to rely on top up benefits .

Do you mean full time jobs? People who work part time are not going to make enough to live on obviously. I don't mind people getting top up benefits if they work full time because they're making an effort, but there shouldn't be a need for it. I think the main problem is housing costs, hence the top up housing benefits.

Maine coon lover wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Do you mean full time jobs? People who work part time are not going to make enough to live on obviously. I don't mind people getting top up benefits if they work full time because they're making an effort, but there shouldn't be a need for it. I think the main problem is housing costs, hence the top up housing benefits.

full time work in the north of England minimum wage 40 hours @ £6.19 after deductions take home pay £222 roughly . minimum monthly outgoings £1000 , the need for top up from tax credits is helpful and HB . JD is saying that full time work is hard to find in parts of the UK so people take part time jobs especially if they have children at school they need to work around them to be there when they come home from school

Raggamuffin wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

full time work in the north of England minimum wage 40 hours @ £6.19 after deductions take home pay £222 roughly . minimum monthly outgoings £1000 , the need for top up from tax credits is helpful and HB . JD is saying that full time work is hard to find in parts of the UK so people take part time jobs especially if they have children at school they need to work around them to be there when they come home from school

I don't think he is saying that - he said that immigrants find full time work. Working around children is a different matter, and one wouldn't expect to make a living out of part time work.

The take home pay for someone on minimum wage would probably be OK if housing costs weren't so high.

Maine coon lover wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't think he is saying that - he said that immigrants find full time work. Working around children is a different matter, and one wouldn't expect to make a living out of part time work.

The take home pay for someone on minimum wage would probably be OK if housing costs weren't so high.

I agree but even utilities are so high that take home pay isn't enough .

I am sure most working people would love nothing more than to be independent and have enough money to support themselves its a wonderful feeling knowing you are earning to pay your way , but it just isn't possible these days for most people .

Raggamuffin wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

I agree but even utilities are so high that take home pay isn't enough .

I am sure most working people would love nothing more than to be independent and have enough money to support themselves its a wonderful feeling knowing you are earning to pay your way , but it just isn't possible these days for most people .

Utilities are expensive, but at least people can cut down by not having the heating on all the time, using less water, or whatever. They don't have much choice re housing, unless they're prepared to live in a damp hovel.

BigAndy9 wrote:How about sending people on benefits out to do some community work, therefore they (I) don't have to pay for the heating.

Sitting at home with the TV on, Sky on, kettle on, heating on is very expensive for me.

Raggamuffin wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:How about sending people on benefits out to do some community work, therefore they (I) don't have to pay for the heating.

Sitting at home with the TV on, Sky on, kettle on, heating on is very expensive for me.

Good point actually. If people are out all day at work, they don't need the heating on, and they're not using electricity or water at home.   

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Utilities are expensive, but at least people can cut down by not having the heating on all the time, using less water, or whatever. They don't have much choice re housing, unless they're prepared to live in a damp hovel.

...oh yes, lets do a BA and wear a jumper of folk can't afford to heat their home,that jumper's really going to keep the elements out eh?  

This government have let energy companies walk all over their customers and have not done near enough to curb energy prices.

Maine coon lover wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


...oh yes, lets do a BA and wear a jumper of folk can't afford to heat their home,that jumper's really going to keep the elements out eh?  

This government have let energy companies walk all over their customers and have not done near enough to curb energy prices.

what if those claiming benefits have babies or children is it healthy to sit in the cold ? they haven't really thought about their solution have they JD I wonder how they would feel if they were in the same situation I just feel that those banging on about benefit scroungers don't have a clue and unless they are put in the same situation they really cannot comment .

I agree there are some who just wont work but the majority do want to work but cant find work so what can they do they are tarred with the same brush .

BigAndy9 wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

what if those claiming benefits have babies or children is it healthy to sit in the cold ? they haven't really thought about their solution have they JD I wonder how they would feel if they were in the same situation I just feel that those banging on about benefit scroungers don't have a clue and unless they are put in the same situation they really cannot comment .

I agree there are some who just wont work but the majority do want to work but cant find work so what can they do they are tarred with the same brush .

Put in the same situation.

Well, the majority of scroungers weren't "put" in a situation - they made the situation.

Babies or children?  Hmmm... I always wanted loads of kids, but because myself and my wife worked, WE COULDN'T AFFORD LOADS.

I wanted kids when I was 20, BUT I COULDN'T AFFORD THEM, I WAITED, I SAVED UP.

I will never be in that situation, I am a responsible adult with discipline!

Get over it!

Maine coon lover wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Put in the same situation.

Well, the majority of scroungers weren't "put" in a situation - they made the situation.

Babies or children?  Hmmm... I always wanted loads of kids, but because myself and my wife worked, WE COULDN'T AFFORD LOADS.

I wanted kids when I was 20, BUT I COULDN'T AFFORD THEM, I WAITED, I SAVED UP.

I will never be in that situation, I am a responsible adult with discipline!

Get over it!

never say that your situation can turn in a second , loads of responsible adults have said that .

I have nothing to get over I just have a heart and have compassion for those in need I did say I know there are those who don't want to work but we shouldn't tar everyone on benefits with the same brush .

I too work and so does my husband we work hard and have made a good life for ourselves , we have two adult children who are successful , but to say it will never happen to you or us is not true it could happen to any of us .

BigAndy9 wrote:

Maine coon lover wrote:

never say that your situation can turn in a second , loads of responsible adults have said that .

I have nothing to get over I just have a heart and have compassion for those in need I did say I know there are those who don't want to work but we shouldn't tar everyone on benefits with the same brush .

I too work and so does my husband we work hard and have made a good life for ourselves , we have two adult children who are successful , but to say it will never happen to you or us is not true it could happen to any of us .

Tar everybody with the same brush?

Who does that?

When I talk of scroungers, I mean scroungers.

You are making mistakes, Coon.  Ask Joy Division about those mistakes.

Joy Division wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Tar everybody with the same brush?

Who does that?

When I talk of scroungers, I mean scroungers.

You are making mistakes, Coon.  Ask Joy Division about those mistakes.

Andy, you despise everyone and anyone on benefits full stop, as well as blacks, Scots, Muslims, Sikhs, Chinese....just tell me when to stop chief ...

So shut up and Tek cak