RT - why fall for the drivel of the propagandists.
The people most effected by this policy are those hard working, low paid people fulfilling essential services in our cities. Without the support of housing benefit making housing affordable these people would be forced to live outside of the capital, yet their wages would not support the cost of commuting. Are you saying that you are going to volunteer to clean your own streets and toilets, mop your floors, serve your own coffee in between earning your deserved wage?
Why do you see 'freeloader' every time benefit is mentioned, when the reality for many is that they are minimally paid? They do contribute to society, and massivly so. Without their contributions the cities would grind to a halt and become dangerous to health. Why don't you wish to permit others to have the opportunity to carry on contributing by forcing them out of the city they love?
And once you have socially cleansed the city, the medium paid workers will still not be able to afford to live in the houses vacated. This issue thus is not excessive housing benefits but inadequate wages. The campaign for the living wage, and the regulation of rents would remove excessive exploitation of people and the benefit system by those who are more to the 'most have' end of the social sectrum.
So yes RT, lets be honest. A number of landlords have grown fat on the inflated rents, abusing the benefit system. A number of employers make short terms profit from low wages (unlike employers who operate in a socially responsible manner making longer term sustainable profits whilst offering fair pay and conditions to staff). Caught in the middle of this are the low paid and those without work.