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

Now if anyone dares suggest any other thought process than the Corbynites (entrenched views) on here, they get flamed.

Poor little snowflake.

Back in the real world, it's just that on here you don't get away with posting spurious right-wing tabloid BS as if its fact without getting pulled up on it. Sorry (not sorry) about that.

It's not a left and right thing.

People are entitled to their opinions.

But whenever people post contentious/possibly tasteless comments on ANY subject, they are questioned about them.
It's a public forum, not a blog, so responses are to be expected.
If you repeatedly make contentious statements it's only good manners to respond when challenged.

And double standards, applied seemingly randomly just make people look a bit thoughtless.

it's just that on here you don't get away with posting spurious right-wing tabloid BS as if its fact without getting pulled up on it.

Exactly. If you want support for made up right wing nonsense then just continue posting on the Daily Mail comments section where you don't need to worry about whether anything is actually true or not.

And double standards, applied seemingly randomly just make people look a bit thoughtless.

double standards never a truer word said on this forum...

I really should have sent my shirts to this thread

Beginner's error to confuse libertarian sympathies with being right wing. Different things.

I realise there are both libertarian and authoritarian strands in both the left wing and the right wing, although it seems to me that sometimes these are ideological positions which conveniently suit personal prejudice.

There has to be a balance between letting the market decide and not interfering in people's lives vs. intervention. Housing seems a case point: something in limited supply which is essential to everyone, which has been allowed/encouraged by successive governments to become a major social and economic problem. If you do not consider yourself right wing, but libertarian, then what is a libertarian solution?

How odd, why would I want to?...Hence can't be bothered. HTH.

Because simply making pithy comments from a position of superior knowledge and relative wealth and comfort adds nothing to the conversation, and ultimately is little more than trolling. Why otherwise are you taking part in the conversation?

Perhaps forum should be changed from SINGLETRACK TO SINGLE-MINDED

Maybe SingleTrackMind given the number of people who flatly refuse to revise their opinion or go "oh yeah, sorry, I got that wrong" when their opinions / fact have later been shown to have no bearing in truth.

We all get things wrong sometimes, it's human nature. Having the moral fortitude to admit that when proven wrong is what separates those with unpopular views from those who are plainly barking. The latter you'll never reach, it's like playing chess with a pigeon.

slowster - Member
If you do not consider yourself right wing, but libertarian, then what is a libertarian solution?

libertarian = every man for themselves.

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.

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?

Well..... let's have a little think about that shall we, with a view to making it even vaguely relevant to paying the current owners, for the use of empty and unused houses/flats in order to home the victims of the Grenfell fire.

If for some bizarre reason, in your imagined version of the future, the government needed access to an HSBC savings account to help out the victims of some tragedy or other, but there weren't any available......
They could happily have mine, as they would be offering fair market rates for the purchase of my HSBC savings account.

So I would happily sell them my HSBC savings account, (as I don't really need it to be specifically in HSBC) for whatever the fair market rate was on that day. (which would be £1 per £1) and move my investment somewhere else.

I don't suppose you have any other, more relevant analogies do you ?

Because that one is quite clearly, total horseshit.

what is a libertarian solution?

Getting a job in a big room full of books?

Like others, Slowster, I believe that inaccurate comments should be challenged. HTH

FWIW, My earlier comment made direct reference to the importance of property rights and hence was an indirect reference to the work of Hernando de Soto, and economist that I have been lucky enough to share a forum with in the past. You may wish to google him as he has devoted a lot of time to the issue of addressing poverty and homelessness in developing economies, a subject close to my heart. Alternatively you can follow the example of others above and sneer instead. Your choice.....

Maybe SingleTrackMind

I thought that was the reason behind Kylie clause

Even allowing for the supposed left wing bias on this forum, it's surprising to me that there are not more some posters who can present coherent detailed arguments for the more right wing end of the spectrum.

Just read this thread over lunch - a couple of thoughts from up here in my cossetted north-west bubble away from the current troubles... I guess I'd fall at the "right wing end" of Slowster's spectrum, Tory voter, Corbyn hater (well, more socialist/communist hater really, I'm sure he's a nice enough fellow, I just don't want him ruining the economy that I rely upon), landlord and multiple property owner... I even ride an expensive road bike, so a bit of a pariah around these parts.

