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

@seaso its a very very slippery slope when a Marxist politician starts taking property from "the rich". Remember at the GE he defined rich as someone earning £80pa (although a couple each earning £40k are not).

@Tom populist he is. No student fees could sts £11bn pa which is substantially more than the extra money he promised the NHS. Strange that but it got him a lot more votes amongst the young

You see Jamby, I unlike yourself - know that the 'victimised' mob can be quite easily led to vote very left or very right

You clearly haven't been reading my posts about Front Nationale have you ? Their core vote comes from the left and hard left. Look where nationally they are strong. They take votes and twon elections from the Communists.

You've missed my entire point.

And he isn't just proving popular with students - he's proving popular with leave voters as well.

This is what happens when you move away from centrist/blairite governance by looking to blame societies ills on a relatively small set of individuals. Corbyns populism and right wing populism/the leave vote are two sides of the same coin - their support is quite interchangeable among certain demographics - and where they are not, both sides attract the same kind of individuals from a psychological point of view.

councilof10 - Member

Anyway, got to dash as I have a tenant to evict... No, seriously... And to be honest, whilst the little **** has effectively robbed me and my family of a couple of grand, it's not something I'll take any pleasure in. Business is business.

I'm reading it as giving him a sense of entitlement.

Entitled to be annoyed?

Strange that but it got him a lot more votes amongst the young

corbyns youth vote wasnt just about uni fees- check what social media was saying about him

he was the more popular choice up to the age of 47

your blinkered view isnt borne out by the facts

[quote=jambalaya ]@Tom populist he is.

Like your mates Nige and Donny, and see what good it did them.

Tom Corbyn won votes from Leavers as the Labour manifesto is essentially the same as the Tories on Brexit. The onky real difference is the "no deal is better than a bad deal" statement where Labour's equivalent is "we will do a deal at any price"

The whole thread is a mute point as even Marxist Corbyn as PM would not / could not put this statement into practice. It just would not work.

jambalaya - Member
@seaso its a very very slippery slope when a Marxist politician starts taking property from "the rich". Remember at the GE he defined rich as someone earning £80pa (although a couple each earning £40k are not).

It's the bottom of the slop jamba, when you jump on the words of a guy, who clearly, in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, felt for the people in the towers plight, and was just off the top of his stating things that [b]could [/b]be done to ease their suffering as soon as possible.

He wasn't outlining a campaign promise, he was just iterating that [b]if the will was there[/b] something could quite easily and very quickly be done, there were many options..

You're somewhat, deliberately, missing the point. If for your own political gain or wind up purposes, i'll others decide. Pretty shameful either way.

its a very very slippery slope when a Marxist politician starts taking property from "the rich"

You clearly haven't been reading my posts about Front Nationale have you ?

as for corbyn are you against personal tax codes now or are you just moaning about corbyn when you actually agree with the reason for why this is done?

Anyway, got to dash as I have a tenant to evict... No, seriously... And to be honest, whilst the little **** has effectively robbed me and my family of a couple of grand, it's not something I'll take any pleasure in. Business is business.

A fine post with a human ending, councilof10. I haven't evicted anyone yet despite 5000e of debt. The power company cut the power off and they left of their own accord. The latest lot are moving on to a new life tonight. They too were months in arrears but their fortunes turned and all I have to do tonight is check the place over and ask for a cheque for the water bill - in theory, fingers crossed and all that.

Requisitioning isn't anti-rich, it's generally the rich that do it - armies, buildings to house armies, food to feed armies, vehicles to transport armies etc.

Tom Corbyn won votes from Leavers as the Labour manifesto is essentially the same as the Tories on Brexit. The onky real difference is the "no deal is better than a bad deal" statement where Labour's equivalent is "we will do a deal at any price"

No, Labour won support from leavers because both the Corbyista's and the Leavers essentially seek to exploit the idea that "[i]All social disturbances and upheavals have their roots in crises of individual self-esteem, and the great endeavor in which the masses most readily unite is basically a search for pride."[/i] and "[i]To find the cause of our ills in something outside ourselves, something specific that can be spotted and eliminated, is a diagnosis that cannot fail to appeal. To say that the cause of our troubles is not in us but in the Jews, and pass immediately to the extermination of the Jews, is a prescription likely to find a wide acceptance.[/i]"

Remember - "[i]Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil.[/i]"

Corbyn won votes from Leavers as the Labour manifesto is essentially the same as the Tories on Brexit

If you keep repeating a falsehood that he has been corrected repeatedly people will keep calling you a liar.

They will have plenty of evidence to support the claim.

@kimbers read the IPSO/Mori analysis just published (today I think). Labour's GE performance was driven almost entirely by big turnout / voter registration with the young. The rest was noise really. The Tories had a near record number of votes cast for them. They won more seats than Labour just less than they had expected.

