Will the bedroom tax be the new poll tax?

First topic message reminder :

Original at: http://skwalker1964.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/unbelievable-not-1-tory-turns-up-for-bedroom-tax-debate/

The Tories’ complete contempt for ordinary people couldn’t have been more clearly demonstrated than it was in yesterday’s Westminster Hall debate on the onerous, ludicrously-unfair ‘bedroom tax’, which will impoverish millions of struggling people for daring to have a spare bedroom, by deducting benefits.

This includes many people whose children are at university and millions of estranged parents who will be punished for having a room for their visiting children to stay in.

Not one Tory turned up for the debate. Not a single one, apart from the minister who was obliged to attend. Even the pathetic LibDems couldn’t be bothered to make an appearance.




For more details, read Eoin Clark’s excellent blog here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2013/feb/26/tenants-exempted-bedroom-tax-reclassify

here it is!

Should MP's be forced to declare the number of bedrooms their Taxpayer Funded Second homes have?..........

The list of authorised EXCEPTIONS to the Bedroom Farce lengthens with each passing day ........... Rejoice for today's "excused deduction" foster-parents and families with a serviceman abroad.

Better than the Dead Parrot sketch for incredulity.

Is this an example of a the government doing more of a 'three point turn' rather than a 'U-Turn'?..................

How can a little twerp like Ian Duncan Smith enjoy such despotic power over the lives of decent human beings?

He's certainly making the most of it while he can

If they really want to reduce the housing benefit bill, cap rents and increase the minimum wage by £2 or £3.

- but I guess that wouldn't fit the tory goal of punishing the poor.

Rent caps

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_control_in_England_and_Wales

.....and as for Labour.

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/6918-bedroom-tax-needed-say-labour-but-coalition-admits-scotland-disproportionately-affected



Oh dear!

Will moving those, on benefits, out of 'cheap' social housing into smaller more expensive privately rented houses really save money?

Just think with the increase in university tuition fees there must be a real glut of small private flats which private developers must have been having trouble letting, is this plan just a way of helping them?

Rockonbrother..... spoke about the "projects" in America, and while I can see what was being attempted there, I think that if we were to go down that route we might finish up being responsible for the creation of more ghettos.

Many councils in Britain already gather the people at the bottom-end of this market into ghettos and all that that achieves is concentrated areas of deprivation that do no service to the ones that are "dumped" in those places.

The only way that we can diminish this phenomenon is by righting the wrongs of inequality and by ensuring that even a small amount of the riches at the top end is redistributed around the bottom end.

Regards.....

Papaumau.

Many councils in Britain already gather the people at the bottom-end of this market into ghettos and all that that achieves is concentrated areas of deprivation that do no service to the ones that are "dumped" in those places.

Thats interesting Papa, In the Late 60's early 70's a potential answer to Londons housing need where to be met by the building of a very large Council Estate by the River Thames in Greenwich. This estate on paper was quite idyllic, it had shopping centres, fishing and boating lakes and masses of green spaces, in fact it looked so good that many people applied to move there on spec.


The problem started as I see it, when the estate was used as an aid for slum clearance. When the then closed docks where wanted by the rich for their yuppie homes, the many streets where the Dockers used to live in where demolished, and the residents where forced to move to Thamesmead, communities where broken up, peoples family and friends support network where split. Some might say “but they where moved to the same estate, well if you see the size of Thamesmead you will know what I mean, Google maps will show you the size.


In no time Thamesmead became a haven for Drugs dealers to supply the many users on the estate, and organised gangs took over. Thamesmead is a place I don’t even want to drive past let alone live, it has become about the biggest shithole next to Angel Town (Brixton) in London.


What happened to Thamesmead is akin to what happened on lots of Estates, The North Peckham Estate is another example, that got so bad, the designer committed suicide.


It all proves that you can take the people out of slums, but can not take the slum out of people.

Yeah! Give 'em a home and they keep coal in the bath!

Coming from poverty myself I KNOW what it is like to be stuck in a dead-end hole with no prospects of ever getting out, but I do think that those of us that DID get out should be doing more to help those that are stuck in such "Fort Apache - The Bronx" places.

The ruling classes work very hard to keep us down there as when we are held in ghettos we are easy to watch and to control and that is why there has never been any real effort to truly integrate poor people with well-off people. It is only when such places go up in fire and riot that the fat-cats and the people of power take notice of us and of course then we are seen as dissidents and criminals and the full force of the law is brought down on our heads.

If the people of power realised it, ( and they should after watching the Russian and French and other popular world-revolutions ), they would do more about keeping us docile by at least trying to re-distribute a bit more of the great wealth that is circulating around at the top end.

