Bedroom tax, new thread !

[TULGEYWOODMAN]

Is that some sort of party that bores you to death so you sleep? e.g. UKip, along the same vein as UShip for hiring trailers when moving?

there is a party called ukip,................or you could vote conservative, or for labour .

[GastonJ]

There should be an option of voting no-one in, that way we wouldn't be paying fat MP's to sit on their rear ends and pass laws that favor their mates or party donors. Would save a fortune on not having to pay expenses as well. Vote for Anarchy, vote no-one Perhaps it's time to send that message and no-one vote at the next election....

[Snowy79]

We are already told to do by parties that the minority voted for as they're useless yet they have the power. It's about time they were held accountable. They argue they need high wages so you get the best people for the job yet they all come out with stupid policies that don't work. They should be charged with wasting Tax Payers money or fraud and stripped of their pensions if found out.

The way I see it they have Civil Servants and think tanks which look at ideas and all parties pretty much use the same Civil Servants but can come out with two completely different ideas from the one set of figures. Surely this means one party is wrong and as such incompetant.

[GastonJ]

that's a pretty accurate posting

It does appear, and is the case, that Whitehall runs the country anyway - the government just get in the way and put their own twist on things... usually a knife in the backs of anyone who'd never vote for them in any case. I dare say Whitehall, and the country for that matter, wouldn't stop running and functioning as it should if there wasn't any MP's around, it does the job quite well while they're all either sat asleep in the House of Commons or on holiday as they frequently are anyway. The Civil Service is the one part of 'government' that stays in place year after year, election after election and continues to ensure things happen, or don't.

I wouldn't buy a second hand car off any MP in this government anyway, since

1) It probably wouldn't be theirs car to sell
2) Would be advertised at ?1,000 and I'd end up owing ?5,000,000,000 for it
3) Would have been a car paid for by me in taxation so I already owned it anyway, but they'd allow me to buy it
4) Would have triangular wheels to save on rubber
5) Would only use fuel from a station owned by an MP at a cost of ?2245.21 pence per litre

Oops don't want to go OT.... knock the walls in teh spare bedroom out, save money

[Saltire]

Stop the bedroom tax: The Queens sends desperate victim letter to David Cameron - Mirror Online

[flyingpig]

As said lots of times before - I work in social housing, I am a socialist and I think that the UnderOccupancy charges are a good thing!!!

You have people who are living in houses that are too big for them, and there are lots of people who need a bigger property for their families, and these people are being made to suffer as there is not enough larger properties.

I have heard it said many time ""this is my home!!""" ----- well guess what, it's not. It belongs to the state and is their to provide a service to the people who need it.

Anyone affected by the charge can continue to live in their property, but they have to pay for the underoccupancy subsidy. This then goes towards funding other things.

[Bulld0g]

As said lots of times before - I work in social housing, I am a socialist

I have to say you don't sound like a socialist, you sound more like a tory. Let's take benefits away from the people who need it and give the savings to other projects.

[Saltire]

As said lots of times before - I work in social housing, I am a socialist and I think that the UnderOccupancy charges are a good thing!!!

You have people who are living in houses that are too big for them, and there are lots of people who need a bigger property for their families, and these people are being made to suffer as there is not enough larger properties.

I have heard it said many time ""this is my home!!""" ----- well guess what, it's not. It belongs to the state and is their to provide a service to the people who need it.

Anyone affected by the charge can continue to live in their property, but they have to pay for the underoccupancy subsidy. This then goes towards funding other things.

As said before, I am involved with organisations far beyond social housing and I agree with the fact that 1 person sitting in a 6 bedroom family council house at age 75 isn't quite right, but as said before, give the people a house with just one bedroom or at most two bedrooms incase maybe a relative wants to stay overnight etc, or the grandkids, give them that house that everyone is waiting on, there is none mate, that is the simple facts as repeated a million times before, bring in saddam Hussein from the dead and he will run the country better, at least he would build us all mud huts,

[flyingpig]

I have to say you don't sound like a socialist, you sound more like a tory. Let's take benefits away from the people who need it and give the savings to other projects.

Sorry Bulldog - I am a definite socialist. There is a realisation that there is only so much money in the pot. I am not saying, never have and never will, that benefits should be taken from people - espeically those that need them. Under the proposals people will still receive benefits but the calculation will be based on the need rather than a flat rate. Surely that makes sense.

How can a single person who lives in a 3 bed semi recieve the same in housing benefits as a couple with 2 children living in a 2 bedroom flat? How can that be right?

[Bulld0g]

This is exactly what the tories wanted. Argue amongst yourselves and debate the policy whilst werub our hands together and watch. Mate if you were a true socialist we wouldn't be in disagreement over this we would be shoulder to shoulder in oposition.

[flyingpig]

I give you a perfect example of why this is fair and there is no reason or rationale behind your thoughts about me except that you assume you are right? That is almost delusional position to be in?

It is my opinion (and a socialist ones too) that we should provide the right level of help to people who recieve benefits - we should not exceed what is required (again a perfectly good socialist view). By providing the right level of support and not going above and beyond that leaves more money in the social pot to do more things with and help more people. Provide wider range of support - including training / education to help people back into work.

[Bulld0g]

Not true mate. The right level of help isn't being afforded to the people that need it. You work in social housing and you are well aware of the amount of scammers that claim benefits and that i fear is clouding your judgement of the vast amount of genuine people who need help.

[Lainie]

You have people who are living in houses that are too big for them, and there are lots of people who need a bigger property for their families, and these people are being made to suffer as there is not enough larger properties.

I have heard it said many time ""this is my home!!""" ----- well guess what, it's not. It belongs to the state and is their to provide a service to the people who need it.

Anyone affected by the charge can continue to live in their property, but they have to pay for the underoccupancy subsidy. This then goes towards funding other things.

exactly - its NOT THEIR HOME at all.

[Saltire]

Bedroom tax: rehoused victims of domestic violence face eviction | Local Leaders Network | Guardian Professional

[Snowy79]

Why can't those that are under occupying take in a tenant and do their part for every other persons human rights. We're seeing cut backs in social care and respite care for those that can't help themselves due to selfish individuals wanting more than they need in the vast majority of cases.