They should not be having children they cannot afford to upkeep and maintain themselves.
It is NOT the duty of the State to provide and if people like blonde breeder won't take responsibility then the riding of the gravy train has to be brought to an end. If that means limiting child benefit to one child only.....then so be it. That would soon put a stop to the work shy mass breeders.
Yes children are always the 'innocents' in this ludicrous nonsense. Used as pawns by greedy and selfish 'parents' for their own ends.
The same cannot be said for the irresponsible adults breeding kids like rabbits and the naive idiots.
Yes, the children ARE always the innocents, so they need to be provided for regardless of the choices of their parents.
I presume you mean the 'teaching assistant' who couldn't spell "to expensive" correctly?
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this as well. Some years before she will reach the rank of Teacher I think!
Surprised she turned it down as the Housing Officer said afterwards that she won't find a cheaper 1 bedroomed flat than that in the borough. I bet the next person in the queue who accepted it was absolutely delighted. Sabrina is deluded about her prospects.
I was on the council housing list but as a single chap with no dependants I was delivered with a dose of realism that I wouldn't get an upper floor 1 bedroomed flat. Although I wouldn't be competing with families, I think I was up against a lot singles and couples facing homelessness.
However, I am still of the opinion that council housing should be there for working people. Right To Buy should be abolished to prevent any more of these homes going into private hands. Right To Buy was probably alright for the 1980s but not for the 21st century.
Nobody in full time paid employment should receive any benefits especially housing benefits, that is the problem.
If nobody could afford to pay private rents to buy to let landlords they would be forced to drop their rents to what people could afford.
There should not be this difference between private and social rent costs and until this is addressed the problem continues.
The trouble is that instead of lowering private rents, they are raising social and council rents.
Private rents are high because of buy to let land lords NOT because of housing benefit. Most of whom take out mortgages based on the rent from earlier buys, so it is one big ponzi scheme.
Incase you didn't notice, most private landlords were not taking DSS tenants.
I couldn't stand Ray. Didn't it occur to him to get out and start trying to change things for himself by, wait for it.....looking for a job? His sense of entitlement was revolting.
Oh i do.......very much. If i didn't then i wouldn't be so rattled and infuriated.
Thank God there are some responsible and sensible parents who do not selfishly expect everyone else to fund their ever expanding families. I'm talking of something which is obviously quite alien to you. People who go to work, behave in a responsible manner and live within their means........such as the female poster below
They are saying 'Look at these one or two people, EVERYONE is like that'.
That's what propaganda is.
Do you seriously thinks its " one or two people " ?!!!!.
We have over 300,000 Romas from Slovakia , Romania etc claiming benefits , no intention of working , then you have hundreds of thousands of others milking the system . " one or two ". ???
You really know about propaganda , the quotes and stats you use ( God knows where you get these unbelievable figures from ) . Your discrpition of the word Propaganda sums your self up totally , using information to make a biased view . Read your own posts to see what propaganda is .
The trouble is that instead of lowering private rents, they are raising social and council rents.
Private rents are high because of buy to let land lords NOT because of housing benefit. Most of whom take out mortgages based on the rent from earlier buys, so it is one big ponzi scheme.
Incase you didn't notice, most private landlords were not taking DSS tenants.
Buy to Let landlords do not control private rents . Just as a second hand car salesmen does not control the price of cars . Landlords ask the going rate for their rent, and people either pay them or they dont. The reason why rents went up so much is because the people renting these properties were not using their own money for the rents, but using housing benefit ( tax payers money ) . Housing benefit meant there was no ceiling to how much rent could be paid , and we had asylum seekers etc living in Holland park renting luxury houses , all paid for the council . it had to stop . As for landlords not taking DSS , of course not . I have dozens of friends who have rented out flats to people on benefits or working and then went in to benefits . ALL of them stopped paying the rent after a few months , and spent the HB on **** , getting drunk etc . They know they can get away with this for months , live free , but get the cash from council to spend as they like . When you speak to council , they say it is the " human right " of the tenant to spend the housing benefit on what ever they like . Madness .They made the problem even worse .
Do you seriously thinks its " one or two people " ?!!!!.
We have over 300,000 Romas from Slovakia , Romania etc claiming benefits , no intention of working , then you have hundreds of thousands of others milking the system . " one or two ". ???
You really know about propaganda , the quotes and stats you use ( God knows where you get these unbelievable figures from ) . Your discrpition of the word Propaganda sums your self up totally , using information to make a biased view . Read your own posts to see what propaganda is .