Firstly, why the hell should private property owners be expected to give up their properties in any way shape or form? The tenants' current housing problems are entirely the responsibility of the landlord - the KCTMO.

If I had a fire or any other situation in one of my properties that meant tenants needed to be rehoused, it would be my responsibility to do so.

On a personal level, if I had available property in that area, I would resist allowing it to be used by unvetted tenants, most of whom wouldn't pass the criteria required to rent one of my properties. Now, I'm sure the STW left-wing hand-wringers will have a field day with that last comment, but the overwhelming majority of landlords and investment property owners are running a business. From personal experience, I will not rent to anyone claiming housing benefit - I have done in the past, and it's cost me dearly. Every time I've had DSS tenants, I've had to evict them due to non-payment (some wise-guy decided they should pay the money to the tenant not the landlord!) and the properties have all required extensive repairs and restoration to make them habitable again.

It's very easy for left-leaning liberals to look down their noses at people who would take a view like mine, but it's not them who have invested heavily in property that they need to protect!

It's very easy for them to paint people like me as right-wing nasty bastards, but there's no simple come-back because the reality of the situation is generally far more complicated!

For example, the Facebook is full of pictures of Buckingham Palace today, with lefty-liberals bleating about the injustice of one family having such a fancy house! Idiots!!! It's not just a frickin house, it's a tourist attraction; our history!

Some of the take-from-the-rich-give-to-the-poor attitudes I've read several times on this thread (sorry for the citation junkies, I can't be arsed to go back and copy/paste quotes) are verging on communism.

But it's usually the middle-income, low-net-worth, hand-to-mouth nine-to-five kinda guys that spout it. They don't personally own enough wealth to make a blind bit of difference, so they're immune from their own pontifications. If they did own a few properties - empty or otherwise - they'd be far less generous!

My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

Can't work out if that's satire or not.

My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

Just so you know.

You aren't even close to being the sort of property owner that is being talked about.

You may want to think you are...,

but unless You have a few hundred properties, in the s****ier parts of London, that are all empty because you don't need the rental income..... then you aren't.

You aren't even close to being the sort of property owner that is being talked about.

You may want to think you are...,

I've not tried to suggest I am. But my experiences and attitudes to property can be scaled up quite accurately. And as far as empty properties are concerned, they're empty because the growth in value is sufficient that they don't need to be inhabited.

but unless You have a few hundred properties, in the s****ier parts of London, that are all empty because you don't need the rental income..... then you aren't.

I'm sure he is Neal....most of the major culprits (on this forum) wouldn't care if it was two properties or two hundred!

councilof10 - Member
My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

most of the major culprits (on this forum) wouldn't care if it was two properties or two hundred!

It's irrelevant. It's a huge portion of my invested wealth and will be a huge portion of my future income - exactly the same as the investment companies and holding companies who own large tracts of London.

Whatever I think or you think it wont change anything- this post has shown (to me) some pent up political anger you want to be lefties or at least show on here that you are but TBH there are a few jumped up champagne socialists on here...

I'm neither a leftie or right winger it just seems to me both Labour and conservatives are completely off track at the moment.

I haven't been nasty nor derogatory about the fire victims so I'm not sure where that escalated from...

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction on my political road '

teamhurtmore - Member
Like others, Slowster, I believe that inaccurate comments should be challenged. HTH

FWIW, My earlier comment made direct reference to the importance of property rights and hence was an indirect reference to the work of Hernando de Soto, and economist that I have been lucky enough to share a forum with in the past. You may wish to google him as he has devoted a lot of time to the issue of addressing poverty and homelessness in developing economies, a subject close to my heart. Alternatively you can follow the example of others above and sneer instead. Your choice.....

What does he have to say about the property rights of people that can't get property rights because they can't afford to buy?

teamhurtmore - Member

Like others, Slowster, I believe that inaccurate comments should be challenged. HTH

FWIW, My earlier comment made direct reference to the importance of property rights and hence was an indirect reference to the work of Hernando de Soto, and economist that I have been lucky enough to share a forum with in the past. You may wish to google him as he has devoted a lot of time to the issue of addressing poverty and homelessness in developing economies, a subject close to my heart. Alternatively you can follow the example of others above and sneer instead. Your choice.....

