General Chat

The housing market is fixed - all of it - by the creation of an artificial restriction on supply. Although the root of this lies in the restriction of new build it actually leverages the whole market. Labour have plans for fixing this by over riding local government planning policies. Kent for instance is in for a big shock if a Labour coalition wins power.

At the top end, mainly in London, the main factors influencing property values are (a) the current $/£ exchange rate, (b) the ease with which the beneficial owner can be hidden and (c) the ease of buying property with funny money. In the last year the fall in sterling and a mild try at not so obviously corrupt deals has pushed the > £ 2M market in London down by 10 - 20%.

Better yet, never be poor, never be sick, never be incautious, never be old, never be unlucky.

Sorry if I offend anyone's sensibilities, ( not), but I've just returned from seeing someone who might in other times have been in the workhouse, and from some quarters receives as much care as she would were she in one now. :-|

Landlords won't put the rent on hold. They cannot afford to.
UC is a bad idea and is not workable. The irrational 7 day compulsory delay after application has been removed by the budget though heaven knows when it becomes effective.

1. Under UC all payments including Housing Benefit go into the account of the claimant. Sounds all well and good but many of the claimants live in a 7 day world, cannot wait, have other debts and cannot protect thier rent income from other needs and creditors. The inevitable result is rent arrears and landlords refusing new lets to people on UC or even evicting current tenants whether in arrears or not. (For those unaware of it classic Housing Benefit is paid directly to the landlord. )

2. The UC provides no paper proof of income, Even worse the computer screen display does not give any breakdown of the benefits so cannot be used for proof of income. Where in some areas peple could actually get a mortgage on a cheap flat or terrace house despite being on benefits that is now pretty well impossible. Mainly affects working women such as teachers and nurses with kids.

3. Under UC claimants are expected to work for 35 hours a week whereas on the old system 22 hours was sufficient and 12 for the disabled. If a claimant is doing , say, 25 hours ( which can fit in with family commitments) then he/she is hounded by their "job manager" into getting a second job to make up the hours with the very real threat of being sanctioned with no benefits at all for weeks.

4. It is the frequent use of sanctions more than anything else causing instant and unpredictable loss of income which has given rise to the foodbanks. As Nyx says children have to eat even if their parents often don't.

5. The DWP uses an expensive 0345 number which forces the claimant to listen to all sorts of guff plus Vivaldi for anything from 10 to 30 minutes before talking to a person. This charge is to be stopped but hasn't happened yet. Many claimants do not have a fixed connection for internet or telephone relying on mobile phones so they get clobbered.

6. The UC system is totally internet centered. There are nothing like enough free public internet terminals so many claimants end up using net cafes or piggy backing mobile phone dialup connections delivering 2Mbps at best often dialup speeds.

7. UC was promoted as a system to make work pay and to make it much easier for claimants to manage their finances. It has done neither.

As an employer having a revolving door of support staff is a major distraction, something which adds nothing to the bottom line and can take up a lot of time. We have been able to greatly reduce "churn" on support jobs by increasing pay, adding hours worked, giving free access to the internet (not in paid time though) and for some people hand holding them through the DWP computer screens. The lack of logic and common sense is incredible.

Quite how somebody is supposed to work, look for more work, manage a family on a tight (impossible) budget and spend hours keeping DWP managers happy god knows. It is a system setup for people to fail.

The truth of it is that the Tories want to return the UK to the 1930s with piece work ("gig" economy), the relieving officer (UC), abysmal and insecure rented accomodation, no proper pensions. A hard brexit will make this so much easier.

As MW says MPs taking pride in the existence of food banks should be ashamed of themselves.

To summarise Sharron's view point.

If your only income is benefits, don't get pregnant!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that in most food banks one needs some proof of need, ie a voucher or a referral etc, and only for a limited period.

for example

"If people come to a foodbank more than three times in six months our system automatically flags this so that the foodbank manager can contact their social worker or the service that referred them to make sure that there is a plan in place to help their client break out of poverty,"

Therefore, I'd suggest that it's 'unlikely' that there are many people who deliberately or accidentally conceive while using a food bank?

Situations can change very quickly, not everyone has even a little money or family to fall back on.

Although Rollo has a point about a 'fixed' housing market, it only applies to new builds.

Homes offered for resale, are subject to market forces. Everyone will know of a home that's been offered for sale that's 'stuck' with no takers. Once they've swallowed their expectations & dropped the asking price, they'll find a buyer.

The same applies if a major employer has moved out of the area or ceased trading. There isn't the demand for homes resulting in those who do want to move having to lower their asking price.

My point was not that people who have babies should not use the food bank or whatever. If a baby was conceived under different circumstances to somebody who is now needing to use a food bank then the child was not conceived by somebody having recourse to using a food bank.

yes sorry I wasn't thinking ( or rather I was but you'd have to know my line of thought lol) about free condoms being available.

Detective, as you say of itself UC is not a bad idea, but the execution of it leaves a lot of people in difficulty.

