I was genuinely gobsmacked by something that happened earlier today
I was on The Guardian website and reading a story about the government's proposal to get rid of the right to have a council house for life where I queried why such a right should ever have existed and said that the only way of guaranteeing possession of something was to own it outright.
I received this response from someone:
"You do realise that having a mortgage you do not own the property. The banks own it until the day you make your final payment. They hold the deeds until that very time. For some people living in a council property is not a choice. But for those of us that do it is for this reason.
We don't want a automatic debt as soon as papers are signed for a mortgage. And we don't want to be paying rip off rents in the private sector & effectively paying someone else's mortage with interest.
Majority of council properties are still of a decent living size. Unlike the pathetic shoe boxes being Peddled off as luxury homes. So until the house prices become more affordable why should any sane person be forced into the private sector?"
So am I mistaken or was this person essentially saying they didn't actually need a council house, but chose to stay in one because it was cheaper than buying or renting?
Now I'm not generally genuinely outraged, but how the f**k is that OK?
I know people who have council flats, own holiday homes abroad, own more than one car and holiday
abroad at least twice a year. How is that "progressive"?
But I don't understand! I will admit to having been lucky enough to afford to be ignorant of these
matters, but I was under the impression that council housing was designed for those who actually needed it and couldn't afford anything else? Is that not the idea of it? Have I got this wrong?
Because government is just a business like any other, as people demonstrate all the time
by "choosing" to use the NHS, state schools or public libraries :shrug:
You don't. But I think at some point the Labour left must have toyed with the idea of nationalising
all property which would have meant everyone would be a council tenant. Of course this created a culture of entitlement and led to the likes of wealthy people, like the late unlamented Bob Crow, living in comfy cheap cpuncil flats whilst other less entitled workers have to commute or pay high rents in the private sector.
Well no. Those things are slightly different. Those are things we pay for through our taxes and
which are designed for universal use. I thought council housing was - like unemployment benefit or disability benefit - designed for those in dire need?
But this is a scandal, isn't it? Why aren't people up in arms about this situation?
There are people perfectly capable of paying for their own accommodation having their housing costs massively subsidised by the taxpayer while there is a housing shortage, ffs! This is madness.
Of course it is. But in a situation where polticians buy votes and the civil service and local
council employees have jobs for life and are not taken to task for ineffciency, what do you expect?
Civil Servants do NOT have jobs for life
Over the last 5ish years there have been many 000s of jobs cut across central Government Departments.
There will be many more before the end of the current financial year. (i.e. 5th April)