[Closed] Taking people property away if it's deemed you shouldn't have it - corbyn

One point I'd like to make as a taxpayer is that I dont think compulsory purchase orders and paying current London market rate is the best use of public money.

I'd think most of these properties would cost millions of pounds where as a hotel room for a year might cost say £182,500 (£500 per night x 365)

I'm with you Op.

I mean how dare they take away our property! A sign of a thriving neo-liberal capatalist society is protecting the winners right?

Poor people need to try harder don't they. For example, even if they're poor because they're disabled and the state hasn't provided enough for them so they've ended up in sub-standard properties - doesn't mean I should feel sorry for them.

Why should I, who have worked hard and had luck bestowed upon me by my parents, let some poor famlies live in my empty home. 79 people dead in a tower block fire - not our problem is it.

This country really needs to stop thinking about others. Choices right. That's why I vote Tory and read the Daily Mail like you. They undertsand us.

Nickc has summed it up beautifully.

Taking a step back for a minute, this forum seems to attract people who'd go out of their way to help folk out - Binners once arranged for me to have a frame powder coated and did the fetching/carrying/postage. I've seen countless other forumites step in to help out people who've had bikes stolen or needed a helping hand fixing things. I'd like to think that I'd go out of my way to help out anyone here simply because it feels good to help someone else out.

What I don't understand is why this spirit of generosity suddenly becomes mean-mindedness when we're talking about residents of a tower block which burned down through no fault of those who lived there. Surely it makes sense to temporarily house them in the hundreds of unoccupied properties elsewhere in the borough, where residents' kids go to school and close to where people work? If I were a politician, I too would be asking questions as to why the local council can't make use of those properties, whilst making appropriate compensation to the properties owners.

Crack on Jezzer

not that I'm rich by any means but there seems be a real hatred of people owning money on the site, why ?

What I'm seeing is a dislike of selfish sociopaths.

PJM it would make perfect sense for them to be [b]offered[/b] spare rooms by home owners. What Corbyn suggested was pure and simple "class warfare" he wanted to confiscate property.

Who on earth would decide a property was empty anyway ? Some lefty walking past and sees no lights on so he "occupies" it ? Thats what Corbyn was suggesting.

Purchasing (compulsory or not) private property would costs £10,000's in legal fees fighting challenges and 100,000's in stamp duty per property.

Thats what Corbyn was suggesting.

#jambafact no. 1376.

But fine to sell someones property to fund health care in their senior years?

PJM it would make perfect sense for them to be offered spare rooms by home owners.

Point taken. Do we have any kind of idea how many absent residents of Kensington have done exactly this?

What Corbyn suggested was pure and simple "class warfare" he wanted to confiscate property.

Class warfare. I'm really pleased that someone has brought this up. I would argue that re-cladding the tower block at minimal expense and maximum risk to occupants in order to beautify the views of millionaire residents counts as class warfare.

Aside from pulling apart the semantics of Corbyn's comments and hysterically jumping to conclusions, how would you deal with the resulting human cost of the Grenfell Tower fire, @jambalaya?

I'd imagine right wing nutjobs want them out of the borough in case there's another election soon - only a very slim majority y'know.

PJM it would make perfect sense for them to be offered spare rooms by home owners. What Corbyn suggested was pure and simple "class warfare" he wanted to confiscate property.

Who on earth would decide a property was empty anyway ? Some lefty walking past and sees no lights on so he "occupies" it ? Thats what Corbyn was suggesting.

He's flipped!

Please stop quoting him, it means his posts evade the killfile

without savings or owning properties what incentive is there to work ?

I'm fairly certain this was what the aristocrats were telling the French poor on the eve of the French revolution.

You could use that argument to apologise for the most extreme cases of wealth inequality, eg North Korea.

No Zokes, I won't.

You may not like what he has to say - but he has a right to say it & ive the right to quote it & reply to it.

So, sorry I won't. You'll have to add me to the list if you don't want to read what he's written.

Which, I think, would be a shame as I think it's important to know what the other side are thinking otherwise you're just in a bubble...& that's not healthy for any discussion.

Ransos +1

What Corbyn suggested was pure and simple "class warfare" he wanted to confiscate property.