I don't care from a personal financial standpoint whether Corbyn is elected or not. There is pretty much zero he could do to go after me tax wise. I'll be retired soon and a Corbyn win would accelerate that. I sold up my main property and will not buy another, don't need it and stamp duty is too high to be of interest. The place I rented in Chelsea I could rent for 7 years before I pay the stamp duty and that's never mind any mortgage/financing and maint costs. The stamp duty changes has seen prices and rents fall (rents quite normally follow property values)

Requisitioning / Occupying (ie breaking into) properties is a political dog whistle anti-rich statement. It is in no way shape or form a workable solution to the rehousing problem.

Indeed. I suspect that Corbyn might be saying this because he knows that it is unrealistic/unworkable, but he also knows that in an era of dumbed down political debate limited to sound bites and slogans, he will bring more public attention and debate to this issue by making a deliberately controversial statement. He seems to have learned from the Leave campaign and it's use of the £350M figure, so you should feel quite pleased about the way political debate is evolving in the UK.

@jamba...you are the 'loadsamoney' character in the Harry Enfield show back in the day.

I wonder if you even realised it was comedy. You probably thought the character was someone to be admired. 🙄

@kimbers read the IPSO/Mori analysis just published (today I think). Labour's GE performance was driven almost entirely by big turnout / voter registration with the young. The rest was noise really. The Tories had a near record number of votes cast for them. They won more seats than Labour just less than they had expected.

Doesn't really bear out in the data does it - you haven't really managed to counter my point that you, ninfan etc and the Corbyn supporters are two sides of the same coin.

[quote=jambalaya ]You clearly haven't been reading my posts about Front Nationale have you ?

Ah, you added that after I replied about populist politicians - Manny outdid your mate Marine on that one didn't he?

the words of a guy, who clearly, in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, felt for the people in the towers plight, was just off the top of his stating things that could be done to ease their suffering as soon as possible.

He wasn't outlining a campaign promise, he was just iterating that if the will was there something could quite easily and very quickly be done.

Eight pages and this is all that really needed saying to be honest. Well done sir 🙂

Right, must dash as I'm still working and will be for a few more hours yet. Funnily enough I work hard, but haven't quite managed to build up a property portfolio of any sort. Neither do I own a fancy car, more than one bike or have had a holiday for the last few years. One would almost assume that an element of luck, or buying before prices went mental must be involved. No, no it's purely hard work

@kimbers read the IPSO/Mori analysis just published (today I think). Labour's GE performance was driven almost entirely by big turnout / voter registration with the young.

I think it's heartening that more young people are participating in democracy, don't you?

just less than they had expected.

Around 150. 😆

especially as they are labour and the tories are shuffling off the mortal coil

One of those if they want policies suited to their needs and desires then vote

no party tries to attract non voters and the reason the young get shafted and pensioners get triple locks are more to do with voter turnout than fairness

I just read the first page and that was enough. Some of the usual people on here make me do a bit of sick in my mouth when I read their self-centered opinions. Shameful.

A fine post with a human ending, councilof10. I haven't evicted anyone yet despite 5000e of debt.

I just ask myself "would I *give* this person, a relative stranger a few thousand pounds meaning my family and I go without?" Nope. "Would I *lend* him several thousand knowing that the chances of ever recouping it are nil?" Nope.

This guy hasn't paid rent since he stopped working due to a heart attack, and he's awaiting a bypass, so he's not going to pay any soon! Far better that he finds somewhere state funded now while he's still mobile... I wouldn't have the heart to see him on the street after a major operation!

^^
[img] [/img]

just less than they had [s]expected.[/s]

kimbers read the IPSO/Mori analysis just published (today I think). Labour's GE performance was driven almost entirely by big turnout / voter registration with the young

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2017-election

i'm well out of this thread - way to political for me now and hands up to that.

councilof10 - Member
A fine post with a human ending, councilof10. I haven't evicted anyone yet despite 5000e of debt.
I just ask myself "would I *give* this person, a relative stranger a few thousand pounds meaning my family and I go without?" Nope. "Would I *lend* him several thousand knowing that the chances of ever recouping it are nil?" Nope.

This guy hasn't paid rent since he stopped working due to a heart attack, and he's awaiting a bypass, so he's not going to pay any soon! Far better that he finds somewhere state funded now while he's still mobile... I wouldn't have the heart to see him on the street after a major operation!

Are you for real !!! OMFG please tell me you're joking ?!?! If not and you're for real you seriously have issues...

serial person banned for trolling saying that ...do you need to ask?

Junkyard - lazarus
serial person banned for trolling saying that ...do you need to ask?

I'm outta the loop on that one no idea who's banned and who's not

he is a previous poster - shiboleth + other names- who returns stays under the radar for a bit, does this sort of thing and then goes on a holiday delivered by the mods hammer

We repeat this every 6-12 months or so.

