View Single Post
Old 13-07-2015, 06:30   #200
peanut
NUTS !!
 
peanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,283
peanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny star
peanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny starpeanut has a nice shiny star
Re: Crackdown on 'rich' council house tenants

Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf View Post
and there was i thinking that it was too many holding out the begging bowl for nanny state handouts but it seems that it was wanting a fair return on investment that was the problem ,maybe we should just give them the house for free along with all the other state handouts .
Do you begrudge those in council houses or housing association or something? You really are showing yourself up here.

The rents are cheaper in social housing, but it doesn't mean it's subsidised, just market rates are higher because they are privately run. I don't see what the problem is here.

What kind of idiot would give up their social housing even though they could afford privately owned rented accommodation, just because of the ethics. It's the terms and agreements that come with social housing that offers the security that people need. Also for some that could afford to rent private probably wouldn't be able to get a mortgage or do not want to go down that road for giving up the security they have. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
__________________
Oh what fun it is
peanut is offline   Reply With Quote