No he doesn't. He's on about using unused property as a temporary shelter instead of leaving people in sports halls.

without savings or owning properties what incentive is there to work ?

eating, clothing, and putting a roof over your head are fairly good incentives.

oldracer - Member
I think it's important to know what the other side are thinking otherwise you're just in a bubble...& that's not healthy for any discussion.

It is, but, when it's just trolling and obfuscation, well, there's not much point.

The "well would you lend someone your £5k bike if theirs was knicked " argument is fine if your £5k bike was bought purely as an investment, you have no intention of riding it, and lending it to someone else won't damage it or decrease its value in any way. Oh and you'd be guaranteed to get it back after an agreed time period.
If any one of those things doesn't apply then it's a load of bollocks that misses the point entirely.

It would also be fine if shelter was a luxury not a necessity.

It is, but, when it's just trolling and obfuscation, well, there's not much point.

I'm not sure he is trolling - I think he genuinely believes in what he says, which is why you do have to have a degree of engagement.

Like I said, if you do t like my engaging with him...add me to the list.

But then, where would we be? When we're censoring opinions we find upsetting or challenging.....for that reason I'm against a kilfile & why I'll never use one.

oldracer - Member
It is, but, when it's just trolling and obfuscation, well, there's not much point.
I'm not sure he is trolling - I think he genuinely believes in what he says, which is why you do have to have a degree of engagement.

Like I said, if you do t like my engaging with him...add me to the list.

But then, where would we be? When we're censoring opinions we find upsetting or challenging.....for that reason I'm against a kilfile & why I'll never use one

I don't censor anyone. honest discussion is fine, I've tried it many times. But what's the point in discussing with trolls that are just out to get a rise? I'm also pretty certain his whole online persona is a pile of keek as well.

What Corbyn suggested was pure and simple "class warfare" he wanted to confiscate property.

No he didn't. That might be want you [i]want [/i]him to have suggested, but it wasn't. You're reading meaning into things that simply isn't there.

Who on earth would decide a property was empty anyway ? Some lefty walking past and sees no lights on so he "occupies" it ?

Irrelevant whataboutery as that's not what he was suggesting. And even [i]if[/i] he was I imagine there are numerous sensible ways to work out if a property is empty, for example looking at records of who owns it, who/if lives there and for how long it's been vacant.

Thats what Corbyn was suggesting.

Again, no it wasn't. You have misinterpreted, likely due to your own bias clouding your judgement, or due to you taking some propaganda at face value without actually looking at what actually happened. Now the error has been pointed out to you do the decent thing and review your interpretation.

If you still think your interpretation is correct then what exactly would sway you? If you asked JC "is this what you meant?" an he replied "No" would you still claim that your interpretation of his thoughts is correct [i]over the man that actually said the words[/i]?

But what's the point in discussing with trolls that are just out to get a rise? I'm also pretty certain his whole online persona is a pile of keek as well.

I've no idea if Jamba's online persona is fake or not. But his views are fare from extreme in the world that is outside the STW left wing bubble. To say he must be trolling because you disagree with some of his pretty mild views is laughable really. Try meeting some of the people I do on a daily basis 😯 . Now they'll make your hair curl. But the thing is their still just normal people.

I hold a conversation and can disagree with people all day long. I've no problem with that. Trolling is a different thing, it's not engagement, it's cheap giggles(which normally I'm also fine with, but on this, when the bodies still haven't yet been recovered, come on, walk away from the games ffs.).

We are going have to agree to disagree.

If you don't like that - you know what to do..

aye, call out bullshit when it presents itself.

[quote=mikewsmith ]Perhaps the people need some cake,always makes a difference.

I'm not sure we have any cake - would a luxury yacht do?

aye, call out bullshit when it presents itself.

for as long as you can be bothered. Which is the problem, it is hard when every post is full of BS.

kerley - Member - Block User - Quote

aye, call out bullshit when it presents itself.

for as long as you can be bothered. Which is the problem, it is hard when every post is full of BS.

Quite. I'm all for constructive opposing opinions. I'll happily change my own if the opposing opinions come backed up with fact that challenges my current way of thinking. However, this has [b]never[/b] happened in the case of Jamby. Never. Not once. His posts on anything politics related are an entire fact-free zone.*

*Unless a very rare moment was lost in all the noise of eternal bullshine

page 1
unfitgeezer - Member

blah blah blah

[b]Rant over[/b]

page 3

unfitgeezer - Member

funkmasterp - Member
you are talking absolute shit !!!!
I think you should really call it quits here. You started a thread with a title clearly chosen to provoke, then filled your initial post full of half truths, conjecture and bollocks. Now you accuse somebody else of talking shite?

