Johnny Dogs wrote: » 120bn in FGs National Development Plan. Shaking the magic money tree there too, right?
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » I already explained where the money will come from. A loan to begin with taken out by the council or state. Paid back via the rental earned and taxation. All less than the cost of paying private rent now. Which the government has to pay (increasing every year). This has already been done which is why I pointed out that 42% of the housing stock was council in Britain at one stage. Not sure if the maximum here. The houseisn’t free. You pay rent. It shouldn’t be a house for life if your earning power increases. Rent should track earnings in fact, being low for low earners and higher for high earners, never exceeding market rent.
hmmm wrote: » It "creates jobs" which require more taxes to pay. Learn some basic economics will you.
hmmm wrote: 26% of existing social housing are in rent arrears, even though the amounts being charged are pitiful. It's a joke.
hmmm wrote: Just be open and honest with people - everyone who works should pay an extra 50% tax, and in return they can see free houses handed out to people who don't work. What's not to love?
hmmm wrote: » I'm assuming you want every bit of capital investment in our country diverted into free houses for people who don't work? Not a school, hospital, road or bridge to be built until we can give everyone a free 3bed semi-d.
hmmm wrote: » The private rental now is a short-term thing. Once someone gets a job, they pay their own rent. You're talking about handing out an entirely free house for life which is what social housing is in this country.
Your plan appears to be to penalise people for trying to get a better job for themselves. Better job, more tax, higher rent.
It's a great message to send to our kids.
Johnny Dogs wrote: » However I'm assuming that when the great plan was announced on how 120bn was planned to be spent , you didn't wonder where the cash was coming from.
Arghus wrote: » That may be all very true, but it doesn't make the housing situation any less farcical. Don't get yourself tied into knots about Margaret Cash, loads of people are struggling to find decent accommodation, loads of hard working decent people, who are more than willing to pay their hard earned money. Margaret Cash this, Margaret Cash this - that's a cop out, focusing on one person because they conform to all your sterotypes. She's not the only one out there struggling.
Wheeliebin30 wrote: » Margaret Cash doesn’t work. She is a criminal. Her fella is a convicted burglar who terrorizes old people but but... They deserve a house for free. Defend that mofos.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » No I’m not. I’m talking about charging rent for social housing relative to income.
hmmm wrote: » We know where the money is coming from - the government builds hospitals etc. out of the budget and the existing tax base. Where are your billions coming from?
c montgomery wrote: » Someone else pays for it basically !!! Just say that.
BBFAN wrote: » You know you sound like the drunken old uncle in the corner waking up every half hour having a rant now don't you?
jluv wrote: » Everything he says is true though? Why are we not highlighting a family who is a two parent working family who through no fault of their own( sick kid,ailing parent,loss of job etc,you get it) .Ms Cash is someone who has done nothing to help herself so she should not even be part of this conversation. This should be about people who are homeless through no fault of their own and have no way of sorting it without help. Ms cash does not fit that description and Mary Lou(who I actually like normally) should not be endorsing someone who does not want to involve and contribute to our society..
Johnny Dogs wrote: » No one really gives a fiddlers fart about Mag Cash.. Poster baddy. Context.
Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: » Ffs. The billions are coming from the same place as the billions that now fund social housing via subsidised private rental.
BBFAN wrote: » It's very simple, no truly vulnerable person would come forward to subject themselves to this kind of scrutiny, vitriol, vile, disgusting abuse. Would you like your fanny/dick discussed on a public forum in relation to housing? We don't get to decide who gets housed based on whether we like them or not.
jluv wrote: » She is given voice time at a lot of their protests so I see her at a poster child. Taking away from true cases IMO..
Arghus wrote: » Then worry about the true cases then. People seem to be more worked up about the media coverage she has gotten than they can manage to be about anything else. A lot of wasted energy IMO.
hmmm wrote: » Government forecast is 3 billion over next five years. That would pay for only 6000 houses.
jluv wrote: » Well when you see a senior member of politics seated beside her,basically promoting her,what do you think?
Arghus wrote: » I think that she's probably shouldn't be used as one of the main figures in a campaign about homelessness - there's way too much questionable stuff about her - but people need to use their brains and know that there is a genuine housing crisis going on in the country, that's affecting a lot more than Margaret Cash. I have no control over who puts her on television. Think about it: when things get out of hand, as they are right now, with accommodation in this country does it not make logical sense that the first people to complain will be the long term unemployed and/or homeless. As much as everyone here seems to think that they all en-masse have beautiful care free lives, when a crunch like this occurs it's that section of society that ferls the pressure first and with the greatest force.
hmmm wrote: » The private rental now is a short-term thing. Once someone gets a job, they pay their own rent. You're talking about handing out an entirely free house for life which is what social housing is in this country. Your plan appears to be to penalise people for trying to get a better job for themselves. Better job, more tax, higher rent. It's a great message to send to our kids.
jluv wrote: » It's not actually a case of whether I like her or not. It's actually a case of whether she's deserving or not. And in comparison to others she is much less deserving. Show how you have tried to provide housing for your kids. Show how you have worked to provide a house and standard of living for your kids. Show how you have struggled.I know a lot of people who can do that. I read and see people who do that and struggle and have kids who have issues etc .People who have given and been productive members of society. We have a housing issue. We need to prioritise who get assistance.
Wheeliebin30 wrote: » She was on RT6 news