In their fat-cat greed they refuse to even consider this idea and eventually they find that these deprived people build up an ingrained hatred for them and try to do them down at every opportunity.

Regards.....

Papaumau.

....and the most cruel and unnecessary reform: people under the age of 25 will receive no housing benefit at all.

Note: nothing in the news, and very little publicity, about that.

Yes Sickchip, this Tory-leading government, bolstered by the two-timing Lib-Dems, have to be the most draconian government, hitting the weakest in our society, since Thatcher ruled the roost.

Cameron likes us to think that he is a middle-of-the-roader, but driven by the dogs in the 1922 committee his cabinet is even more radical than Thatcher's was.

What with their successful attacks on the NHS as they privatise it by the back-door and the wicked ways that they attack the poor, the sick, the disabled, and the old, this government are going to be tarred as the cruelest Tory-government that has ever been in power.

The electorate are known to have strangely short memories but I would hope that we would ALL remember what this mob have done to us during these last periods in government.

Regards....

Papaumau

Papaumau wrote:Yes Sickchip, this Tory-leading government, bolstered by the two-timing Lib-Dems, have to be the most draconian government, hitting the weakest in our society, since Thatcher ruled the roost.

Cameron likes us to think that he is a middle-of-the-roader, but driven by the dogs in the 1922 committee his cabinet is even more radical than Thatcher's was.

What with their successful attacks on the NHS as they privatise it by the back-door and the wicked ways that they attack the poor, the sick, the disabled, and the old, this government are going to be tarred as the cruelest Tory-government that has ever been in power.

The electorate are known to have strangely short memories but I would hope that we would ALL remember what this mob have done to us during these last periods in government.
Regards....

Papaumau

I certainly hope so.

Excellent post.

Coming from poverty myself I KNOW what it is like to be stuck in a dead-end hole with no prospects of ever getting out, but I do think that those of us that DID get out should be doing more to help those that are stuck in such "Fort Apache - The Bronx" places.

You're dead right Papa - came from a very working class family myself, and have always felt grateful to the large State measures that made it possible for me to move away from the prospect of a minimum wage job in a depressed local economy (things like free education, free school meals, decent council housing, etc etc).
It breaks my heart to see all that good stuff being duismantled by a bunch of vicious ideologues, and the poor life chances that remain for kids from backgrounds like mine.

Not really sure what one can do to challenge this, except by voting and trying to spread the word about the harm being done under this right wing government

Doubts Raised about the Competence of Bedroom Tax Assessors

s(glamour.com)

" Are you sure this room is always used as a library, you cheeky boy...?"

sickchip wrote:....and the most cruel and unnecessary reform: people under the age of 25 will receive no housing benefit at all.

Note: nothing in the news, and very little publicity, about that.

The Tories have apparently back-pedalled from that one for the time being to keep the LibDems onside, hence it being quiet.

boatlady wrote:

Coming from poverty myself I KNOW what it is like to be stuck in a dead-end hole with no prospects of ever getting out, but I do think that those of us that DID get out should be doing more to help those that are stuck in such "Fort Apache - The Bronx" places.

You're dead right Papa - came from a very working class family myself, and have always felt grateful to the large State measures that made it possible for me to move away from the prospect of a minimum wage job in a depressed local economy (things like free education, free school meals, decent council housing, etc etc).
It breaks my heart to see all that good stuff being duismantled by a bunch of vicious ideologues, and the poor life chances that remain for kids from backgrounds like mine.

Not really sure what one can do to challenge this, except by voting and trying to spread the word about the harm being done under this right wing government

Sadly boatlady, not enough people have made it out of the ghettos to be able to use that knowledge to better the lives of the rest.

All we can hope is that at least some of the people that get elected in the 2015 election will have come from poverty - like us - so that they might have a model of need to work from.

This ever-widening gulf between the haves and the have-nots HAS TO BE addressed by some of our political representatives of the future as if it is not Britain is going to finish up like some banana republic with only the very rich at the top, the very poor at the bottom, and with nothing in between.

Regards....

Papaumau.

The most unfair aspect of this bedroom tax is the fact that many people are stuck, they have no means of escaping it.

In the area where I live there are hundreds of people who are going to lose out, families where a son or daughter has fled the nest and a bedroom has become vacant, but no point in trying to downgrade to a smaller home because there are none.

If a family cannot downgrade to a smaller house because there just is none available, then how can it be justified to penalise that family? They should be exempt until a suitable downgrade becomes available.

The Tories are happy to hit those at the bottom of the social ladder with a bedroom tax, but reluctant to hit the very wealthy with a Mansion Tax.

