Priorities

There are too many loopholes whereby wealthy people can employ the very best and the most expensive tax barristers to devise schemes that allow their clients to pay less taxes than the average person.

I do not believe donations to charities justify the efforts of the super rich to reduce their tax burden. Most people do not, fortunately, have that opportunity for such cherry picking and, some might say, self-aggrandisement. It is, in my opinion, just as well because there would be some charities which would benefit enormously and other, less popular, charities that would suffer.

To be fair the wealthy probably pay the taxes they are legally obliged to and many do give to charity. Can't remember the name of the billionaire who has given the largest ever donation to Cambridge university this week to help minorities. Some of the people mentioned in the Queen's Honours lists are there because of their charitable giving but they don't boast about it. I don't blame the wealthy, especially those who have made the money themselves and provided work and taxes for the country. If they should pay more tax the rules should be changed.

The homeless were discussed on the Welsh news yesterday, they interviewed a man who will not move into a hostel, he said there is much stealing and aggression in hostels.he wants his own home.

I think many people on average incomes would be willing to pay a little more tax. However, given that it has been reported that anything from 8 to 61 people have the same wealth as half of the world, I think it's about time these people pay their fair share.

The Guardian reported in August last year:

"Pay for chief executives at Britain’s biggest listed companies rose more than six times faster than wages in the wider workforce last year as the average boss’s pay packet hit £3.9m.

"Chief executive pay at businesses on the FTSE 100 index surged 11% on a median basis in 2017 while average worker earnings failed to keep pace with inflation, rising just 1.7%, according to the High Pay Centre’s annual review of top pay."

In proportion to their income, it is actually the poorest people in the UK - and probably other countries - who pay the most tax, VAT being one of the most unfair taxes.

I'm with you on that - the wealthiest families have enough to sort a lot of the world's problems! And the ones in the UK should be first on HMRC's hit list!

I just want to correct my post on Sunday about people not paying tax. I wasn't referring to the low-paid, heavens above, but to the likes of Jeff Bezos and those of his ilk.

It is a complex issue and I don't think anyone so far has mentioned the homeless people who refuse to go into shelters because they are scared of the others there. I have seen that given as a reason by homeless people in the news.

I think we have because that is the main reason for exclusion criterias and single SEX provisions etc.. but if there are exclusion criterias there needs to be provisions for those excluded elsewhere.

Our problem local to me is that temporary hostels seems to exclude multiple issues. Leaving people who have more than one issue with nowhere to go.

E.g. the wheelchair accessible hostel does not accept behaviour/mental health issues or active addicts.

The provision for people with behavioural or mental health issues is not wheelchair accessible and does not accept people with physical health needs...

So where do you send someone who is wheelchair bound and has physical and mental health and addiction issues?

Nowhere. They bounce in and out of police custody with nowhere to be referred to in between. They wont meet the criteria for rehab because of physical health issues and mental health crises. They will self discharge or get kicked out of general hospitals because they cant manage then mental health/behaviour side so their physical health keeps relapsing. Mental health hospitals wont give them crisis care because of physical health issue and ambulance them back to general A&E.

They never get to stay anywhere long enough to get anything sorted because hybrid multidisciplinary care doesnt exist....

Are we willing to pay more tax ?

Hostels for addicts

Hostels for addicts who want to recover

Hostels for addicts with mental illness

Hostels for men

Hostels for women

Staff to work in these hostels

Nonnie - I'm glad you mentioned those who are scared to go into shelters because of the others there. I saw a young girl interviewed on TV recently who preferred sleeping in a doorway because she was afraid she would be raped in a hostel or have her few valuables stolen. It certainly is time our politicians got to grips with homelessness. I am an admirer of Andy Burnham, he seems to have good ideas which he is not afraid to act upon.

It is a complex issue and I don't think anyone so far has mentioned the homeless people who refuse to go into shelters because they are scared of the others there. I have seen that given as a reason by homeless people in the news.

There is also the issue of the council tax payers who don't want to pay more tax and those who don't want a homeless shelter near their homes.

If the Finnish system is working and proved to work here why don't we give it a go?

I don't think anyone chooses to be homeless any more than they choose to be alcoholics or drug users. I think it creeps up on them.

I think we only have one in our town and I thought to ask him if he wanted any washing done but everything is clean. There are always takeaway coffees near him, dog food and sandwiches so I think he is looked after as well as he could be by local people. I do prefer to give money to the charities but would have been happy to do his washing.

A complex problem certainly. When I was a child I recall seeing the odd tramp or gentleman of the road.

What on earth have we become to all homelessness to exist on such a scale?

www.facebook.com/P4PEACE1/videos/170838080244950/?hc_ref=ARTWkygfMN4zAjM6vbFsZSmyRbAjlbreyS3GZer4KTxwdPF07Ep1-1CzU4msw1vkMj0&__xts__[0]=68.ARCqVoXMKMtvxGO

Hostels absolutely SHOULD have exclusion criteria, a recovering addict wont do well amongst active users and dealers. However wethouses should also be available. There is only one small wethouse in my very large town (& it covers 2 towns) which isnt enough. It is the only shelter that wont kick you out for active using.

