Bedroom tax

[psychocandy]

Must admit having no experience of this I didn't really know how this worked. (Even claiming JSA).

Anyway, family member is without a job. He lives alone in a rented 2 bed flat. So of course, I assumed this so called bedroom tax would apply because he only needs one bedroom.

Found out this a crock of tulipe. Basically, they give you an allowance based on what you need. i.e. single person only needs one bedroom, I guess for family its different. As it happens, the rent they'll pay covers his 2 bed flat anyway so hes lucky.

But, and I could be thick here, why are people moaning that they're without work and the government won't pay for the extra bedroom they don't really need. Its not a tax its just paying you what you need surely? Or am I missing something?

Yes Im a supporter of claiming JSA as you all know. But its a safety net, that is all, not a comfortable lifestyle choice. Next thing we'll get the do-gooders making up a fag and holidays tax because people on benefits can't get extra money for fags etc.

[MrMarkyMark]

And your point is

[barrydidit]

[vetran]

its official title was 'spare room subsidy' the 'Bedroom tax' is an emotional name dreamt up by its opposition.

Problem is that they found people who had a four bedroom council house after the kids had fled the nest didn't want to move out as it was 'their home' (I know of 3 families like this personally) so they had to find a way to get them to move out. Not paying benefit for the value of the extra bedrooms seemed the fairest way.

Now its attacked as a tax on the poor and they wheel out someone who has a long term health condition and needs the second bedroom to store their medical equipment in as justification for scrapping it. There is a fund for each local council to cover such edge cases.


Note New Lie imposed the 'Bedroom tax' on people who were renting privately on benefits when they were in power. Their objection seems to be to the Tories withdrawing benefits from those who have won the council house lottery and are unwilling to downsize.

[psychocandy]

Seems fair to me if you're rent is being paid by benefits you should only get what you need not a bigger house because you like it.

[MrMarkyMark]

Seems fair to me if you're rent is being paid by benefits you should only get what you need not a bigger house because you like it.

But that does not include JSA, in your case, though, does it?
i.e. you didn't need it.

it, therefore, must only apply to those filthy scroungers who are constantly not working, in your eyes?

Seems you have a strange case of double standards.

[BrilloPad]

Seems fair to me if you're rent is being paid by benefits you should only get what you need not a bigger house because you like it.

Bankers don't get the house they need. The tax-payer pays them way more than necessary.

[MrMarkyMark]

Bankers don't get the house they need. The tax-payer pays them way more than necessary.

Hopefully we will increase this amount to them, once they reduce all government bank guarantees down to 50K, prior to removing them completely.

"for the good of the economy"

Then our money will legitimately be removed, from those accounts, when the bankers feck up again.

Sorted.

[The Spartan]

Seems fair to me if you're rent is being paid by benefits you should only get what you need not a bigger house because you like it.

There's a sense of entitlement even amongst those that can't be bother to get off their arse's

[VectraMan]

The point that gets missed is that the people in genuine need of a 4 bedroom council house can't get one because they're all being occupied by little old ladies whose children left home 10 years before. The taxpayer then pays out more in housing benefit for them to find somewhere private, which inevitably means some BTLers get richer.

The Tories did a spectacularly bad job of explaining all this.