[Gllug] VACANCY: Junior Systems Support

[Jason Clifford]

On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 14:51 +0100, Hari Sekhon wrote:
> > Why? Those young professionals are as able as anyone else to apply for
> > social housing and, if they qualify, to obtain it subject to
> > availability and that "subject to ability" bit applies to everyone
> > seeking social housing.
> >   
> They'll never get anything, they're not one of the pre-determined 
> priority categories. They're dead in the long run, they just don't know 
> it yet (not immediate dead like gun shot, just having too few children 
> to sustain themselves in the long run)

In other words they don't qualify. Why do you think that is a problem?

It's not a general entitlement.

> I've known people with flats paying nothing and even when working full 
> time in £15K+ jobs paying only £11 per month in rent and ridiculous sums 
> like that or £8 per week in another case I know personally.

That's not a fault in the social housing system but rather a question as
to the operation of the benefit system. 

> > Very few people will be seeing £5K pay rises now unless they are moving
> > job.

> Changing job is always the best way of getting a pay rise and the jobs 
> market is now making a comeback gradually (finally!)

Perhaps or it might be the result of a premature optimism. The
fundamental cause of the recession is still there - lots of bad debt. 

> > I strongly disagree. Social housing is not in itself the basis for any
> > kind of generational disaster. The lack of any kind of affordable
> > housing for the poorest parts of society however would be.
> >   
> It will be, it's only a matter of time now as the population is 
> gradually replaced (I guess you could cheat and solve the equation on 
> paper by simply re-classifying council types as the more successful for 
> having playing the system better)

I suspect you are holding a number of misconceptions regarding social
housing.

In what sense does the gradual replacement (please explain what you mean
by this too!) cause a generational disaster?

> Practically it could be solved by tiny temporary accommodations, 
> preferably a large redeveloped brownfield site outside of London 

The word you are looking for is ghetto. It's been tried before and has
failed.

> with 
> train link to re-utilize the London space better and allow those who 
> work hard to pay their own way to live closer to work - for example, 
> myself and many colleagues travel for 2-3+ hours per day to work, and 
> walk past council estates next to work in an more central area most 
> couldn't afford to live in. 

Do I detect a note of envy?

> This new setup would still provide a needed 
> safety net and get people back on their feet and working towards paying 
> their own way and working back in to the competitive private market 
> housing market through their own work. (You'd also have much nicer 
> redeveloped London areas free of council estates instead of million 
> pound houses next to the estate where you get jumped after work as 
> someone from work did a few years ago).

Or you'd have muggers commuting to "work" - but that already happens as
I've experienced myself.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug