[Sloper]

http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2015/feb/10/blackpool-treasury-slash-residents-housing-benefit

Absolutely agree and not before time, if we slashed the tax credits and housing benefit etc in London and the South East the employers there would have no option but to pay a living wage (granted some would relocate but that's no bad thing either).

[Stubbs]

That appears to be an article about taking control of a bad housing situation brought about by arsehole private landlords in their area by setting up their own company with govt money.

[Will Hunt]

No, Stubbs, can't you read. It's obviously an article about why cutting benefits is a good thing.
 

[Sloper]

No, Stubbs, can't you read. It's obviously an article about why cutting benefits is a good thing.
 

Personally I find it obscene that landlords are able to suckle at the public teat in the way that they are particularly when in so doing they are exploiting the most vulnerable and I take no issue with the council forming a company to compete commercially.

The oldest 'facts & figures' I have is 2001 and this gives the fullt im adult male rate for sales assistant and check out operators as £12,732 (gross) or £244 per week.  in 2014/15's version this has increased to £277 as the median. 
That £33 wage increase is 12% over a 14 year period or <1% per year.  In comparison, wages for bricklayers and masons increased from £16963 to £24310 and increase of 43% or about 3% p.a.

But for the introduction of the tax credits in 2003 I would suggest that it is a compelling argument that wages for this group would have increased by a much greater degree (of course one can also argue that the NMW has also depressed wage increaes at the bottom).

Given this my view is that tax credits allow large companies to subsidise low wages and if the subsidy were removed then wages would rise to meet the market level.

As to the question why the landlord are arseholes: I would suggest that the council failing to regulate them is the secondary cause (the primary cause being that they're scum*) and would posit the question why is a council failing in its duties so spectacularly?

* note I refer to the landlords as scum as they're clearly housing people in substandard accommodation

[Stubbs]

I was just pointing out that the article you linked to in no way reinforced your 2nd paragraph.

Perhaps the council would be better able to regulate landlords if they hadn't had their funding cut...

As an aside, the picture that article paints of people heading to Blackpool when the bottom falls out of their life because it's a place with which they associate happy memories,  only to get stuck in some horrible converted guesthouse, is intensely depressing.

[Sloper]

Quite right, my proposition that cutting benefits would result in employers paying higher wages has nothing to do with the article.

Blackpool's ability to regulate landlords has nothing to do with cuts to the council's budget as the landlords pay fees for the licence etc

[Will Hunt]

As an aside, the picture that article paints of people heading to Blackpool when the bottom falls out of their life because it's a place with which they associate happy memories,  only to get stuck in some horrible converted guesthouse, is intensely depressing.

Indeed. I cannot fathom where my life would need to be for Blackpool, that well known town where the streets are paved with gold, to seem like the happiest option.

Tim, don't let the troll hook you in. If Sloper is as sharp witted as he says he is then he can see the logical fallacy of his argument. He has employed it purposefully in order to generate a discussion where obviously there is none to be had. Unscrupulous landlords are cock-faces. There's nothing more to be said.

[Sloper]

So why are Blackpool proposing to slash HB rates rather than regulate the cowboys out of town?

[Will Hunt]

So why are Blackpool proposing to slash HB rates and provide liveable accomodation, funded by development cash, rather than regulate the cowboys out of town?

It's a novel way to fix the problem. Maybe they've chosen to fix the problem this way because it brings investment and development into the area AND puts the shysters out of business rather than just trying to regulate the bad guys which may be legislatively difficult, resource-intensive and futile if a freshly dispatched landlord is quickly replaced by one just as bad.

The thing that concerns me most is that the people affected appear to be very vulnerable and on the face of it this looks like a mass eviction - putting these 'problem people' somewhere out of sight. That would be the cynical way to look at the measures.


Oh shit now I've been hooked   

[Sloper]

So why are Blackpool proposing to slash HB rates and provide liveable accomodation, funded by development cash, rather than regulate the cowboys out of town?

It's a novel way to fix the problem. Maybe they've chosen to fix the problem this way because it brings investment and development into the area AND puts the shysters out of business rather than just trying to regulate the bad guys which may be legislatively difficult, resource-intensive and futile if a freshly dispatched landlord is quickly replaced by one just as bad.

The thing that concerns me most is that the people affected appear to be very vulnerable and on the face of it this looks like a mass eviction - putting these 'problem people' somewhere out of sight. That would be the cynical way to look at the measures.


Oh shit now I've been hooked   

Will, the landlords have to apply for a licence and pay a fee, if the property is inadequate the council simply keeps the fee and refuses to issue the licence: I would suggest it's not exactly difficult, indeed I'd probably do it and make a decent profit (say 500 properties at £600 to £1000 per property per year = very decent turnover for a small company).

Let's say you need 1 admin (£17k pa) two inspectors (£30k pa) and some office overheads (£50k pa) then you're looking at a surplus of around £200k pa.

Nice work if you can get it.