Why Can't People Manage On £500 Per Week?

[magsmay]

So - the Cap on Benefits will commence, along with a chorus of moaning minnies who say they can't possibly manage and will have to cut down on food and heating -so bloody what!!! If two working people had the misfortune of one of them losing their job they would have to cut down until things got better - your weekly cheque is a benefit For Funks Sake not a wage - Some WORKING couples barely clear £500 after off takes -this makes my blood boil -people these days are like spoilt children when they get their sweeties taken away - Quote from one moaning minnie this a.m. on TV '' I've tried to get work in the past but for me its not an option'' -then suck it up madam- if you want the State to provide for you then cut down and budget like the working families have to.

[emmie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22148764

[Sharingan]

No I'm not basing it on one flat in Gower Street, I just don't walk around with my eyes shut, have a look at any London Estate agents, watch them for a couple of days, you will see flats appear one day and signed 'let' the next with vast rents attached to them. It obviously depends on area, but London is notoriously expensive to rent in, my father also has a London property portfolio, and this has held true for that as well. Of course people share and commute and of course there are also people who don't even earn £100 per week, but there are plenty who can afford vast rents as well. This is one of my main points that we will be creating a scenario where no-one earning a normal wage will be able to afford to live in London if we aren't careful.

[LazyGun]

http://www.londonpropertywatch.co.uk/average_rental_prices.html

@ Sqad - not sure if thats masochistic or pervie, watching 2 women fight... :)

[MadMen]

Oh for fluffs sake. Seriously, shut up the both of you.

As EB says, we are sick of having to trawl through your petty arguments.
I DO have to read it, because you post a thread that I am interested in, and then start your bickering.
Don't give a Sugar who "started" it, you're both as bad as each other. Can you not just call a truce. It's boring and tedious....

B00, exactly what I was thinking! Where are these people getting £500 a week from?
Childcare costs are a serious issue here. I am lucky that I have family/friends that help out, because there's no way I could afford to work full time and then shell out for a childminder.

[naomi24]

Em, //can someone come up with the facts that plenty of people could afford 3k a month rent, because i know of no one past or present who could. //


If "It's rather common knowledge", you and I must have missed something important. And us knowing London so well too. Tut. ;o)

[Sharingan]

Thank you Lazygun- a much simpler answer to the question xx

[EvianBaby]

Sharin, I think that's already the case.

[Sqad]

LazyGun.....never question my motives.........always "PERVIE.".......;-)

[sara3]

MadMen, I think you're missing who keeps dragging up the same old tedious nonsense.

[Sharingan]

Please see Lazygun's link Naomi.

[MadMen]

Sara, they're both doing my head in. Both as bad as each other.

[emmie]

sve, wages would rise to realistic levels, ok so all the small and medium businesses, businesses who can't afford it, go out of business, leaving those people without a job. What is a realistic wage, doesn't it depend on the job you do, a cleaner isn't going to earn what a brain surgeon does, nor a middle manager earn what a CEO does, so not really sure how you get a realistic wage scheme going. All those people may reside in the capital, the CEO may have a house, apartment paid for by the company and his main home may be out of town. The others have to try and find what they can, social housing if at all possible and they do not give those out to singles, not unless there is a very good reason, or that a single bed apartment comes free when the elderly person dies or goes into a home. Then perhaps a single person can go into one, but that isn't often. So many rent privately, and few can afford many of the high rents that have and are being charged in the capital. The answer for some could be move out, then begs the question they then have to pay a small fortune to commute back in, if their job is here in the capital, so in effect no better or perhaps worse off.

[maggiebee]

Wow, £500 a week? Bring it on!! That would be luxury living for me. Mind you I only worked for 50 years and brought up three of a family so I probably don't deserve it!!!

[sara3]

I appreciate that, but if magsmay would drop it, I'm pretty sure Sharingan would be more than happy

[naomi24]

Sharingan, before you make the silly claims such as you have made, I suggest you see LazyGun’s link.

[pastafreak]

ditto for what sara said.

[Sharingan]

I have already dropped it several times Madmen and as Sara so rightly said would be delighted to drop it again, it's Magsmay who constantly brings it up, rehashes it and ultimately gets suspended for it not me but I'm afraid I won't ' shut up' whilst she's still flinging her mud around.

[jim360]

There won't be too many people hit by this which is already part of the myth - that so many on benefits earn way more than the minimum wage. So that's point one. Secondly those who are over this are indeed on housing benefit. They didn't move into that house after getting benefits, apart from maybe one or two exceptional cases, but the system should be judged by those. What happens far more often is that circumstances change rapidly and beyond control. Someone had a highly-paid job, and a large house and family, and then lost that job, or the husband left, or some sob story or other. It's not always tragic, but even so the point is generally true.

In those cases you have someone or several people trapped in a house they can no longer afford, with sometimes no realistic option of downsizing. It might be that they moved into that house in the first place because they needed somewhere so large. At any rate, the great majority of people, however they got into this position, got there by accident and could be stuck there for a while, and there are almost always children involved.

In these circumstances, you can say "well they should move" but that could be difficult. After all, in some cases there's nowhere smaller for them to move, or perhaps there is but it's at the other end of the country. An entire family uprooted and being effectively forced to move by the state? Thats not pretty.

Other budgeting is perhaps possible, and certainly some of those on benefits might be better off not buying luxuries. But in general if you are on £500+ a month benefits then most of that will rapidly disappear on rent anyway, leaving you on closer to maybe £200 a month.

[Sharingan]

I've looked at the link thank you Naomi, I suggest you do likewise, as that link bears me out.

[magsmay]

This rent thing is a bit like chicken and egg -give people enough housing benefit so they don't have to live in 'poorer' areas- so what happens then -only the people on generous housing benefit can afford to live in certain areas as working people can't afford it? Madness! Mr and Mrs X live in a nice semi with a huge mortgage and both have jobs -Mr. X loses his and they can't manage to pay the mortgage - so they cut down on expenditure and if the worse comes to the worse move to a smaller house -thats what people do -except if you're on benefits then you play the 'oh dear me i can't manage why should i move away from all my friends just because the government won't fund my 4 bed detached in leafy suburbia'.