Scottish Independence

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is there sufficient housing capacity to move all of those with a spare room?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nowhere near it.

What about the houses that the families desperate for an extra room would vacate?

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What about the houses that the families desperate for an extra room would vacate?

Forced house swapping, now there's an idea.

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What about the houses that the families desperate for an extra room would vacate?

They are handed over to English politicians to use as holiday homes. FACT.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Forced house swapping, now there's an idea.

I don't think anyone's being forced to do anything. Good job at trying to make it sound almost Nazi-esque though.

Either way, we should definitely leave folk homeless and families all having to sleep in one bedroom so that no-one gets their nose put out of joint or loses their unneeded spare room.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think anyone's being forced to do anything. Good job at trying to make it sound almost Nazi-esque though.

Either way, we should definitely leave folk homeless and families all having to sleep in one bedroom so that no-one gets their nose put out of joint or loses their unneeded spare room.

The general undertones of your post would suggest you're against investing in new housing. I would have thought that's better than forcing folks to swap their homes. New more energy efficient homes would make more sense but maybe the investment to do so will get lost on the way from Westminster, after all we're only a small proportion of the electorate.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is there sufficient housing capacity to move all of those with a spare room?

No. Still doesn't make it a tax though.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The general undertones of your post would suggest you're against investing in new housing. I would have thought that's better than forcing folks to swap their homes. New more energy efficient homes would make more sense but maybe the investment to do so will get lost on the way from Westminster, after all we're only a small proportion of the electorate.

I'm pro whatever it takes to make social housing meet the needs of the folk that choose/have to use it. If that means encouraging folk to give up houses that are too big for their requirements so be it.

I don't know about where you live but where I live in East Lothian, there are a fair number of new social houses/flats being built. It still won't be enough though whilst folk are sitting in bigger houses that they need.

[Just Alf]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm pro whatever it takes to make social housing meet the needs of the folk that choose/have to use it. If that means encouraging folk to give up houses that are too big for their requirements so be it.

I don't know about where you live but where I live in East Lothian, there are a fair number of new social houses/flats being built. It still won't be enough though whilst folk are sitting in bigger houses that they need.

My neighbour has a 2 bedroom house, they had 2 kids, who shared until they moved out she's all on her own now but the family regularly have someone there to look after her and save her needing to move into a home but Anne's being pestered re that "spare" room!

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm pro whatever it takes to make social housing meet the needs of the folk that choose/have to use it. If that means encouraging folk to give up houses that are too big for their r'equirements so be it.

I don't know about where you live but where I live in East Lothian, there are a fair number of new social houses/flats being built. It still won't be enough though whilst folk are sitting in bigger houses that they need.

Pro what ever it takes includes forcing people out of their homes for having a room too many to solve the housing problem, really? That's not Nazi-esque that's Stalinist.

[VickMackie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What about the houses that the families desperate for an extra room would vacate?

Why not have a list that people are on who are willing to swap and don't charge them whilst on the list waiting for a swap?

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Pro what ever it takes includes forcing people out of their homes for having a room too many to solve the housing problem, really? That's not Nazi-esque that's Stalinist.

Aye, I'm a Stalinist. Busted.

I think it's the lack of perspective that I love most about some folk on here.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why not have a list that people are on who are willing to swap and don't charge them whilst on the list waiting for a swap?

I don't agree with the measure by the way, I just don't think it should be labelled a tax.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Aye, I'm a Stalinist. Busted.

I think it's the lack of perspective that I love most about some folk on here.

Absolutely mind boggling isn't it?

[green glory]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think anyone's being forced to do anything. Good job at trying to make it sound almost Nazi-esque though. Either way, we should definitely leave folk homeless and families all having to sleep in one bedroom so that no-one gets their nose put out of joint or loses their unneeded spare room.

Your argument is actually perfectly sound, and in principle I'm in total agreement.

Unfortunately the reality is there aren't the single bedroom properties available to move the affected people to. Even if there were it would mean moving tens of thousands of mainly disabled and elderly out of their homes, with the attendant risks their health and well being.

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Your argument is actually perfectly sound, and in principle I'm in total agreement. Unfortunately the reality is there aren't the single bedroom properties available to move the affected people to. Even if there were it would mean moving tens of thousands of mainly disabled and elderly out of their homes, with the attendant risks their health and well being.

Another consequence of longer lived populace.

The concept of one or two people living in a two or three bedroom house for another 20 years just because they have done for 20 years prior brining up a family but at the same time denying other young families that choice is a strange one.

I don't particularly agree with the approach the policy has taken (carrots tend to be better than sticks) but as this is rented housing the landlords surely need to have some way of actively managing their stock to best meet demand?

[Just Alf]

I read in the news that BAE are suggesting there might be large job cuts at a number of dockyards. I thought this MOD work was heralded as one of the key losses if went down the independence route?

[Smiggy 7-0]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I read in the news that BAE are suggesting there might be large job cuts at a number of dockyards. I thought this MOD work was heralded as one of the key losses if went down the independence route?

Does anyone honestly think that the MOD for the rest of the UK will award any contracts to an independant Scotland when it has facilities to do this work in it's own country....NEVER and rightly so.

[southfieldhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You said "Westminster will scale back the powers of Holyrood post NO vote, they'll ensure we never have the opportunity at independence again.". No "In my opinion" or "it's possible that", you definitively stated "will".