Anyone who has had any dealings with the DWP for oneself or for others knows it 'can' work quickly...often it doesn't though, you can't put eating 'on hold' like you can paying the rent/bills for 4 weeks until some money comes through.

A big part of this mess is that employer's expect the tax payer to featherbed their payroll in order to finance vast profits for a a handful at the top.

Call it what you will "working tax credit" is a monster employment subsidy. It cetainly breaks both EU and WTO rules so it is not obvious how the UK gets away with it.

The housing market is fixed too with government, banks and builders conniving with one another to create an entirely false market in housing.

So long as the root causes are not fixed then the symptoms such as food banks, rough sleeping, sofa surfing , desperation debt and family breakdown will not go away.

The housing market can be fixed. Stop "right to buy" - if people want to buy a property there is no reason to make a social property available at huge doscount. Do as in all other EU countries, treat social housing as an assett not a liability. Allow councils as well as HA to build. Fix rents at what people can afford. One south coast town has new "affordable" housing with a 3 bed terrace renting at £ 930 per month! On the private side release a lot more brown and marginal "green belt" land for private building especially where main services are already there. True some people may see a hefty loss on property bought in the past ten years. What goes up sometimes comes down.....

Employers can choose to pay realistic wages nobody is stopping them. They can choose to work with the needs of people and their families, whether aged parents or children. No one is forcing rigid attitudes to staff. Many, many bosses in both private and public sector will tell you that their staff are their main asset but few put their money where their mouth is.

If the UK goes on as it is we will slide back to being the impoverished low skill economy which we were in the 1960s and 1970s. The young and skilled will go just the same way as they went then.

I thought contraception was free for all? Certainly the feminine version is & apparently condoms used to be handed out at Family Planning clinics like sweeties. Even if the male was too shy to approach them, their female partner would have been able to ask.
STI clinics would rather prevent an infection than have to treat it - that's another source for condoms.

Personally I don't mind donating to Food Banks. Its about time we pulled together as a Community rather than expecting the benefit system & 'them' to be the cure all.
Universal Credit was a good idea at the time, although the application of it has a lot to be desired. The same with councils giving the rent to private tenants so they have 'control' over their finances. Unfortunately, some of them either spend the 'windfall' on other things or their Bank grabs it to reduce their overdraft. Guess what? They eventually get evicted.

And so it goes on.

Definitely the male should take at least 50% of the responsibilty, it might also cut down on the amount no doubt spent on treating STIs,? But that's another topic.

Condoms are free!
Both from the NHS - and online.

It takes two to make a baby - the male of the species should take at least 50% of the responsibility!

Contraception doesn't always work Sharron, I don't think many women particularly want or choose to be in a position where they can't afford food for their child, let alone be unable to buy it the new shoes etc it needs. If working women and men can't afford this because the rent/mortgage and bills they pay take the greater part of their money, what choice do they have?

If the DWP do not pay benefits out straight away when someone claims, or the tax credits application takes 7 weeks ( yes really!) what is a mother or father to do...let the baby starve or go without nappies in the meantime? What century are we in!

However I agree contraceptives should be available, I personally think they should be free to all :-D

Trouble is, you can't generalise Sharron, people with babies can lose their jobs.

Sharron .........

but what about those families where the parents do have jobs, just don't earn enough to pay rent and have enough left over to buy food for the whole month, let alone buy nappies? Or the baby was conceived while one or both parents had good jobs (or decently paying jobs), but then were laid off?

That seems to be the case for many here


Mind you, the metro area has got very high rents, even higher than in London or so we are told.

Minimum wage of $11.35 an hour (= ca £6.70) is what a lot of people earn.

However, if you are a liquor server, the minimum wage is only £10.10 per hour (= ca £5.96) .............. because they get more tips :-S

Rather than nappies and baby food, maybe there should be contraceptives available. As far as I am concerned, nobody who has need of a food bank should conceive a child.

I think the same attitude is here too Sylvia. It's great that others want to help poorer people but the government seem to rely on it to happen more and more.

Lizx

..and sanitary products, Sylvia.

We have girls who miss school because they're having a period.
It's tragic.

It seems to me that when volunteers open food banks (as is what happened here back in the late 70s/early 80s) governments seem to take it as granted that they will continue to be provided with the necessary by the public, along with "largesse" delivered by elected officials at crucial times of the year.

I know the ones started here as an emergency measure .............. they're now considered an essential part of the social services for homeless and working poor, and the provincial government delivers a nice large cheque whenever there is the annual Christmas drive.


I find it really terrible that food banks are now considered essential by families and seniors who are not earning enough/getting a large enough pension to be able to reach the end of the month without resorting to the free food. In some areas, this segment makes up more than 50% of the regular users.

The largest call for donations, apart from money (because our food banks can buy 3 times the amount of food for each $ than you or I could) is for nappies and baby food.

I agree Maggie, let them live in the real world for a while, not just a couple of weeks
like some of these reality show programmes

Lizx