This is STW at its, what's a great word for the opposite of finest, most vile?

I think you're right [b]I'll quit[/b],

page 4

unfitgeezer - Member

not that I'm rich by any means but there seems be a real hatred of people owning money on the site, why ?

blah blah havering blethers blah blah

[b]Over n out from the capital[/b]

unfitgeezer - Member

You're not one of those ghastly sycophants who thinks May is a victim of the fire are you?

No I can't stand her either !

unfitgeezer - Member

I wasn't trolling btw !

Nightmare!

Politician gains traction by espousing a populist notion that is probably unlikely but sounds good.............

£350 million a week for the NHS anyone?

So when the country is broke and on its knees which would happen if corbyn had his way - would it be right if you had savings and the government took them away?

Even allowing for the supposed left wing bias on this forum, it's surprising to me that there are not [s]more[/s] some posters who can present coherent detailed arguments for the more right wing end of the spectrum. I appreciate STW is only an internet talking shop for a relatively small demographic, but I would have expected it to include some people who both could and would want to take the time and trouble to articulate their reasons for a particular right wing viewpoint.

It seemed to me Teamhurtmore evidently could do so if he had wanted, but could not be bothered and preferred instead to make comments from a lofty position of superior academic knowledge without going into detail.

I suspect Jambalaya feels an isolated lone voice, but persists because it's important that the left wing viewpoints should not go unchallenged and simply be accepted as correct, but I cannot recall seeing a clear thorough detailed argument from him, as opposed to short sweeping assertions of belief or viewpoint presented as fact rather than opinion and typically in very simplistic black and white terms, ignoring or rejecting any nuance or balance. Consequently I think he loses credibilty and his posts are counter productive.

Who on earth would decide a property was empty anyway ? Some lefty walking past and sees no lights on so he "occupies" it ? Thats what Corbyn was suggesting.

Jamby, Ninfers and Chewie always seemed a band member short - not any more with unfitgeezer joining the band.

The Trolling Stones - now a four-piece!

Jamby, Ninfers and Chewie always seemed a [s]band member[/s] spanner short of a tool box - not any more with unfitgeezer joining the band.

It seemed to me Teamhurtmore evidently could do so if he had wanted, but could not be bothered...

How odd, why would I want to? Beginner's error to confuse libertarian sympathies with being right wing. Different things. Hence can't be bothered. HTH.

GIven the (apparently) widespread use of kilfiles, I am amazed that Jambas comments receive such a "warm" following. Also very odd.....very odd indeed, unless.......

Oi!

The Trolling Stones - now a four-piece!

😆

Excellent work, although they're more like "The Who Gives a ****?" from my POV.

dannyh - Member
Jamby, Ninfers and Chewie always seemed a band member short - not any more with unfitgeezer joining the band.

The Trolling Stones - now a four-piece!

I feel bullied by the singletrack police, its wrong to bully - you wouldn't bully any other minority...

And if I was trolling which I wasn't, I'm not sure who put you in charge btw this post has certainly done its job, which is getting views out there.

Mate, if you post something tasteless and contentious, at least have the decency to defend your point and not throw your toys out of the pram when challenged.

It won't be long before the political stuff on this forum will turn most people off, to the point that they just won't bother anymore. Someone can't even complain about a bit of building work without the thread being derailed into a left wing rant. Now if anyone dares suggest any other thought process than the Corbynites (entrenched views) on here, they get flamed.

Someone can't even complain about a bit of building work without the thread being derailed into a left wing rant.

Not sure if trolling given the title of the thread.

Now if anyone dares suggest any other thought process than the Corbynites

If you need to know Corbyn's thought process, just consult the OP and The Daily Fail. Maybe you did...

It's perfectly good to have conflicting opinions. What is not so good is spin and BS. Does this concern you?

Rusty Spanner - Member
Mate, if you post something tasteless and contentious, at least have the decency to defend your point and not throw your toys out of the pram when challenged.

I didn't post anything tasteless - you didn't agree with it
I also haven't thrown my toys out the pram

Perhaps forum should be changed from SINGLETRACK TO SINGLE-MINDED