If active users are given shelter and treated humanely they are more likely to go on to engage in detox programs.

The big gap in provision is for people who have multiple issues.
There are shelters for active users (though not enough)
There are shelters for recovering users
There are shelters that accept physical / health disabilities and have some degree of access provision
There are shelters that accept people with mental health / behaviour issues

But....
There is no shelter (in my region not just my town) that would accept this combination:
Wheelchair user who is an addict with learning disabilities and mental health/behavioural issues and needs.

But surely its common sense that a lot of these issues go hand in hand so where do all the people with more than one need/requirement go?

The answer is there is nowhere for them to go. The only places that actually accommodate the above combination in my local region are prisons. Mental health hospitals wont take people with physical health needs, general hospitals won't tolerate destructive behaviours. There is no housing provision for that combination of needs... so all things get worse: mental health, physical health & addictions.

ClareAB. Have you given thought to a hostel where residents can get drunk or high on drugs ?

Have you ever tried having a logical conversation with either ?

Rough sleepers are said to have a life expectancy of 47 years. What a terrible indictment of our society and its current government!

I'm a supporter of Corbyn but he hasn't gone far enough in hammering the Tories on the housing crisis and the homelessness scandal. He is calling for a general election but he needs to indicate to Labour councils to get moving now by setting no-cuts budgets - many are sitting on huge reserves.

Annibach, I stand corrected. I know that reduction regimes re alcohol are used with community detoxes, and in rehab they will be given drugs such as Librium to stop fitting. Methadone is also used on a reducing scale or heroin addicts.
My point is, is that homeless hostels should not be making sobriety a condition of admittance without relevant and timely support. Many homeless people have been let down time and time again by services including the care system, mental health services, ex-services services, drug and alcohol services. Everyone seems to work in silos with strict criteria that are designed around mythical 'outcomes' and tick boxes. Unfortunately human beings are all different, their situations and histories, personalities, resilience and support vary enormously. It's pointless forcing a detox on someone without helping them deal with the issues that they are trying to seek oblivion from.
Care leavers make up a disproportionate share of the homeless. My argument, is that if they were given comprehensive counselling and support whilst young, they might have a better chance. Instead they receive a lottery of care where many fall through the net, never getting the support they need fully. Once 'adult' they are ill equipped to cope. It's truly tragic.

But homeless people are not in rehab and the methods being used in Manchester are working well, that is, as ClareAB says, accepting reality instead of imposing arbitrary rules. The first thing is to get people under shelter, not argue the toss on how to solve their other problems and issues.

Sorry you are mistaken about alcohol users, in rehab medication is given to prevent fits, gradual reduction is not allowed. If an alcoholic decides to give up alcohol whilst living at home then a reduction plan is agreed , gradual reduction is not very successful because the alcohol is so available. There is medication prescribed to prevent fits but again if not in rehab the alcoholic can stop taking it

There used to be a supported hostel in the road I lived in in Sth London. It was for , mostly men, who had drug abuse / mental health history. It was partly funded by the council. When they made a decision to cut funding ..possibly to help meet government targets, the hostel closed. It is now a smart new block of unaffordable apartments. The government could, if it chose to, do all sorts of things to alleviate the situation.

Hostels should be set up to accept all homeless including those addicted to drugs and alcohol. By utilising exclusion criteria they are turning away those who are most desperately in need of help.
If someone is dependant on alcohol or drugs, to suddenly stop can be extremely dangerous. No drug and alcohol service would ask that service users stop dead. Gradual reduction is the safest way to manage it, with counselling and support alongside.
So, homeless shelters/hostels are asking the impossible and putting people at risk by doing so.
It's about time homelessness services dealt with the reality of the problem, rather than making non-evidence based rules based on ideals.

We've always had mental illness and addiction within the population but I don't believe we have ever had the degree of destitution and sheer misery that so many people are experiencing now.

There are no doubt myriad and quite individual stories behind homelessness. But cuts to council funds, the NHS, and many other organisations that deal with mental/physical health, addiction and homelessness, plus cuts in individuals' pay and welfare benefits, must, in my opinion, be major contributing factors.

Social Bite Villages – A full circle solution for homelessness
www.socialbitevillages.co.uk/

I think we could pay a little more, even if the threshold for those paying none is increased and those who avoid it altogether should be chased up much more vigorously.

People not paying any income tax at all are often employed in low-paid jobs. The benefits are making their salaries up to a genuine living wage, but the people really being subsidised are their employers, who should be paying a living wage in the first place!

Yes, indeed, re income tax and those not paying it at all.

Jalima: I have been to Finland, spent some time there; the rate of income tax is much, much higher than in the UK.

This is true, Jalima. The Scandinavian countries pay more income tax. But this is not the route we want to take in Britain.

I was shocked when I first arrived in this country 45 years ago by the class system and the general inequality. I must say that I don't think things have improved much and I can only come to the conclusion that we prefer things as they are.