This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Not Fit To Govern
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
hedgehog50  Croydon 09 Nov 17 2.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
To help those truly in need, more needs to be done about housing and benefit fraud which is widespread. A fraudster has just been jailed after council inspectors found him living in a converted garden shed while illegally renting the four bedrooms of his council house. He raked in more than £95,000 in benefits from Hammersmith & Fulham Council and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over eight years. He rented his rooms out for between £645-£700 per room per month, plus £80-£100 a month towards utilities and deposits of £300-£540 per room.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 npn Crowborough 09 Nov 17 2.22pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
I know it's tough to measure, but defining poverty as a percentage of the median seems very iffy. Can it ever be eradicated under those terms? Surely the very fact of people lifting themselves out of poverty moves the median, thus putting more people in poverty?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 Nov 17 2.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by elgrande
But if you are on benifits you 3.70 according to Frugallife.com. Although in fairness you'd have to be economic in terms of making sure you re-used all the ingredients they list to get that kind of value (or eat a lot of Spag bol)
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 Nov 17 2.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by npn
I know it's tough to measure, but defining poverty as a percentage of the median seems very iffy. Can it ever be eradicated under those terms? Surely the very fact of people lifting themselves out of poverty moves the median, thus putting more people in poverty? I agree with that (in terms of defining it by a median), then when we've tried other methods, the first argument is still about how we measure it. We should really set poverty targets based on fixed sums, tied to living costs to establish a reasonable figure. The problem is that whilst everyone argues about what poverty is in the UK, no one needs to do anything about it (previous governments resolved the problem by just changing or scrapping definitions of poverty).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| npn Crowborough 09 Nov 17 2.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
I agree with that (in terms of defining it by a median), then when we've tried other methods, the first argument is still about how we measure it. We should really set poverty targets based on fixed sums, tied to living costs to establish a reasonable figure. The problem is that whilst everyone argues about what poverty is in the UK, no one needs to do anything about it (previous governments resolved the problem by just changing or scrapping definitions of poverty). Ironically, it ought to be a sum that's already been calculated by the benefits office as an amount you need to live on, but I don't suppose they do that calculation.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
beak  croydon 09 Nov 17 2.54pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Is the current opposition the most inept, useless, lying and downright incompetent opposition there has been in living memory?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 Nov 17 2.59pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
To help those truly in need, more needs to be done about housing and benefit fraud which is widespread. A fraudster has just been jailed after council inspectors found him living in a converted garden shed while illegally renting the four bedrooms of his council house. He raked in more than £95,000 in benefits from Hammersmith & Fulham Council and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over eight years. He rented his rooms out for between £645-£700 per room per month, plus £80-£100 a month towards utilities and deposits of £300-£540 per room. So about 989 a month, to live in a shed. I'm more concerned that we live in a society where 645-700 a month is considered reasonable rent for a room in house. How f**ked up is that. You'd need to work for about 86 hours a month just to pay rent, at 7.50 a hour, for the room (assuming you paid no tax). Let alone paying any bills, council tax etc.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 09 Nov 17 3.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Its the correct terms, for children in poverty, within the UK, and adheres to the democratically agreed terms of what child poverty is. That people were more impoverished in the past is irrelevant, we as a society have taken steps, through policy, agreed democratically, to implement welfare and social protection against poverty. Democratic Governments have to be held accountable to the standards they commit to, based on democratic mandate, not the ones we'd like to imagine. It doesn't matter if your imagined ancestors had it worse, that's not the point. The point is that the Conservative Government, like the government before them and the last Labour government, are failing to deliver on Child Poverty. Lets not see the solution to poverty as being redefining poverty to fit the numbers, rather we should be focused on ensuring that poverty and its impact on society is reduced. I didn't imagine it.It is historical fact. Perhaps the measure is wrong. It's fine to idealise a country where there is an equal spread of wealth but what is more important is that those at the bottom of society have more in relative terms than previous decades.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 09 Nov 17 3.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by beak
If that is a complete list,they are streets ahead of the Tory shambles now unfolding,I wouldn't want Boris representing me in court,that's for sure! No not complete. Just a few of the more obvious ones - I could go on and on and on and on if you want.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 09 Nov 17 3.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
So about 989 a month, to live in a shed. I'm more concerned that we live in a society where 645-700 a month is considered reasonable rent for a room in house. How f**ked up is that. You'd need to work for about 86 hours a month just to pay rent, at 7.50 a hour, for the room (assuming you paid no tax). Let alone paying any bills, council tax etc. There is no doubt that there is a serious issue with the percentage of earnings required to live in a rented or mortgaged home. That is where we need to help people. The system is seriously flawed when you have to earn good money to live very modestly or work full time and can't afford your own home. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (09 Nov 2017 3.07pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Nov 17 3.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I didn't imagine it.It is historical fact. Perhaps the measure is wrong. It's fine to idealise a country where there is an equal spread of wealth but what is more important is that those at the bottom of society have more in relative terms than previous decades. Why is one older person dying every seven minutes during the winter?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 09 Nov 17 3.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
So about 989 a month, to live in a shed. I'm more concerned that we live in a society where 645-700 a month is considered reasonable rent for a room in house. How f**ked up is that. You'd need to work for about 86 hours a month just to pay rent, at 7.50 a hour, for the room (assuming you paid no tax). Let alone paying any bills, council tax etc. I should think the Fulham first team players can afford it, but I expect the guy in the shed is a Chelsea fan. Edited by hedgehog50 (09 Nov 2017 3.14pm)
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.