Anagh Coar Homes To Get New Gold Plated Kitchens

[pauld]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

[pauld]

Shouty man says that it's not the Corpy, it's Social Care - political members of that department include Bill Malarkey and Bill Henderson.

 

Whatever the politics, £10k for a kitchen in anything less than a mansion is extortionate (even if it includes a new boiler and ALL appliances)- if not a couple of grand is more than enough.

 

Its investment into stock, at a time when it is most appropriate and economically prudent, something many of the next generation will be thankfull for, what more is there to be said, they will get another 40 years rent out of those houses yet.

But still require 25% from central government in grants to balance the books! It's there in writing. You put them there.

 

Edit: and has done since 2009 (since that's as far back as the report goes)

 

 

Yes andy thats why i put them up to show, other LAs ofcourse have the mirror image, the department takes a global view of social housing.

the corpy only get 7.5% of rental revenues for admin, and 30% for maintainence, i could see they coulnt balance their books, they were the only pages i had left open after a weeks reading of many pages from social care and other LAs budget reports.

 

the department is a well run department, show us any bad examples of it not being well run.

[Tugger]

Honestly, he must be a wind up. NOBODY is this thick

[oldmanxfella]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

 

You don't get it pauld either do you? Like your 9/11 investigations you seem to have an ability to read documents and stuff that other people read but arrive at totally different conclusions to 99.9% of the other readers of the same document. As Andy Onchan said - it's there in black and white that a subsidy exists. We have all read the same documents but only you read them in the same loony way that you read your 9/11 bullshit stuff and apply a totally different interpretation to the information provided. Are you dyslexic? Or just a complete knobber?

[pauld]

Honestly, he must be a wind up. NOBODY is this thick

 

 

 

ive told you stamping your feet and blindly insisting "their subsidised without any semblance as to an explanation how, just doesn't do it, no matter how many postings you make doing it.

 

joe the rich plumber living in n0 16 just doesnt cut it as an arguement for subsidised "pond life" as argued sorry.

[oldmanxfella]

Honestly, he must be a wind up. NOBODY is this thick

 

He might actually be Cretney, don't laugh.

[pauld]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

 

You don't get it pauld either do you? Like your 9/11 investigations you seem to have an ability to read documents and stuff that other people read but arrive at totally different conclusions to 99.9% of the other readers of the same document. As Andy Onchan said - it's there in black and white that a subsidy exists. We have all read the same documents but only you read them in the same loony way that you read your 9/11 bullshit stuff and apply a totally different interpretation to the information provided. Are you dyslexic? Or just a complete knobber?

 

 

ok, we will play the game your way.

 

where does the "subsidy" go.

once its spent does it just vanish ?.

 

What is the money spent now worth ?

 

where does the money come from, and on what conditions is it handed over, what happens to the money that the LAs 62.5% rental income exceeds interest payment on loans.

Are they social care paying peters shortfall with pauls excess, you just dont know do you.

 

Its a well run scheme with good global supervision by the department as far as i can tell.

[oldmanxfella]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

 

You don't get it pauld either do you? Like your 9/11 investigations you seem to have an ability to read documents and stuff that other people read but arrive at totally different conclusions to 99.9% of the other readers of the same document. As Andy Onchan said - it's there in black and white that a subsidy exists. We have all read the same documents but only you read them in the same loony way that you read your 9/11 bullshit stuff and apply a totally different interpretation to the information provided. Are you dyslexic? Or just a complete knobber?

 

 

ok, we will play the game your way.

 

where does the "subsidy" go.

once its spent does it just vanish ?.

 

What is the money spent now worth ?

 

where does the money come from, and on what conditions is it handed over, what happens to the money that the LAs 62.5% rental income exceeds interest payment on loans.

 

I make a point of not arguing with nutters. The documents speak for themselves. Keep on fighting against absolutely everyone else fuckwit.

[pauld]

manxfella give us a short summary of how the scheme works, just a short summary to show that you actually have a clue.

[Silentbob]

call everyone that lives in social housing "pond life" your also including my parents grand parents and aunties uncles cousins etc

 

 

So your entire extended family lives in taxpayer subsidised housing; nice one.

 

And by the way, Amadeus quite clearly stated that his wife was supporting his department's case, not that she herself spearheaded the campaign for crystal dining tables for all.

 

Our kitchen has lasted since 1981 with replacement of 2 ovens, 2 diswashers and 3 microwaves. Then again since we have to pay full whack for everything we tend to look after OUR stuff.

 

I recall a certain 'social housing' estate over here having to replace internal doors with metal ones as the tenants were burning everything they could.

 

So forgive me if I do not generally give a rat's ass about the ever increasing amount of scummers nationwide who sponge off the state (normally after knocking of their mumsister's or dadbrother's offspring) as a career then go out looting when the oppertunity arises.

[ScotsAlan]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

 

 

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

 

But "investments" normally need some sort of return. After all, what would residents do if their kitchen was not upgraded? Would they move to the private housing sector to spite the government?

[Alias]

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

That's fine if it's a house for life, if not it raises problems.

[pauld]

are you under some kind of illusion that my kitchen hasn't cost me anything then bob.

And as it happens my daughter and several aunties and uncles moved into mortgaged houses, including my parents, i know that any manx people reading this have family now or in the past whose whole lives were spent in social housing, the ones that didnt will be rare.

You new manx really are a royal uninformed pain in the azz.

[pauld]

Sweetpea, for you to claim I'm uneducated is just beyond the pale. What I mean is that I have explained the subsidy to you half a dozen times, but because you wish it wasn't a subsidy, you refuse to accept that it is one. I understand the sentiment, but don't mistake it for analysis, or even having a clue: you don't.

 

 

 

You just dont get it do you, they are not subsidies, they are investment into future income and a section of the community who will repay the investment.

 

 

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

 

But "investments" normally need some sort of return. After all, what would residents do if their kitchen was not upgraded? Would they move to the private housing sector to spite the government?

 

alan they get a 40/50/60/70 year return.

look at rents at the momment rising 5% year on year as part of a 5 year cycle, then to be re-assessed.

So thats rents up 28% and maintainence budgets cut 20% in the same 5 years.

 

oh and the thing that frightened guilty enough to try and mislead us in the other thread, admin budget being reduced to 5% from 7.5% because of steep rental increases.

 

And this from a department you say is a joke.

[Blade Runner]

are you under some kind of illusion that my kitchen hasn't cost me anything then bob.

And as it happens my daughter and several aunties and uncles moved into mortgaged houses, including my parents, i know that any manx people reading this have family now or in the past whose whole lives were spent in social housing, the ones that didnt will be rare.

You new manx really are a royal uninformed pain in the azz.

 

Why are you bringing manxness/place of birth into this?

 

It has nothing to do with the subject.

 

I imagine after your racist post addressed to Amadeus you are a boat in the morning kind of "fella"