1.8 m could leave London suggests Shelter poll

[cloughie]

too many to live at unsustainable western lifestyle levels, perhaps........

There seems to be a constant urge for growth in economies, how about a bit of planned shrinkage, and how often these days is it cheaper to replace rather than repair, why can't you even give away unwanted furniture, when I was first setting up home I was glad for anything pushed in my direction - these days everything has to be new. I can remember back in the early 70s, the advent of computers would make life simpler and give us all more liesure time - what happened there then?
With hindsight, was the selling off of all those council houses and privatisation of all those utilities wise?

[Serial_Apologist]

There seems to be a constant urge for growth in economies, how about a bit of planned shrinkage, and how often these days is it cheaper to replace rather than repair

A very good example being my new printer: cheaper new than would be the cost of replacing the cartridges. Obviously it serves to ditch it when the inks go dry and get another new one.

[LHC]

Getting back to the original topic, if 1.6 million people would really be forced to move, does this not suggest that the subsidy provided by benefit payments has been artificially inflating rents in London? Indeed, it could be argued that the existence of this subsidy, and its apparent inflationary effect on rents in central London, is one of the reasons that so many of London's key workers have to live outside the capital. It seems barmy to me that the only way to afford rented accommodation in Westminster is either to be one of the super-rich, or on benefits.

The sudden removal of 1.6 million people from the market for rented accommodation in central London (which is what would happen if they were all forced to move out) would undoubtedly have an effect on market rents in those areas. If no one can afford the rents landlords are charging, the rents would inevitably have to come down. This might eventually make it easier for London's key workers to live closer to the areas in which they actually work.

I am not saying this is what will happen. I find it hard to believe that 1.6 million people will really be forced to move, but it does seem that an unintended consequence of a laudable aim (to ensure that those on benefits can afford somewhere to live) has been to raise rents beyond the level that those in work can afford.

[old khayyam]

and yet those who attempt to live in such a way as to put no pressure on the benefit system, require no social housing or amenities, get off their backsides and work day in, day out, live minimum-impact sustainable lifestyles, whilst actually paying money into the system in the form of Vehicle Excise Duty among others, are slandered by the mass-media and moved on by police on a daily basis..

[MrGongGong]

and yet those who attempt to live in such a way as to put no pressure on the benefit system, require no social housing or amenities, get off their backsides and work day in, day out, live minimum-impact sustainable lifestyles, whilst actually paying money into the system in the form of Vehicle Excise Duty among others; these people are slandered by the mass-media and moved on by police on a daily basis..

Exactly who are you referring to ? tis a little cryptic

[Segilla]

Exactly who are you referring to ? tis a little cryptic

Seems obvious to me.

The theory is that pressure is coming off those who pay for others to live on benefits.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, because the country is hugely in debt and the party is now over, it's time to pay the bill.

[MrGongGong]

"moved on by the police " ???
and "slandered " ???

It's time to support the most vulnerable rather than give away our money to *ankers IMV

[Flosshilde]

it's time to pay the bill.

The bill for what?

[MrGongGong]

it's time to pay the bill.

Fine, but there's something intrinsically wrong about paying someone else's bill when they are more than able of paying their own bills !

[cloughie]

A very good example being my new printer: cheaper new than would be the cost of replacing the cartridges. Obviously it serves to ditch it when the inks go dry and get another new one.

I'm on my fourth printer on that basis, several hundred pounds worth of cartridges later!

[Segilla]

The bill for what?

For overspending on benefits, foreign wars, immigrants who are only here for the beer.
For undertaxing the grossly rich.
For over-paying people who cannot possibly need the huge amounts of money they are alleged to 'earn'.
For wasting substance on frivolous living. Imported plastic trash everywhere. How many dozens of fluffy toys are there in the average family house?

Agree or disagree, the bill is still there on the table.

I pay my whack and being elderly I'm one of the lucky ones.