Papaumau, Wednesday, 13 March 2013, 11:35

Rockonbrother..... spoke about the "projects" in America, and while I can see what was being attempted there, I think that if we were to go down that route we might finish up being responsible for the creation of more ghettos.

Many councils in Britain already gather the people at the bottom-end of this market into ghettos and all that that achieves is concentrated areas of deprivation that do no service to the ones that are "dumped" in those places.

 

Papaumau (mau),

That is exactly what happened in America. At first, “the projects” were safe. By the time I was nine or tem, venturing into the projects was a dangerous proposition. HUD Secretary Jack Kemp’s radical policy encouraged perpetual renters to become homeowners. Rent payments became equity-building mortgage payments. The key component was that project resident didn’t have to move to become homeowners.

As a social worker for the largest “welfare” agency in the US, I witnessed and was a part of what I call “the great divide.”

The majority school of thought was to wrap public assistance recipients, clients, in a cocoon of state security. AFDC, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, payments at that time ranged from about $88.00 per month for one dependent child to about $124.00 per month for four or more dependent children (these figures are from memory), while a one bedroom apartment in the projects was about $150.00 per month, more outside the projects (halve these figures to get an approximation in pounds sterling), which meant that without government-subsidized housing (Section , government-subsidized food (food stamps), government-subsidized medical care (Medicaid), and charity clothing, survival was impossible, and the phenomenon sometimes called “the welfare culture” was generated and passed down from generation to generation.  

I was a part of the minority school of thought that in effect said “Bull crap!” Our attitude was to “get ‘em outta here” by hooking our clients up with everything we could find to get them off of AFDC and onto their feet as independent, empowered citizens.

Secretary Kemp was squarely in that minority camp. He wanted unempowered, perpetually dependent project residents to become empowered, independent homeowners.

The application to your nation is this: When one owns one’s own home, one can tell “the gub’mint” from which bridge and into what lake to jump, and one can actually use one’s dining room to dime of one so chooses.

Power to the People.

An attempt by some Council tenants on the outskirts of Pease Pottage to rearrange their accommodation to avoid the Tory Bedroom Tax runs into unexpected difficulties...







" So - it was a load-bearing wall, after all..."

Yes RockOnBrother..... The rich and privileged and powerful ones only want the poor folk out of their hair so that they do not have to even look at them and that is why such "ghettos" re-occur right around the modern world.

The thing is that once all of these, ( as they see it ), "undesirables" are kettled into tight areas of deprivation the crime rates soar and the gangs are formed and get bigger each day and the local cops have a hard job keeping a lid on such places.

This view of mine is supported by the number of riots that have started both here in Britain and in America when the people in those places can no longer see a way out and all that is left to them is to foment hatred and violence.

This phenomenon has in the past created situations where the people felt that the only way out from under this kind of repression was to riot in large numbers and to form full-scaled popular revolutions. Russia, France, Cuba, and many Latin American and African states of the past have done just this and such ideas are not too far away now in the richer and more developed countries of the world.

Regards....

Papaumau.

Yes RockOnBrother, I remember it well, even over here across the pond. Thanks for reminding me and the rest of us about these modern-day revolutions.

I know that poverty is not totally to blame for such events, but it is never far away when people get onto the streets to riot.

The race thing has been much worse over in America than it has in Britain but even over here we still feel racial hatred touching our lives fairly regularly too.

The hard right over here, like the UKIP political party and the extremist right-wingers in some parts of the Tory party and the really hard-line BNP party are showing levels of xenophobia that we have not seen for a very long time in Britain and this hatred of anything European or foreign has split this country right down the middle.

Of course we ARE having problems with immigration, ( just like in America ), but here we see the rich side of our society trying to make this into some kind of a "race" thing while they are happy to employ these folks at less than the minimum wage and treat them like modern-day slaves.

Such double-standards give one a really bad taste in the mouth.

I guess that there are no easy answers to problems like this, but I know one thing: If the powers that be were to do something about the ever-widening gulf between the poor and the rich here and even try to re-distribute the wealth in this very rich country, a bit better, There would not be nearly as much unrest on the streets and the Brits would feel a bit more settled and comfortable in their worn-out shoes.

Regards.....

Papaumau.

I keep thinking the solution to inequality would be to require everyone to use the same health services and send their children to the same schools - completely get rid of private education and health care - then the 'universal' provision will improve, people won't be able to grow up not knowing what life can be like for poorer people, no-one will be able to get into a plum job just because they were in the 'right' school.
Let's not insist on anyone giving up their money - just insist on them not buying health care and education with it.

I know --- just too idealistic

Basic guaranteed standards for all. Sounds reasonable, unless you are fortunate enough to be able to pay for the absolute very best, in which case depriving yourself and family in order to subsidise the lower orders makes no sense at all.

