are, as we know, the ones paid by other people.
Similarly with other state charges. So, while I was rebutting Merryn Somerset Webb, after she disappointingly came out with the old canard about council houses being subsidised, I wondered why all the envious who are so keen to means-test previously universal benefits have said nothing about charging for one of the biggest of them all, state education. Could it possibly be that they send their children to state schools?
Forbidden Bible Verses — Genesis 42:1-17
6 hours ago
2 comments:
FFS, even if it were true that council housing is subsidised, which it isn't, then let's assume it's subsidised by tax payers.
And don't "rich" people pay the most taxes?
Therefore, for every £1 tax they pay, they might indeed get a few pence back in council house subsidy, but it's a lot lot less than other "rich" people get back in state education, NHS and so on.
And if she wants to mention the "economic" non-cash subsidy of "below market rents", firstly, that is largely illusory (although it is probably true for London council housing) and secondly, that's the whole rationale for having Land value tax (an economic non-cash but easily encashable benefit for Homeys).
Post a Comment