The Bedroom Tax and an alternative solution

The ever so wise (not) government have introduced a tax on those people who under occupy their homes. This tax applies to those who are of working age and only to the housing sector called Social Rented Housing. For example, councils and housing associations. Pensioners are not effected by this and a cynical person might say this is because they are ever so more likely to vote at elections. No government in their right mind would do anything to antagonise the elderly. In many cases the elderly have it easier than those termed as working age.  For everyone is always looking out to help pensioners.

An example of someone who might be effected by this would be say a forty plus individual, living in a flat with two bedrooms, in this example it could even be a couple. Say they had two children who have grown up and left home. Living in a two bedroom property this will automatically mean they are under occupying the property. Adding a little more detail to this situation, lets say this couple are at work but in low paid jobs and are able to receive some form of housing benefit. The bedroom tax will mean because they are under occupying the property they will not receive housing benefit in relation to the full rent. The maximum this benefit could be applied at would be a 14 per cent reduction in the actual rent. If their rent is normally £100 then the calculation of housing benefit will only be determined as if the rent were £86. This couple will have to find the additional monies to cover this rent.  If they were not working and receiving state benefits the same figure is used. Proportionately someone who is receiving state benefits will have even less money to live off. There are some exceptions in the bedroom tax, but the majority of working age claimants will have less money to pay their rent.

The repercussions of the bedroom tax have not been considered fully. A simplistic notion in a simplistic Tory mind is these people will either have to take in a lodger or they will move to another property. In London there are very few if any single bedroom properties vacant, because these are probably the most wanted properties around. In addition, there is absolutely no consideration to how many years of their life these people have spent living in a property or becoming part of the community they are in. Paradoxically there will now be people renting properties from the private sector who will be entitled to more in the way of housing benefits than those who rent from the Social Rented Sector.  Properties in and around London are expensive and their rental is equally expensive because demand is high. Of course the higher the demand the higher rental values can be charged in the Private Rented Sector. It's a matter of fact.

An alternative to have controlled spending on the housing benefit budget (which is about £23 billion per year) would of been to introduce a new fair rent act. An act which would restrict rental values of all private sector accommodation.  In addition to introduce an extra empty home tax, this would apply to all those properties which are empty for too long. Were this tax applied after three months and equivalent to say 70 per cent of the weekly rental value it would automatically encourage private landlord's to ensure they rented out their spare unused properties. The value of the empty property tax could then suitably increase if the property remains unoccupied for longer. Of course exemptions and exception would be applicable but those exemptions and exceptions would also be open up to review.  Applied to London and all other areas of the country this could increase income levels for taxes and at the same time ensure the number of empty and unoccupied properties were reduced and occupied. It would certainly be in the interest of any private landlord to ensure they were.

Instead now the Toss pot, I mean Tory Party coalition government have created a situation where the poorest people in the UK pay the most. They are expected to pull the economy out of recession by the government reducing it's underlying spending on housing benefit.  In the country there will be millions of people effected by this tax. The costs incurred to society will be high. Residents in the social rented sector will fall behind in the rent, creating rent arrears can mean they are in jeopardy of losing their home. In turn they will not be rehoused in social sector properties again as at this point they are considered intentionally homeless. However, they can seek out private accommodation, which charges a higher rate and be awarded benefits at an equally higher rate. In this respect the underlying desire to reduce the housing benefit budget is scuppered because now more funds are required.

It's a shame the government didn't have any idea about a fair rent act, then again they probably wouldn't. After all I expect a number of their supporters are private landlords who enjoy receiving the monies they do from their tenants. As for the pensioners, I'm sure a number of them will have children or grand children who are trying to start off in life and have difficulty making ends meet. In such cases when they hear of their children's plight they might become empathetic and change their vote. After all, even the bank of mum and dad, or granddad and grandma is limited. Look out voting box.

The Budget and a nasty smug chancellor

Tomorrow we get to see a budget by Georgie porgy Osborne, the upper class Tory snob who doesn't have the faintest idea of what it is like for a normal working or lower class person to live in the UK. He has his head so far up his own backside I understand he once sent out a search party to find himself. Fortunately he now has an app on his smart phone which tells him exactly where he is every minute of the day. He needs it, he gets lost easily, which is understandable as Cameron to has the same problem and was the first to tell Georgie about the app.

As though to give the country a good bit of news some of the budget has already been leaked. Those families who have children may be able to get additional help with child care costs. But this will not be immediate. It'll take place in 2015. Why tell us about it now I wonder. Inflation has gone up. This has been put down to the increase in oil, which Georgie has likely not even considered. How can a man with a degree in modern history run a country's economic? The Tory party must believe knowledge of economics is unnecessary. The most irritating thing though is everyone in the UK will have to endure Georgie's smug, ugly looking face tomorrow because he just happens to be the chancellor. I expect the NHS will take a hit with an increase in high blood pressure medication over the next few days. In the meantime Georgie will be basing himself in a bath of smug milk, and he'll probably use it all up before Cameron gets a chance to dip his toes in as well.

If evil exists then it must exist in ignorance, Georgie isn't fit to sit in Parliament but he does, how very unfortunate for the rest of us. Then if Karma also existed, Georgie is going to be in for a very interesting time when he leaves the house of power. Were god to exist then he sure could do with helping all of us.