Soldier put behind the unemployed, criminals and asylum seekers on housing register

[GommeInc]

Wiki (as reliable as it is ) says they're called council housing in Canada too. Something about affordable post war housing.

[Hitman]

I personally think soldiers should get a lot of things for free once they've finished X amount of years... free housing or discounted housing at least...

This makes me very angry yet again... ugh.

[Jordy]

Wiki (as reliable as it is ) says they're called council housing in Canada too. Something about affordable post war housing.

That's exactly what ours were meant to be originally, although looking at this thread, it only goes to show times have changed.

[Catzsy]

Well I have to say Jordy that it was Margaret Thatcher who changed all this.

After Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, the legislation to implement the Right to Buy was passed in the Housing Act 1980. The sale price of a council house was based on its market valuation but also included a discount to reflect the rents paid by tenants and also to encourage take-up. The legislation gave council tenants the right to buy their council house at a discounted value, depending on how long they had been living in the house, with the proviso that if they sold their house before a minimum period had expired they would have to pay back a proportion of the discount. The sales were an attractive deal for tenants and hundreds of thousands of homes were sold. The policy is regarded as one of the major points of Thatcherism.

This means that theres is a vast shortage of social housing everywhere because a lot of it is now owner/occupied and they also got the houses at a huge discount. Bad move in my opinion - if they could afford to buy a house then they should not be living in Social housing. But the situation is as it is now. I don't know why the soldier even wants a council house but I do believe that something should be done for him for all the reasons above. It doesn't necessarily mean though he is being denied it just by criminals and immigrants as I am sure there are many people and families on the list that do not fall into the category and have been waiting longer. The other question is has he left the army with a pension or has he just quit? Lots of unanswered questions here that haven't been explained. However, I checked the rental accomodation in Bexhill as it is in quite short supply and is pretty expensive. Hope something gets done as it is quite a unique situation as he is accomodated by the army at present.

[Jordy]

Well I have to say Jordy that it was Margaret Thatcher who changed all this.

This means that theres is a vast shortage of social housing everywhere because a lot of it is now owner/occupied and they also got the houses at a huge discount. Bad move in my opinion - if they could afford to buy a house then they should not be living in Social housing. But the situation is as it is now. I don't know why the soldier even wants a council house but I do believe that something should be done for him for all the reasons above. It doesn't necessarily mean though he is being denied it just by criminals and immigrants as I am sure there are many people and families on the list that do not fall into the category and have been waiting longer. The other question is has he left the army with a pension or has he just quit? Lots of unanswered questions here that haven't been explained. However, I checked the rental accomodation in Bexhill as it is in quite short supply and is pretty expensive. Hope something gets done as it is quite a unique situation as he is accomodated by the army at present.

I commented on Labours failure to build promised houses in general, until very recently they have almost made it incredibly difficult for first time buyers too. If more houses were built it would of eased the pressure on social housing too.

Right To Buy gave something for people to aspire to, a reason to work hard and save money so they could actually own their own council house, I'm sure owning your own home is anyone's dream in life. Thatcher made it affordable for them to do this, the council houses were offered at cheaper prices than typical houses on the market.

[dbgtz]

I personally think soldiers should get a lot of things for free once they've finished X amount of years... free housing or discounted housing at least...

This makes me very angry yet again... ugh.

No they shouldn't? They do actually get paid and some perks for what they do, it is a job at the end of the day. If you say it's a risky job, there's plenty of risky jobs but they don't get these "after perks".

Assuming those people applied for houses first, then fine but if it's like some sort of punishment that he will only be done later then that's not fair.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well I have to say Jordy that it was Margaret Thatcher who changed all this.

This means that theres is a vast shortage of social housing everywhere because a lot of it is now owner/occupied and they also got the houses at a huge discount. Bad move in my opinion - if they could afford to buy a house then they should not be living in Social housing. But the situation is as it is now. I don't know why the soldier even wants a council house but I do believe that something should be done for him for all the reasons above. It doesn't necessarily mean though he is being denied it just by criminals and immigrants as I am sure there are many people and families on the list that do not fall into the category and have been waiting longer. The other question is has he left the army with a pension or has he just quit? Lots of unanswered questions here that haven't been explained. However, I checked the rental accomodation in Bexhill as it is in quite short supply and is pretty expensive. Hope something gets done as it is quite a unique situation as he is accomodated by the army at present.

Well that is just terrible;- giving the poorest the chance to buy a house at a discounted price and thus not have to rely on the state in future is dreadful (from a Labour point of view because quite frankly, it loses you votes and removes power from the state and gives it to the individual which is against everything that the left stands for). The fact is that the right to buy scheme was introduced to allow the poorest to get on their own two feet and give them motivation to better off themselves. I would like to say and ask, despite the fact that Labour have had 13 years now in office why is everything still Margaret Thatchers fault? - maybe, just maybe, its the fault of Labour for failing to build new council houses and for allowing immigration/asylum to explode thus deepening the burden?

[Hitman]

No they shouldn't? They do actually get paid and some perks for what they do, it is a job at the end of the day. If you say it's a risky job, there's plenty of risky jobs but they don't get these "after perks".

Assuming those people applied for houses first, then fine but if it's like some sort of punishment that he will only be done later then that's not fair.

Like I said, I personally think they should. That's my opinion. You have yours, which is opposite to mine, which is fine. Of course they get paid. We wouldn't have an army if they didn't get paid. :rolleyes: It's not a huge amount though... in the region of £20k per year for putting their lifes at risk. Yeah, those other risky jobs aren't the same. You didn't care to name one but it's different, the army is defending the country and is an honourable thing, whereas a window cleaner climbing up 100's of stories is not on the same level. At the end of the day these people put their lives on the line for our country: without these people we might not be here. If a soldier puts in so many years, 10 for arguments sake, then I think they should get housing, or at least cheaper housing. That's my opinion.

I have nothing but utter respect for every person who is in or has been in the Armed Forces. They risk their lives to defend us, knowing they could die any time, yet they do. I don't think many people join the army solely for the money, rather for the honour of fighting for the country.

[dbgtz]

Like I said, I personally think they should. That's my opinion. You have yours, which is opposite to mine, which is fine. Of course they get paid. We wouldn't have an army if they didn't get paid. :rolleyes: It's not a huge amount though... in the region of £20k per year for putting their lifes at risk. Yeah, those other risky jobs aren't the same. You didn't care to name one but it's different, the army is defending the country and is an honourable thing, whereas a window cleaner climbing up 100's of stories is not on the same level. At the end of the day these people put their lives on the line for our country: without these people we might not be here. If a soldier puts in so many years, 10 for arguments sake, then I think they should get housing, or at least cheaper housing. That's my opinion.

I have nothing but utter respect for every person who is in or has been in the Armed Forces. They risk their lives to defend us, knowing they could die any time, yet they do. I don't think many people join the army solely for the money, rather for the honour of fighting for the country.

Well all jobs have risks. Also the honourable thing depends on which side of the stick you're on, plus how are they defending us at the moment, really? We still get terrorist attacks.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well all jobs have risks. Also the honourable thing depends on which side of the stick you're on, plus how are they defending us at the moment, really? We still get terrorist attacks.

I agree with them not being put to the front of the queue, the issue I have is why are they put behind criminals, asylum seekers and the unemployed?

The bigger issue being; why do them three even qualify for council housing in the first place?