Not sure if its the real thm back or a faker nevertheless I still read all his posts in the voice of Jacob Rees-Mogg! 😀

What does he have to say about the property rights of people that can't get property rights because they can't afford to buy?

If they had bought their properties, there would be no landlord with a responsibility to ensure they were rehoused!

councilof10 - Member
What does he have to say about the property rights of people that can't get property rights because they can't afford to buy?
If they had bought their properties, there would be no landlord with a responsibility to ensure they were rehoused!

So no property right equates to being at the whim of the propertied class?

My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

All on your own, on land you created, with tenants you nurtured and educated? Nope. Your wealth is built on others, one way or another. Up to a certain point you get to keep the fruits of that. Beyond that point you have to acknowledge that you are part of a bigger system that has benefitted you. If you don't like that, move to Libertaria or some other place with no functioning government. I hear Somalia is nice at this time of year.

All on your own, on land you created, with tenants you nurtured and educated? Nope. Your wealth is built on others, one way or another.

I'm not sure if there's an award for the most ridiculous comment of the day, but if so, I'd like to nominate DrJ.

🙄

My portfolio is hard won, and for the benefit of me and my family. So screw you, get yer filthy hands off it!

Sums up the capitalist argument very well, thanks. Let's hope it never goes badly for you or your family and you never need any help from people who have the same attitude as you.

Actually, meh.

I'm sure someone else will be along soon to try and beat it! 🙂

Btw reading the basic outline of hernan de sotos idea, that capitalism doens't work outside of europe and america because the legal systems don't exist to back property rights is fine, i don't know whether I'll agree with his ideas, i might I might not, I'll read more later. But I'm struggling to see what relevance that has to a system that does have the legal system to back it up, and an owner class that has the market cornered, limiting available entry to that class.

Seems the opposite to me tbh, ie the balance has tipped from the law being useful to society to manipulation for personal gain on the backs of others.

A lot Joe, it's his main area of interest.

Google him.....it won't hurt.

(Cross post 😉 - I met him first when discussing how to finance home ownership in South Africa and was intrigued by his thesis and experience of helping the poor in Peru. But you are correct, a bit of a tangential leap here, other than I agree with the idea of respecting property rights. Anyway, enough from me, didn't meant to get involved)

You lost me at "left-wing hand-wringers" and "lefty-liberals".

teamhurtmore - Member
A lot Joe, it's his main area of interest.

Google him.....it won't hurt.

I will.

But it's usually the middle-income, low-net-worth, hand-to-mouth nine-to-five kinda guys that spout it. They don't personally own enough wealth to make a blind bit of difference, so they're immune from their own pontifications. If they did own a few properties - empty or otherwise - they'd be far less generous!

i keep hearing this from certain people Council of 10, that to dislike what the Tory party has done to this country and to want to vote Labour makes you a "loonie lefty"

The Youguv stats seem to say different, every type of person from the full time worker, to the student, to the unemployed, voted for labour in greater numbers than the Tories, if it hadn't been for the retired, they would of been scuppered:

[img][url= https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4234/34615625413_9e0e93985a.jp g" target="_blank">https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4234/34615625413_9e0e93985a.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/UJS8rP ]2[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/49281217@N02/ ]Scud75[/url], on Flickr[/img]

And that to vote Labour was to be thought of as less educated or working class, when actually it was the least educated in the classical sense that voted Tory:

[img][url= https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4228/35425300355_83c1f710c6.jp g" target="_blank">https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4228/35425300355_83c1f710c6.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/VYpVAB ]1[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/49281217@N02/ ]Scud75[/url], on Flickr[/img]

Then that old argument over the media:

[img][url= https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4202/34615625203_1d1eb7e4c7.jp g" target="_blank">https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4202/34615625203_1d1eb7e4c7.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/UJS8oc ]3[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/49281217@N02/ ]Scud75[/url], on Flickr[/img]

So whilst you think we're all leftie/marxist/ communists, it would seem we are the youth/ middle aged, educated people that can actually read a quality newspaper, not the retired, bitter Mail/ Sun/Express readers...