Nice use of statistics for your propaganda.
The 'Gypsy on Benefits and Proud' show on Channel 5 said there were 200,000 gypsies from Romania in the UK, but it didn't say how many were on benefits, or who never intended to work. It only showed one person trying not to work.
There are 3 million unemployed in the UK and only 500,000 jobs available.
That is the only statistic that matters.
So even if we got rid of the 300,000 gypsies you are biased against, that would still leave 2.7 million unemployed fighting for the 500,000 jobs.
But then who next on your list?
Single parents? The Somalians featured on this show?
You do the easy thing, while the rest of us will fight for better wages, lower rents and proper jobs for people who really want them.
Buy to Let landlords do not control private rents . Just as a second hand car salesmen does not control the price of cars . Landlords ask the going rate for their rent, and people either pay them or they dont. The reason why rents went up so much is because the people renting these properties were not using their own money for the rents, but using housing benefit ( tax payers money ) . Housing benefit meant there was no ceiling to how much rent could be paid , and we had asylum seekers etc living in Holland park renting luxury houses , all paid for the council . it had to stop . As for landlords not taking DSS , of course not . I have dozens of friends who have rented out flats to people on benefits or working and then went in to benefits . ALL of them stopped paying the rent after a few months , and spent the HB on **** , getting drunk etc . They know they can get away with this for months , live free , but get the cash from council to spend as they like . When you speak to council , they say it is the " human right " of the tenant to spend the housing benefit on what ever they like . Madness .They made the problem even worse .
That is just not true.
You saw on the show that private renters were not renting to DSS tenants.
Also what do you think is happening now with the benefits cap?
Are rents going down? NO they are staying the same because working tenants are paying the rents.
Buy to let landlords are the reasons rents are going up. NOT housing benefits which have risen because rents have risen.
You saw on the show that private renters were not renting to DSS tenants.
Also what do you think is happening now with the benefits cap?
Are rents going down? NO they are staying the same because working tenants are paying the rents.
Buy to let landlords are the reasons rents are going up. NOT housing benefits which have risen because rents have risen.
Rents are based on supply and demand, council rents are subsidised by the taxpayer, having had 20 years experience in Social Housing I know that there are many, but not all, DSS tenants who don't pay rent even though they are claiming Housing Benefit, and the trash the property when they leave.
The Welfare State is NOT a bottomless pit of money and it's intentions were never to provide for greedy, selfish, irresponsible people.
There is a vast difference between greed and need.
Oh i do.......very much. If i didn't then i wouldn't be so rattled and infuriated.
Thank God there are some responsible and sensible parents who do not selfishly expect everyone else to fund their ever expanding families. I'm talking of something which is obviously quite alien to you. People who go to work, behave in a responsible manner and live within their means........such as the female poster below
Sigh. The children are not greedy, selfish, irresponsible people and NEED to be provided for regardless of the choices their parents made.
Rents are based on supply and demand, council rents are subsidised by the taxpayer, having had 20 years experience in Social Housing I know that there are many, but not all, DSS tenants who don't pay rent even though they are claiming Housing Benefit, and the trash the property when they leave.
Wow how wrong can a post be.
Rents are high because council homes have been brought and are now being rented privately which means the buy to let land lords want profit.
Profit means higher rents than not having a profit.
Council homes are NOT subsidised, this has been proved many times.
And your experience is not mine and I live in council houses.
Sigh. The children are not greedy, selfish, irresponsible people and NEED to be provided for regardless of the choices their parents made.
Sigh . Yes, the children need to be provided for , BY their parents !!. That is what parents do , provide for their children . But nowadays , many irresponsible people ( too many ) expect every one else ( the state ) to provide for them . Providing for themselves or for their children never enters their minds .
Sigh . Yes, the children need to be provided for , BY their parents !!. That is what parents do , provide for their children . But nowadays , many irresponsible people ( too many ) expect every one else ( the state ) to provide for them . Providing for themselves or for their children never enters their minds .
They don't expect the state to provide for them. It does provide for them.
They are only getting what they were allowed to get.
Move the goal posts for new claimants not those who have been allowed to have children and claim benefits.
Rents are high because council homes have been brought and are now being rented privately which means the buy to let land lords want profit.
Profit means higher rents than not having a profit.
Council homes are NOT subsidised, this has been proved many times.
