new social housing rules
26/10/2010 9:40 pm
when do you think the new "end of lifetime tenency" & higher rents will come into force? also will this affect tennents who are already on a 1 year starter tennency?
Sort: Newest first | Oldest first
27/10/2010 9:09 am
I understood it was only for new tenants.
27/10/2010 10:51 am
They say it is for only new tenants, but it will affect existing tenants in all sorts of way. For example if you want to transfer...
Any existing tenant who is so naive to think these attacks will not affect them as well one way or another live in cloud nine.
Do you really think they are going to stop asttacking tenants now?
27/10/2010 11:55 am
New, Old, Private, Public - if tenants are being made to suffer they need to stand together. Staying silent because it only effects new tenants, or only private tenants, or only the unemployed, the sick, the disabled, the vulnerable, only makes those attacking the sector stronger. Be assured, if you are a tenant these changes will eventually land at your door. Be assured, that if you are a parent these changes will effect your children. Be assured that if you grow old or need support at some point in your life these changes will effect you.
Every person in this land has benefited because of social housing, either through their family living in it, the original effect on moderating the private market costs, enabling businesses to grow using a local workforce thus having products you want at prices you a prepared to pay, enabling services to be staffed for you to use, etc. If social housing did not exist it would need to be invented - acting together can still save it!
27/10/2010 4:36 pm
Not whilst Eastenders or Corrie are on, and then there are the Jeremy Kyle shows and the cable re-runs of American Chav Boxing. F1 on the weekends, and double bills of the Simpsons and Family Guy.
OK - So long as the revolution can start at 8pm on Wednesday, and be finished by 9am the following morning of course it can happen!
27/10/2010 7:18 pm
Social residents have traditionally been brownbeaten and brainwashed into non complaining about anything. Just look at the horrors of complaints procedures to make sure they never get anywhere....
If you look at the history of slavery liberation in USA, when southern states were imposed to give freedom to the slaves, many slaves refused to accept it...
It will take long time to educate people to turn things round... But things will turn round, as even slaves refusing freedom soon found out that slavery had been forced into their minds and they had to free themselves of their psychological chains to be able to free themselves from social chains.
28/10/2010 8:56 am
I take your point Kass, even if I disagree about the complaints procedures. (try complaining to some commercial businesses) However, on the matter of social 'chains' I thought I's share something I read recently I think, in one of the Sunday supplements:
It told of how, in victorian times a number of investigators were send out in the north of england to document the lives of the poor, One family, the father unemployed, walked the streets in a desperate serch for work. like many, were so poor that the children went barefoot and their 'tick' at the corner shop was so high that they could only buy bread until it was paid. The little boy who went barefoot went on to have a son of his own. That son managed to get a job at the Cadbury factory, and had a family of his own- the current generation who, because their father had got a reasonable job had done well for themselves and had no idea that in their grandfathers time, things had been so bad.
So, my point? Not a lecture about people getting jobs, but a thought. Roll back to those Victorian times, imagine if the family got HB, income support, JSA, child tax credit (whatever benefit you like). They can probably buy more than bread and the children would not be going barefoot.....BUT in the absense of such deprivation, would the parents of the little barefoot boy be driven to walk the strrets in search of work? Would the little boy be driven to go on to get a decent job?
Of course I don't know the answer and I'm not advocating grinding poverty!
My point is that the social chains are not brainwashing. The social chains are an absolute reliance on state support and in many cases a lack of ambition, a lack of drive that many people suffer to take control of their own lives. The chains are an aspiration to social housing, and an aspiration to perpetuate the state-dependent lifestyles.
As you say- the slaves refused to accept their freedom, just as tenants are railing against the reduction in government support now.
I'm not a great fan of what they're doing, but, unfortunately they've got to start somewhere
28/10/2010 10:23 am
Well said PSR, where do I join up (I can record Corrie) OOPs I live in social housing, should I admit I have a TV and recording equipment
28/10/2010 11:37 am
"My point is that the social chains are not brainwashing. The social chains are an absolute reliance on state support and in many cases a lack of ambition, a lack of drive that many people suffer to take control of their own lives. The chains are an aspiration to social housing, and an aspiration to perpetuate the state-dependent lifestyles."
However I think you miss the point you are trying to make if you follow your own tale (no pun!... )
Lack ambition, lack of drive... Tell me where does it come from? Who has engendered it?... Why do we have social classes?... Surely if you accept the social consequences of victorian times, you got to accept these are the social consequences of our own times... I will never agree that the majority of people who are given REAL opportunities to better themselves will not take them (unless you claim some of us are born stupider than others).
Consequently either these opportunities are not really there (ie they look like opportunities but in fact they are not, just a trap, or may work for a few but not for many) or the opportunities are really there but the (social) system is failing to convey these opportunties to the mass of people they are meant to take them.
28/10/2010 12:13 pm
I suspect a mixture of the above- there are opportunities there, but particularly now there are too few opportunities and too many people trying to grab them- and for some who are state-dependent, the financial penalties mean that only the most determined will succeed a consequence of a benefits culture. We also have an 'easy win' culture where young people grow up to have the ambition of being a WAG or be on X factor and become famous. In our efforts to encourage young people we give them football couching and they grow up to think they can be the next David Beckham.....but we don't need david beckhams, we need nurses and clerks and people to work in call centres.
Some people will always have more drive and ambition than others but people naturally look for the easiest option- it's the same mentality that means millions of people buy a lottery ticket each week- you can work really really really hard and start your own business or climb the greasy career pole....and you can become wealthy.......or you can trundle down the road and buy a scratchcard!
It's not a critisism....it's numan nature.
It is much harder for people today, once upon a time people could leave school and get a factory job and if they work hard, they may become shift manager, they may even progress to being the big manager.....but today people have come to expect to go to university and get a well-paid job straight after, but many people are excluded because they don't have qualifications and fall right into the low income, benefit support trap.
Personally, I belive that the government has a moral responsibility to create meaningful work for the people affected by these cuts, so that they CAN go out and take control of their lifestyle and income.
Where I live there is a wonderful ( but likely to be cut) subsidised scheme for people with disabilities, they do jobs within their abilities and their products sold for profit- they employ all sorts of disabled people including those with learning difficulties- making signs, outdoor furniture and buffet catering. Such schemes should be rolled out for the unskilled, unemployed and the disabled to build skills and abilities as well as structure and self worth....they can do more and they can progress, but more than that they should be creating work and givig those on benefits the training to do them.
My parter is unemployed- been on benefits for over a year. He's a delivery driver....but there's not work. He has no money so he can't afford to train.......but down the road there is a massive transport hub for big articulated lorries, but without the right license, he can't apply....Common sense would dictate that it would be a great investment for the jobcentre to provide the training- effectively doubling his job chances....but no, they just keep paying out the JSA, give him a regular nag about seeking non-exsistent jobs!
28/10/2010 8:20 pm
I agree that some people will always have more drive than others...
But that's not the point. This is a social issue about the majority of people in a particular section of society, not about some people or some gifted/determined individuals,
You will get always get a handful gifted people who are born on a derelect estate and will end up becoming billionnaires with mansions in different countries.
But the basic need of a secure safe home for the many has been eroded and even robbed by governments and social landlords.
It might well be true that in the private sector complaint procedures are worse than in the social sector - but (apart the fact the social landlords complaints procedures are paid for with your rent and your taxes) that's not excuse for social irrepsonsibility from landlords and governemnts.
Like it is just not logical to justif street homlessness in this country by saying there is more street homelessness Somalia.
That's what I am talking about, that social residents, like you have been brainwashed in being grateful to accept situations they should be very angry about.