It's a problem which assails Pop Stars and Footballers with a social conscience who would ideally use the NHS but are then criticised for taking up space when they could afford to go private.

See, I think the absolute very best in education and health care should be available to all.

"To each according to his need" has subtly become "to each according to the depth of purse".

Someone remind me which political party has been working continuously towards that change ever since 1945?

The problem is we now only have one political party - unless you count the inconsequential smaller parties on the fringes.

Voting Con, Lab, or Lib only puts a different wrestler from the same corner in the ring. They are a tag team.

"Voting Con, Lab, or Lib only puts a different wrestler from the same corner in the ring. They are a tag team."

Their response to Press Control measures over last weekend put that beyond doubt. Like any other Professional Body, there is a swift closing of ranks when under threat.

Talking idealistically about the rich and the NHS makes for a good sound bite but in fact so long as we recognise that there will always be this gulf between the haves and the have nots we then have to think of ways to ensure that the "have nots" are not just left with the dregs of the health-care that are left by the rich.

I have had an idea for some time that these two sections of society should actually be properly separated by forcing them to admit that they are truly independently-wealthy and no longer need any service from the NHS.

Yes, this might sound a bit radical, but as I see it the people who pay into the national insurance scheme should be able to get very high quality care from the service they pay into without the people that already have the wealth to be able to privately pay for the best while also parasiting from the NHS.

By this I mean that either you are in the NHS or you are not and if you are given the chance to opt-out and do not pay into the NHS via the national insurance scheme you should not be able to get ANY health-care from it at all.

Of course this would then mean that the rich would have to have their own emergency services, their own hospitals, ( and I do not mean the likes of the Bupa hospitals that steal staff and consultants away from the NHS on a regular basis ), and that consultants that moonlight in the private sector when they feel like it should be banned from jumping ship back and forward while the NHS suffers from their absences.

In other words....a very high wall should be built between all of the NHS services and the privateer services and the staff and patients should never meet by slipping through any doors in this wall.

Anybody......

Regards.....

Papaumau

The problem there might be that it is the Rich who make the Rules, and have done so for almost the past thousand years. They'll take some shifting, Papaumau.

Yep Papa, that's socialism for you, "us and them". weird world innit?

tlttf wrote:Yep Papa, that's socialism for you, "us and them". weird world innit?

Trouble is tittf its the rich that created the "us and them" and they intend to put as much space between them and us, and as the gap grows bigger so will the rift between the have and the have nots grow. :bom:

Is the bedroom tax the new poll tax ~ in regard to its unfairness YES!!! This is two fold for me, as those set to suffer the most will inevitably be those in low income area's and the councils that have to support those areas. Once universal credit makes its entrance in October of this year the choice and strain on families will be even greater, the option to pay the extra for the rent to keep their roof over their head or putting food on the table/heating the house, are decisions that no family should ever have to face.

Then there is the impact on the Local councils, particularly those in low income based areas which come October will see a severe drop in the amount of money they will be grossing per month due to tenants being unable to pay the full amount of their rent. Which then results in less money for building new houses in areas viewed as deprived less regeneration type projects and given enough time to pass houses fall in to such disrepair, the iconic yet disturbing "Slum" makes its return.

Perhaps to save all the hassle the Conservative party should just re-introduce the work houses and be done, as they clearly want to return to days of old with the gap between the have's and have nots becoming wider with each new policy that they introduce.

What should YOUR society do for YOU ?

Firstly, we expect that your particular society be protected and defended, and therefore we have defence budgets and armies, run, paid for and controlled by the government - does this make armed forces a socialist idea. ?

Most societies provide universal free education, run and funded by national or local governments, another socialist provision. ?

What about the police or fire service, are these socialist ideas simply because they are taxpayer owned and funded, then there s libraries, national parks, museums and the coast guard.

If there were to be no universal free healthcare, no welfare state to act as a safety net, then what would happen to millions of people who are sick, disabled, on low wages, those who become unemployed, people who need THEIR state and THEIR society to help them out. ?

Why do those on the right of politics always cry "socialism" when what they real mean is a decent, caring, human society that looks after its own people.

What kind of sociey is it that would sit back and watch poor people or sick people suffer - a Conservative one.

What a strange world some people live in witchy. Nobody denies that there are some that on occasion have to rely on the state for some support. What as that got to do with the conservatives, anybody that believes the "wannabes" waiting in the wings will even attempt to change one of the policies put forward by the "coalition" (note not tory) lives in a totally red tinted world. Not one government since the 70's has tried to change things for the benefit of the working man/woman. What makes anybody believe things would change under the other socialists?