And your experience is not mine and I live in council houses.
Lucky you living In Your subsidised council house . Rent paid by council ? .
The rent for a council house is much less than the market rate , therefore it is SUBSIDISED.
Fascinated to know about all this work you do to get wages higher and rents lower ?
Not really .
Lucky you living In Your subsidised council house . Rent paid by council ? .
The rent for a council house is much less than the market rate , therefore it is SUBSIDISED.
Fascinated to know about all this work you do to get wages higher and rents lower ?
Not really .
The rent is low because there is no need for profit.
It is NOT subsidised. It is now being artificially inflated so that those in private accommodation do not get jealous.
Housing should be to live in, not to make money from.
They don't expect the state to provide for them. It does provide for them.
They are only getting what they were allowed to get.
Move the goal posts for new claimants not those who have been allowed to have children and claim benefits.
Move the goalposts for new claimants but allow those already on benefits to stay as they are? How would the system work then? Some people doing nothing, continuing to have children being paid more and more while their neighbour who has recently become a single parent/become disabled or whatever gets less money for the same circumstances. Do they change the rules again every year for more new claimants? It would be chaos.
Move the goalposts for new claimants but allow those already on benefits to stay as they are? How would the system work then? Some people doing nothing, continuing to have children being paid more and more while their neighbour who has recently become a single parent/become disabled or whatever gets less money for the same circumstances. Do they change the rules again every year for more new claimants? It would be chaos.
Well it is what they are doing now for disabled people.
This show is just so painful to watch. I couldn't get the attitude of the teaching assistant though. I get that the rent wouldn't have left much money left, but really, she should be thankful of what little is being offered.
In Australia, you don't qualify for public housing if you're working. You only qualify if you're on benefits. I'm not saying the system is better, but I wouldn't turn down a heavily discounted apartment in Tower Hamlets. Even if it meant that I had to go without having a smart phone, or even cutting down on entertainment. Even if I had to get a second job stacking shelves in a supermarket in the evening, I would still take it.
I think the system in the UK is a bit screwed up though. They really shouldn't sell council flats unless they have an intention to build another in its place. There's also the issue of all of the townhouses in towns in the north of the UK that are just boarded up and left to rot. It's a crying shame really.
Comments
Yes, the children ARE always the innocents, so they need to be provided for regardless of the choices of their parents.
I think it's you who doesn't get it
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this as well.
Surprised she turned it down as the Housing Officer said afterwards that she won't find a cheaper 1 bedroomed flat than that in the borough. I bet the next person in the queue who accepted it was absolutely delighted.
I was on the council housing list but as a single chap with no dependants I was delivered with a dose of realism that I wouldn't get an upper floor 1 bedroomed flat. Although I wouldn't be competing with families, I think I was up against a lot singles and couples facing homelessness.
However, I am still of the opinion that council housing should be there for working people. Right To Buy should be abolished to prevent any more of these homes going into private hands. Right To Buy was probably alright for the 1980s but not for the 21st century.
If nobody could afford to pay private rents to buy to let landlords they would be forced to drop their rents to what people could afford.
There should not be this difference between private and social rent costs and until this is addressed the problem continues.
The trouble is that instead of lowering private rents, they are raising social and council rents.
Private rents are high because of buy to let land lords NOT because of housing benefit. Most of whom take out mortgages based on the rent from earlier buys, so it is one big ponzi scheme.
Incase you didn't notice, most private landlords were not taking DSS tenants.
Just walk into the council offices pretend you cant speak english and colour your face and arms a darker colour.
The Welfare State is NOT a bottomless pit of money and it's intentions were never to provide for greedy, selfish, irresponsible people.
There is a vast difference between greed and need.
Oh i do.......very much. If i didn't then i wouldn't be so rattled and infuriated.
Thank God there are some responsible and sensible parents who do not selfishly expect everyone else to fund their ever expanding families. I'm talking of something which is obviously quite alien to you. People who go to work, behave in a responsible manner and live within their means........such as the female poster below
Do you seriously thinks its " one or two people " ?!!!!.
We have over 300,000 Romas from Slovakia , Romania etc claiming benefits , no intention of working , then you have hundreds of thousands of others milking the system . " one or two ". ???
You really know about propaganda , the quotes and stats you use ( God knows where you get these unbelievable figures from ) . Your discrpition of the word Propaganda sums your self up totally , using information to make a biased view . Read your own posts to see what propaganda is .
Had you seen the programme you would know why.
Buy to Let landlords do not control private rents . Just as a second hand car salesmen does not control the price of cars . Landlords ask the going rate for their rent, and people either pay them or they dont. The reason why rents went up so much is because the people renting these properties were not using their own money for the rents, but using housing benefit ( tax payers money ) . Housing benefit meant there was no ceiling to how much rent could be paid , and we had asylum seekers etc living in Holland park renting luxury houses , all paid for the council . it had to stop . As for landlords not taking DSS , of course not . I have dozens of friends who have rented out flats to people on benefits or working and then went in to benefits . ALL of them stopped paying the rent after a few months , and spent the HB on **** , getting drunk etc . They know they can get away with this for months , live free , but get the cash from council to spend as they like . When you speak to council , they say it is the " human right " of the tenant to spend the housing benefit on what ever they like . Madness .They made the problem even worse .
Nice use of statistics for your propaganda.
The 'Gypsy on Benefits and Proud' show on Channel 5 said there were 200,000 gypsies from Romania in the UK, but it didn't say how many were on benefits, or who never intended to work. It only showed one person trying not to work.
There are 3 million unemployed in the UK and only 500,000 jobs available.
That is the only statistic that matters.
So even if we got rid of the 300,000 gypsies you are biased against, that would still leave 2.7 million unemployed fighting for the 500,000 jobs.
But then who next on your list?
Single parents? The Somalians featured on this show?
You do the easy thing, while the rest of us will fight for better wages, lower rents and proper jobs for people who really want them.
That is just not true.
You saw on the show that private renters were not renting to DSS tenants.
Also what do you think is happening now with the benefits cap?
Are rents going down? NO they are staying the same because working tenants are paying the rents.
Buy to let landlords are the reasons rents are going up. NOT housing benefits which have risen because rents have risen.
Rents are based on supply and demand, council rents are subsidised by the taxpayer, having had 20 years experience in Social Housing I know that there are many, but not all, DSS tenants who don't pay rent even though they are claiming Housing Benefit, and the trash the property when they leave.
Sigh. The children are not greedy, selfish, irresponsible people and NEED to be provided for regardless of the choices their parents made.
Wow how wrong can a post be.
Rents are high because council homes have been brought and are now being rented privately which means the buy to let land lords want profit.
Profit means higher rents than not having a profit.
Council homes are NOT subsidised, this has been proved many times.
And your experience is not mine and I live in council houses.
Sigh . Yes, the children need to be provided for , BY their parents !!. That is what parents do , provide for their children . But nowadays , many irresponsible people ( too many ) expect every one else ( the state ) to provide for them . Providing for themselves or for their children never enters their minds .
They don't expect the state to provide for them. It does provide for them.
They are only getting what they were allowed to get.
Move the goal posts for new claimants not those who have been allowed to have children and claim benefits.
Lucky you living In Your subsidised council house . Rent paid by council ? .
The rent for a council house is much less than the market rate , therefore it is SUBSIDISED.
Fascinated to know about all this work you do to get wages higher and rents lower ?
Not really .
The rent is low because there is no need for profit.
It is NOT subsidised. It is now being artificially inflated so that those in private accommodation do not get jealous.
Housing should be to live in, not to make money from.
Move the goalposts for new claimants but allow those already on benefits to stay as they are? How would the system work then? Some people doing nothing, continuing to have children being paid more and more while their neighbour who has recently become a single parent/become disabled or whatever gets less money for the same circumstances. Do they change the rules again every year for more new claimants? It would be chaos.
Well it is what they are doing now for disabled people.
Probably because it is the women who get to keep the house and money.
But some of us have pointed out that the fathers status doesn't get mentioned in many of these programmes.
Well, fathers can have 50:50 care and share the money. I would hazard a guess that they don't want the responsibility.
In Australia, you don't qualify for public housing if you're working. You only qualify if you're on benefits. I'm not saying the system is better, but I wouldn't turn down a heavily discounted apartment in Tower Hamlets. Even if it meant that I had to go without having a smart phone, or even cutting down on entertainment. Even if I had to get a second job stacking shelves in a supermarket in the evening, I would still take it.
I think the system in the UK is a bit screwed up though. They really shouldn't sell council flats unless they have an intention to build another in its place. There's also the issue of all of the townhouses in towns in the north of the UK that are just boarded up and left to rot. It's a crying shame really.