Let's hope it never goes badly for you or your family and you never need any help from people who have the same attitude as you.

Like whom? I'll help a guy out who's in a fix, I'll give someone a lift if they've broken down, lend someone a lawnmower... But I'm not going to give a stranger a flat because my income relies on that flat having a paying tenant in it.

I don't know what you do for a living Kerley, but let's just suggest you make loaves of bread and sell them in return for money so you can feed yourself and family, and pay for a roof over your head, cars, holidays, nice things.

Would you, at the behest of some bleeding-heart liberal give all your bread away free, let your family go hungry and homeless, just because a lefty told you to??

I tend to find that the people who haven't got a pot to piss in are very generous - they'll lend their lack-of-pot to anyone!

@Scud - pretty pointless graphs, find one that lists value of assets.

But I'm not going to give a stranger a flat because my income relies on that flat having a paying tenant in it.

Sorry, wind back...are we talking about booting paying tenants out of properties to re-house fire victims?

Would you, at the behest of some bleeding-heart liberal give all your bread away free, let your family go hungry and homeless, just because a lefty told you to??

What an extraordinarily stupid question.

But I'm not going to give a stranger a flat because my income relies on that flat having a paying tenant in it.

So you're not a target. The target is property that's empty and has been for some time if I'm reading it right. A major issue in big cities is "buy for capital protection and capital gain". Renting out is a risk that doesn't need to be taken so porperty sits empty.

Interesting graphics, Scud.

Like whom? I'll help a guy out who's in a fix, I'll give someone a lift if they've broken down, lend someone a lawnmower... But I'm not going to give a stranger a flat because my income relies on that flat having a paying tenant in it.

I missed the bit where Corbyn said "let's temporarily kick tenants out of flats to make room for those currently homeless from the Grenfell fire"

I tend to find that the people who haven't got a pot to piss in are very generous - they'll lend their lack-of-pot to anyone!

Who's more generous in your mind, someone that gives away are 1% of their £100 pot. Or someone that gives away 10% of their £10 pot?

m not sure if there's an award for the most ridiculous comment of the day, but if so, I'd like to nominate DrJ

Thanks mate, but I think you've got that award pretty well sewn up.

Ah hang fire a minute lads...from the tractor thread:

councilof10 - Member - Block User - Quote

I used to love this place... I'd stroll into a debate, drop one of my trademark slightly fascist or intolerant "thread bombs" and watch the liberals running round like headless chucks trying out out-do one another in the mock indignation stakes.

Now the liberals have cottoned on to my little game, and I'm not sure I like it!

Just trolling...

Would you, at the behest of some bleeding-heart liberal give all your bread away free, let your family go hungry and homeless, just because a lefty told you to??

What the hell are you on about? Which lefty is suggesting that scenario. We are talking about multi millionaires and vacant property they own.

If you want to use a totally unrelated made up scenario then it would be like me giving away surplus bread that didn't sell at the end of the day to those in need. And yes I would do that without fail and without a lefty telling me I had to do it.

The heat does seem to be getting to the uptight right today.

Like others, Slowster, I believe that inaccurate comments should be challenged. HTH

FWIW, My earlier comment made direct reference to the importance of property rights and hence was an indirect reference to the work of Hernando de Soto, and economist that I have been lucky enough to share a forum with in the past. You may wish to google him as he has devoted a lot of time to the issue of addressing poverty and homelessness in developing economies, a subject close to my heart. Alternatively you can follow the example of others above and sneer instead. Your choice.....

Thank you for the reply. I've only googled briefly, but the comments I've read suggest that Hernando de Soto's work has been on property rights of the poor in [u]developing[/u] countries, i.e. stating that their occupation of shanty housing and (presumably black market?) economic activity should be recognised as legal ownership, because that will help to take them out of poverty and property rights are essential to developed economies and societies.

I'm not sure that that is a great argument for defending the property rights of some extremely wealthy investors in a [u]developed[/u] society, where the property in question is an essential for human life and is in limited supply both because land for building is physically finite vs a growing population and also because planning laws/govt. policy etc. have restricted growth in supply of housing.