I was...

twice.

I think I'm a reformed character now.

Cereal troll?

Trolled oats?

Flashy's call on hotels is a good one, but I imagine many in the area are booked months in advance this time of year with little spare capacity?

IANAC'ney btw, but you'd hope they'd be volunteering to shelter people, it must have been looked into by now?

There's little spare capacity in the current social housing system anymore.

@kimbers read the IPSO/Mori analysis just published (today I think). Labour's GE performance was driven almost entirely by big turnout / voter registration with the young.

Where presumably "The young" means people under the age of 47?
(i.e. the crossover point where people become old and cynical enough to be more likely to vote Tory than Labour).
[img] [/img]

The Tories had a near record number of votes cast for them.

[i]"near record"? [/i] How near exactly?

13,669,883 votes (42.4%) compared to Labours 12,878,460 (40%).

Churchill had [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1951 ]13,717,851 way back in 1951[/url] (and Attlee had even more).
Macmillan had [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1959 ]13,750,875 in 1959[/url].
Thatcher had [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1979 ]13,697,923 in 1979[/url] and [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1987 ]13,760,935 in 1987[/url].
And Major had [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1992 ]14,093,007 in 1992[/url].

Considering how much the UK voting population has grown over that time, I'd say they were pretty far from a "near record".

I'm more interested in results than ideology. The objective here is to rehouse a few hundred people as close as possible to their former homes. JC's proposal, as Capt Flasheart said, would be fraught with costs and legal wrangles. How about:
1. Put them in nearby hotels at council expense, they've got a big reserve.
2. Appeal to the consciences (if fitted) and pockets (tax deductions) of vacant/large property owners. Central money.
3. Rehouse asap. Accelerate building in the area and those nearby.
Seems simpler (not simple!) to me!

Flashy's call on hotels is a good one, but I imagine many in the area are booked months in advance this time of year with little spare capacity?

It's an easy solution, but I'd hesitate to call it a good one. Not really going to help people try to move on with their lives, is it.

Councilof10, when I've had tennants in difficultly I've gone along to our local social services with them to see what their rights are and if a solution can be found. On one occasion that resulted in them settling a part of the debt, then the tennant eventually got another job and cleared the rest of the debt. The loss came from a tennant more concerned with helping his family in the Ivory coast civil war than paying rent or electricity - his ss money went on flights. It's my property but their home.

Living in a hotel? Haven't these people suffered enough?

hotels are a short term interim measure for people who need homes ;they are not the solution to them having no homes.

RichPenny - Member

It's an easy solution, but I'd hesitate to call it a good one. Not really going to help people try to move on with their lives, is it.

I agree, I'm not talking long term, just temporarily getting people into a situation that feels
safe , more human.

I don't have much faith in the government three week promise, but even that seems too late to me.

London, 2017.
There must be a way to safely, legally, house a few hundred traumatised people, surely?

Junkyard - lazarus
hotels are a short term interim measure for people who need homes ;they are not the solution to them having no homes.

This is true. However, as a short term option goes, it's better than posturing about requisitioning/occupying luxury flats. A lot cheaper, and quicker, basically. Also, as mentioned before, the legal costs and delays of Jezza's concept would probably be ruinous in both short and long term.

Yes, it's not a long term fix, but it's the best short term fix to get people in need in to safe accommodation.

True CFH but common sense and pragmatism don't make headlines to draw the gullible in.

It can be done.

I was present at a big family Christening do at a hotel recently.
It was pretty clear from the police and social/medical services present that they were there to protect and care for family members of those killed at Manchester Arena who were being put up at the hotel.

I believe this was replicated all over the city for other families.

It can be done, given the will.

Hes back with his trade mark style of personal arrogance and pithy dismay of anyone who disagrees 😀

You tories really love property laws dont you even when the wealthy are not using them and people are really in need. Still got to make sure the wealth stays where it belongs. Sad

In reality yes it would be fraught with difficulty to achieve what he said but its not exactly ludicrous to think hey lets house folk in all those unused houses of the uber rich who dont need them and are not using them

Their core vote comes from the left and hard left

What's the "hard left" look like? Genuine question, I've no idea.

You clearly haven't been reading my posts about Front Nationale have you ?

I for one haven't. Was that in one of the several thousand post monster-threads I bowed out of months ago?

he is a previous poster - shiboleth + other names- who returns stays under the radar for a bit, does this sort of thing and then goes on a holiday delivered by the mods hammer

Point of order, he was never under the radar, we had him pegged from day one. We decided to turn a blind eye as he seemed to be behaving himself.

Wouldn't it be nice if some uber rich dude said "use my houses for a year they're empty anyway" ?

Just to piss everyone off like.

London, 2017.
There must be a way to safely, legally, house a few hundred traumatised people, surely?

Germany did a million or so last year and even the town of 150 000 I live in took 40.