General Discussion
@Lynne Nobody mentioned the concept of deserving/undeserving retired until you did. Not sure it would enter most people's heads.
If people can't afford to have children, or are not prepared to put up with the financial hardship, then just don't have any. I don't see why the state should subsidise people who choose to have kids.
I'm talking about child benefit, I don't see why people should be "rewarded" just for having kids.
If you want to bring kids into this world then be prepared to pay for them out your own pocket, don't expect others to subsidise you.
I thought User 4549 wasn't going to post on this site anymore?
@Duckileaks - i suggest you at the newspaper as a whole, week in, week out.
Well that only goes to show which side of the political fence the Gazette sits, which doesn't surprise me one little bit.
I don't think the government can legally raise the rents of current social housing tenants to market rates because those tenants have a pre-existing tenancy agreement, hence only new tenants may be affected. And, it is only an option for the social landlord to charge up to 80% of market rate, some social landlords have stated they will not take advantage of the change in rules. Social housing ...
I see that hoary old chestnut is being peddled again. People in social housing pay a FAIR rent which covers costs, a market rent is something entirely different.