[Stoots]

Council housing is a great way to live unfortunately if you  are  not  a single mum it's very hard to get one.

I stumbles inot a 3 bed semi council house 10 years ago when I met me ex. When I left 2 years ago the rent was only 360 per month. Now I'm paying 600 private. Never realised how good I had it. We got new windows, roof, kitchen and bathroom whilst I was there all for free

[Tosh]

That's life.

[AuRavelling79]

That's life.

Thanks for that Esther.

[Dave Willis]

Sorry If I'm being a bit thick, but aren't council houses for poor people who can't afford their own place? If you become wealthy or inherit loads of dosh shouldn't you move on and let another desprate person take the property? Why don't they periodically means test the tennants? What I'm intending to do is start living rough next summer get my flat then sell all my properties and retire on the proceeds sell my round and bobs yer uncle!

[Tosh]

If they regularly means tested everyone none of em would make an effort. It would just encourage fat people to get fatter.

Yours
E. Rantzen.

[richard groves]

Sorry If I'm being a bit thick, but aren't council houses for poor people who can't afford their own place? If you become wealthy or inherit loads of dosh shouldn't you move on and let another desprate person take the property? Why don't they periodically means test the tennants? What I'm intending to do is start living rough next summer get my flat then sell all my properties and retire on the proceeds sell my round and bobs yer uncle!

The late Bob Crow didn't seem to think so and neither does Dazmond 

[Shrek]

Sorry If I'm being a bit thick, but aren't council houses for poor people who can't afford their own place? If you become wealthy or inherit loads of dosh shouldn't you move on and let another desprate person take the property? Why don't they periodically means test the tennants? What I'm intending to do is start living rough next summer get my flat then sell all my properties and retire on the proceeds sell my round and bobs yer uncle!

No your wrong, just because someone gets a job or starts a business, that doesn't mean they're not poor anymore- how do you define poor anyways?
Are you poor if you haven't got a job but get your rent and bills paid for?
Are you poor if you get a job and now have to pay your bills leaving you less dosh than applepicker?
Are you poor if you have a job but can't afford a deposit for your own house

[Stoots]

Sorry If I'm being a bit thick, but aren't council houses for poor people who can't afford their own place? If you become wealthy or inherit loads of dosh shouldn't you move on and let another desprate person take the property? Why don't they periodically means test the tennants? What I'm intending to do is start living rough next summer get my flat then sell all my properties and retire on the proceeds sell my round and bobs yer uncle!

generally yes the way to get into them is by being poor, on benefits etc. But they could also be passed down. I got my council house by virtue of it being my ex girlfriends grandmas house.  The ex moved in with her for a brief period with her son to help lok after her as she was becoming ill.... The grandma then got moved to a smaller bungalow when she became unable to climb stairs and the ex took over the house no questions asked.  I moved in, got my name on the tenancy and thus it also became mine.

But no, once you have your name on the tenacy agreement the house is yours for as long as you pay the rent, they cant/dont just kick you out because you have now got plenty of money, you also after a certain number of years get the right to buy and at a discount too.

[chris turner]

Sorry If I'm being a bit thick, but aren't council houses for poor people who can't afford their own place? If you become wealthy or inherit loads of dosh shouldn't you move on and let another desprate person take the property? Why don't they periodically means test the tennants? What I'm intending to do is start living rough next summer get my flat then sell all my properties and retire on the proceeds sell my round and bobs yer uncle!

Actually council houses were meant for the poor and working class alike. They were built with the purpose that everyone should have somewhere they can call 'home', at an affordable renting price.
The problem started years ago with the intro of right to buy.
At the time there were more then enough houses to go around, so the government decided rather then people renting houses, everyone should own there own home.
With huge discounts every man and his dog started snapping up council properties, problem was as the population was growing, there wasn't enough council properties being built to replace all the stock being sold.
This lead to the current situation of huge waiting lists and council homes only going to those 'who need them the most', basically the poorest. Hence the reputation that council houses are only for the 'poor'.

[Positivity]

House of Commons Library briefing paper provides information on the ‘pay to stay’ scheme in England under which social landlords can charge tenants with an income of over £60,000 market or near market rents.
The Government has included measures in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, to make higher rents compulsory in due course for council tenants earning over £40,000 in London and £31,000 elsewhere.
Sorry Dazmond should have kept quiet about all the dosh your raking in!!
That's combined total household income by the way!
Affected households will pay an additional 15p in rent per week for every £1 they receive in taxable income above the thresholds.
The Government’s aim is to implement the mandatory pay to stay scheme from April 2017.

[chris turner]

House of Commons Library briefing paper provides information on the ‘pay to stay’ scheme in England under which social landlords can charge tenants with an income of over £60,000 market or near market rents.
The Government has included measures in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, to make higher rents compulsory in due course for council tenants earning over £40,000 in London and £31,000 elsewhere.
Sorry Dazmond should have kept quiet about all the dosh your raking in!!
That's combined total household income by the way!
Affected households will pay an additional 15p in rent per week for every £1 they receive in taxable income above the thresholds.
The Government’s aim is to implement the mandatory pay to stay scheme from April 2017.

Actually the scheme is not mandatory, it is up to the local authority or housing association whether they implement it.
I know some have refused it and some, like the one my partner works at, have delayed implementing it until at least 2018 until they have carried out their own studies into the impacts.

[davids3511]

I find it difficult to believe those figures. How many of those self employed are actually declaring their full earnings. I know a couple of guys in other trades who only declare the absolute bare minimum.
There are so many loopholes in the complicated tax system of ours that i bet a large percentage of self employed are 'legally' paying very little tax.

Dazmond explained it well, large companies are now employing people under the guise of them being self employed and
getting away with paying less than the minimum wage, plus not paying pensions, holiday pay and other legal employment requirements.
Its a bit like employing  somebody to clean windows under the guise of a franchise, that person isn't self employed he works
for the franchiser but for tax purposes he will be classed as self employed.

Maybe that's how your franchise would work but not how mine work. They are nothing like employees.

They work for your company under your company name and rules, just because you have given them a bit more responsibility
doesn't make them any less an employee, they're certainly not self employed.

Wow, you have no idea what I do, how the business is structured, what responsibilities my franchisees have but feel qualified to comment. What a joke! You seem to have very strong opinions and very little idea.

[davids3511]

I find it difficult to believe those figures. How many of those self employed are actually declaring their full earnings. I know a couple of guys in other trades who only declare the absolute bare minimum.
There are so many loopholes in the complicated tax system of ours that i bet a large percentage of self employed are 'legally' paying very little tax.

Dazmond explained it well, large companies are now employing people under the guise of them being self employed and
getting away with paying less than the minimum wage, plus not paying pensions, holiday pay and other legal employment requirements.
Its a bit like employing  somebody to clean windows under the guise of a franchise, that person isn't self employed he works
for the franchiser but for tax purposes he will be classed as self employed.

Maybe that's how your franchise would work but not how mine work. They are nothing like employees.

They work for your company under your company name and rules, just because you have given them a bit more responsibility
doesn't make them any less an employee, they're certainly not self employed.

Instead of pontificating about 'not self employed' tell me exactly why it is that makes them not self employed? They price up, take on customers, arrange their own schedule and holidays, collect their own payments, use their own van and equipment, remove bad customers without any recourse to me. Where does any of that suggest employee?

[Tom White]

No your wrong, just because someone gets a job or starts a business, that doesn't mean they're not poor anymore- how do you define poor anyways?
Are you poor if you haven't got a job but get your rent and bills paid for?
Are you poor if you get a job and now have to pay your bills leaving you less dosh than applepicker?
Are you poor if you have a job but can't afford a deposit for your own house

My ex-army mate who works on the rigs says that the definition of poor is:

You have a mortgage.

[SeanK]

I find it difficult to believe those figures. How many of those self employed are actually declaring their full earnings. I know a couple of guys in other trades who only declare the absolute bare minimum.
There are so many loopholes in the complicated tax system of ours that i bet a large percentage of self employed are 'legally' paying very little tax.

Dazmond explained it well, large companies are now employing people under the guise of them being self employed and
getting away with paying less than the minimum wage, plus not paying pensions, holiday pay and other legal employment requirements.
Its a bit like employing  somebody to clean windows under the guise of a franchise, that person isn't self employed he works
for the franchiser but for tax purposes he will be classed as self employed.

Maybe that's how your franchise would work but not how mine work. They are nothing like employees.

They work for your company under your company name and rules, just because you have given them a bit more responsibility
doesn't make them any less an employee, they're certainly not self employed.

Wow, you have no idea what I do, how the business is structured, what responsibilities my franchisees have but feel qualified to comment. What a joke! You seem to have very strong opinions and very little idea.

Get over yourself mate, you build a window cleaning round and then hand it to an employee/franchisee to work and run for you under your terms, its not rocket science.
Some people are so far up their own backsides they cant see the wood for the trees.

[SeanK]

I find it difficult to believe those figures. How many of those self employed are actually declaring their full earnings. I know a couple of guys in other trades who only declare the absolute bare minimum.
There are so many loopholes in the complicated tax system of ours that i bet a large percentage of self employed are 'legally' paying very little tax.

Dazmond explained it well, large companies are now employing people under the guise of them being self employed and
getting away with paying less than the minimum wage, plus not paying pensions, holiday pay and other legal employment requirements.
Its a bit like employing  somebody to clean windows under the guise of a franchise, that person isn't self employed he works
for the franchiser but for tax purposes he will be classed as self employed.

Maybe that's how your franchise would work but not how mine work. They are nothing like employees.

They work for your company under your company name and rules, just because you have given them a bit more responsibility
doesn't make them any less an employee, they're certainly not self employed.

Instead of pontificating about 'not self employed' tell me exactly why it is that makes them not self employed? They price up, take on customers, arrange their own schedule and holidays, collect their own payments, use their own van and equipment, remove bad customers without any recourse to me. Where does any of that suggest employee?

Yes and the manager of the company I used to work in which wasn't his did all that, it still didn't make him self employed. (roll eyes)

[G Griffin]

No your wrong, just because someone gets a job or starts a business, that doesn't mean they're not poor anymore- how do you define poor anyways?
Are you poor if you haven't got a job but get your rent and bills paid for?
Are you poor if you get a job and now have to pay your bills leaving you less dosh than applepicker?
Are you poor if you have a job but can't afford a deposit for your own house

My ex-army mate who works on the rigs says that the definition of poor is:

You have a mortgage.

But people living in council houses and on benefits don't have a mortgage.

[Dave Willis]

actually ........ I might not live rough next summer after all. I cleaned a council flat yesterday and If I had to live there I'd top myself.

Five star council property only for me.

[8weekly]

actually ........ I might not live rough next summer after all. I cleaned a council flat yesterday and If I had to live there I'd top myself.

Five star council property only for me.

Look at some of the blocks of maisonettes in Inner London. I feel suicidal just knowing that that is how some people have to live. God knows how I'd cope. 

[SeanK]

That's the dilemma, whilst some will say council properties should only be for those who need them, if you start means testing and
remove all who have turned their lives around you then turn them into ghetto's for down and outs only.
They then become alarm zone areas for potential employers making it impossible for anybody living in them to get employment
which adds to what is known as the poverty trap.
Its the same if you then up the rent for anybody doing well, you remove the incentive for them to stay in that community and
potentially create the same problems.