None of the links are evidence that Westminster WILL scale back the powers of Holyrood in the event of a 'no' vote. One's some random's musing from the looks of it, one's from an eighty-one year old who retired from politics in 2005 and the other appears to be a columnist from the Scotsman.

Apologies, your pedantry wins.I did mean 'in my opinion'.

[steakbake]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Does anyone honestly think that the MOD for the rest of the UK will award any contracts to an independant Scotland when it has facilities to do this work in it's own country....NEVER and rightly so.

Well, it RUK doesn't have facilities now that Portsmouth has been closed.

A very political decision which I think, will stoke resentment in the rest of the UK.

Govan/Rosyth are protected species - could you imagine if they had closed and how much that would have handed to Yes Scotland?

[VickMackie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't agree with the measure by the way, I just don't think it should be labelled a tax.

If you have a forced payment you need to make to the government and no options to downsize then I would class that as a tax. If this was a fully thoughtout scheme where the aim was to make better use of the housing capacity then there would be no need to charge people unless they were unwilling to move.

[jodjam]

Snp lad at pmqs Westminster just played a blinder. Simply stated he was stunned that Cameron / milliband had been arguing about everything apart from 1800 job losses.(it was Angus Robertson )

It's a fair point as I expected it to be main focal point.

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you have a forced payment you need to make to the government and no options to downsize then I would class that as a tax. If this was a fully thoughtout scheme where the aim was to make better use of the housing capacity then there would be no need to charge people unless they were unwilling to move.

No expert in this but my understanding is that it's not a forced payment..hence why it's not a tax.

It's a reduction in benefit to reflect the fact that the government no longer wishes to subsidise people's rental for properties they have deemed to large for that persons use.

Effectively they are saying the state will pay your accommodation costs for the minimum you require, if you wish to remain in a larger (and hence more expensive) property then you will be expected to make up that rental difference.

As with all benefits this may sound sensible at the macro level but the devil is in the detail and will impact individuals to a different degree.

[500miles]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Does anyone honestly think that the MOD for the rest of the UK will award any contracts to an independant Scotland when it has facilities to do this work in it's own country....NEVER and rightly so.

They seem happy enought to have all the support ships, oil tankers etc. contracted out to Korea. The majority of jobs in Portsmouth are ship maintenance and repairs, which will remain.

The truth is, Govan is losing almost as many jobs as Portsmouth, with about a 45/55% split, after Portsmouth was recommeded for closure by BAE two years ago!

This is a commercial decision, which it is in the governments interest to dress up as pro-Scottish politics.

[southfieldhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Does anyone honestly think that the MOD for the rest of the UK will award any contracts to an independant Scotland when it has facilities to do this work in it's own country....NEVER and rightly so.

MoD award contracts for ships to either BAE or Babcocks in general, I think.The same BAE who've just emptied 1800 people today.A promise to reopen Portsmouth if Scotland votes YES is crass in the extreme, but politiking at its finest.

I can understand why and agree that an independent Scotland shouldn't build warships for The UK as they would be subject to official secrets etc.The same immediate curtailment of ship building for the MoD should be applied to any vessels subject to the same secrecy in Scottish waters,yes?

And our good pals over the North Sea seem to have a thriving ship building economy without the ever benevolent MOD
http://www.shipbuildingnorway.com/vo...red-in-2012-2/

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you have a forced payment you need to make to the government and no options to downsize then I would class that as a tax. If this was a fully thoughtout scheme where the aim was to make better use of the housing capacity then there would be no need to charge people unless they were unwilling to move.

Here's the definition of a tax: "a compulsory contribution to state revenue levied by government on personal income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, service and transactions".

Giving someone less in housing benefit is therefore not a tax.

[southfieldhibby]

Here's another thought on BAE/MOD.

The MoD will only offer contracts for naval vessels to UK shipyards.BAE are their preferred partner.BAE have invested time/money into people/infrastructure on the Clyde/Rosyth.Indy Scotland will need to invest in Navy, offers the same deal to BAE to keep/upgrade/expand workforce in Scotland on basis they're #1 supplier.

Scotland gets new ships/asset/more tax payers.BAE gets another partner.Portsmouth reopens courtesy of Scottish indy.

You're welcome Portsmouth

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well, it RUK doesn't have facilities now that Portsmouth has been closed.

A very political decision which I think, will stoke resentment in the rest of the UK.

Govan/Rosyth are protected species - could you imagine if they had closed and how much that would have handed to Yes Scotland?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They seem happy enought to have all the support ships, oil tankers etc. contracted out to Korea. The majority of jobs in Portsmouth are ship maintenance and repairs, which will remain.

The truth is, Govan is losing almost as many jobs as Portsmouth, with about a 45/55% split, after Portsmouth was recommeded for closure by BAE two years ago!

This is a commercial decision, which it is in the governments interest to dress up as pro-Scottish politics.

Damned if they did, damned if they didn't.

[VickMackie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here's the definition of a tax: "a compulsory contribution to state revenue levied by government on personal income and business profits or added to the cost of some goods, service and transactions".

Giving someone less in housing benefit is therefore not a tax.

Technically not a tax but the only option if you can't afford it is to be made homeless. Definition of *****.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Technically not a tax but the only option if you can't afford it is to be made homeless. Definition of *****.

Let's call it an unpopular welfare reform

[Phil D. Rolls]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Pro what ever it takes includes forcing people out of their homes for having a room too many to solve the housing problem, really? That's not Nazi-esque that's Stalinist.

Where did people get the idea that their rented home is their's for life. Even more, where did they get the idea that they should have extra space in their houses subsidised?