Saturday, March 16 2013, 12:32PM
“Firstly it's not a tax, it's a welcome reduction in benefits for those in 'benefit mansions' who have one or more spare rooms when there are larger families desperately waiting for these type of properties.
Secondly, it's only unpopular with those who face having to actually contribute to their accomodation (heaven forbid!). For someone like me who doesn't receive benefits but does pay too much in tax, this proposal is MOST WELCOME.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 1:55PM
“Seems a little strange you would object to emotive terms such as referring to this benefit cut as a "tax," then go on to refer to "benefit mansions" when many of those affected will be living in two-bedroom flats.
I should say I am not opposed to coming up with ways to free up under-occupied social housing, just in using hyperbolic arguments.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 1:57PM
“Seems a little strange you would object to emotive terms such as referring to this benefit cut as a "tax," then go on to refer to "benefit mansions" when many of those affected will be living in two-bedroom flats.
I should say I am not opposed to coming up with ways to free up under-occupied social housing, just in using hyperbolic arguments.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 6:29PM
“Chatelet
I'm afraid the information you have posted is untrue - in many ways, and I'm not sure of your motives for posting such misinformation.
The under occupancy rules which come into effect in April are bad enough as it is. There is noo need to scaremonger with such rubbish.
Would you like to explain what a "Specialist Housing Committee" is?”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 8:19PM
“The worst thing is about this bedroom tax is the effect it will have on various people. For instance, you and your partner have lived in your social housing house for 30 years, raised children who have now left home. One or both of you work but are on low wages and claim housing benefit. You have neighbours with whom you are friends, and your other friends live nearby. You keep your home, inside and out, in good condition and look after your garden. Part of the cohesion of community that this government bangs on about, maybe you are part of the 'big society' in your area.
But, unless you can afford to pay the extra, you're gonna have to move. Maybe to a one bedroom flat on the other side of town. Away from your neighbours and friends. Away from your community. All for a bit of money that you cannot afford to pay on minimum wage.
If only you had an adult child in the forces. Then it would be alright. Is this social engineering of some sort?
And of course, whilst this is going on, you realise that the Tories forced through the spineless LibDems a tax cut of 5% for those whose wealth you could never even begin to imagine. £40k a year EXTRA. If you had even a fraction of that EXTRA income you could afford to stay where you now live.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 10:34PM
“So what you're saying, Neo_Madbadger, is that social housing residents should keep 'their' properties simply because they've lived there a long time, done a bit of work on the garden, and get on well with the neighbours? Irrespective of need? Can I have one then, cos my neighbours are horrible and I'd like a veg plot?
These council properties were never 'their homes', that's the problem, any more than a company car is your car in-perpetuity. It's your's till the organisation that owns it can find a more suitable use for it.
As for caring for the properties...should bring back council housing inspectors then. Broken fridge and car engine in the garden? Get rid of them in a week or your out. Never mow the lawn? Sort it in a month or your out. Noisy? Keep it down or your out. You'll soon have a cohesive, clean, cared for estate.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 10:55PM
“It's high time something was done about the plethora of champagne Socialists, like Frank Dobson, Bob Crow and Baroness Uddin, who earn massive salaries that continue to live in social housing, sucking limpit like on the teat of the taxpayer.
http://tinyurl.com/6eqnd66
http://tinyurl.com/645xrfl
http://tinyurl.com/cw9uouu”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 10:55PM
“It's high time something was done about the plethora of champagne Socialists, like Frank Dobson, Bob Crow and Baroness Uddin, who earn massive salaries that continue to live in social housing, sucking limpit like on the teat of the taxpayer.
http://tinyurl.com/6eqnd66
http://tinyurl.com/645xrfl
http://tinyurl.com/cw9uouu”
Sunday, March 17 2013, 1:12AM
“Benefit bedroom is awoken from long term slumber to the frightening thought of enduring the cuts we all face!!!! Help. Yes but we need these spare rooms and should have what we want- shouldn't we? Errr well no, actually. Sorry but we must arise from this comfy bed the government has previously generously provided and join in with the workers who also face cuts in their own tax paying lives. Please, no more excuses lets get to grip with benefit spending cuts.”
Sunday, March 17 2013, 4:55PM
“Whither the council house sell-offs under the Tories. 20% of those properties sold are now in the hands of private landlords / buy-to-let, many of whom derive their income from Housing Benefit-claiming tenants. Now, who exactly is sucking on the taxpayer's teat again?”
“Specialist Housing Committees have been consulted over the legal implications of re-classifying thousands of properties to maximise savings in the unpopular, soon to be implemented, bedroom tax.
Given the go-ahead, it's estimated 1 in 3 occupants in social housing – thought safe from the sanctions – upon re-evaluation will be deemed to have extra living space and forced either to find smaller properties or survive with lesser housing costs.
Under new rules, a single bedroom having more than 180 sq ft floor space will be redefined as two rooms. The Government are calling to amend the 1985 Housing Act which will make these changes enforceable. The cost of dividing up living space should these measures be introduced will fall on the claimant, with the tenant facing eviction or heavy fines if failing to carry out work within strict time limits.”