|
Author |
Message |
Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010 Karma :
|
Posted: 11:03 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
Apparently beggars can be choosers.
One thing puzzles me. Since we all agree or else that Diversity Is Our Strength and "social housing" users are as Diverse as they come, why aren't other boroughs and authorities queueing up to offer housing and relocation services to displaced Grenfellians and the ever swelling ranks of Bitty Boys like M.C?
It's like they're saying one thing, but doing another. It's quite inexplicable. ____________________ Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
sickpup |
This post is not being displayed .
|
sickpup Old Timer
Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
Posted: 12:00 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
mpd72 wrote: | Nice idea, but in reality that's nonsense.
The actual state owned real estate is worth several times that of one in Middlesborough or Manchester. The state could sell the flat to the private sector and buy 5 or so flats in Middlesborough, housing 5 times more dolescum and refugees. |
Again this shows your failure to understand the financial side of what you are talking about. You are confusing potential earnings with cost, they are two very different things.
Most social housing properties older than 30 years were built on land that was either owned by the state or cost a pittance to buy. The fact that it cost little or nothing is completely seperate from the potential it could realise in sale.
mpd72 wrote: | When we have thousands of empty houses in some areas up North, why are we housing Gimmedats in the most expensive areas in the country, where most middle income earners can't afford to live? |
I can't answer that to your satisfaction so won't even bother. Hopefully my explanation above as to costs can be understood by you.
Rogerborg wrote: | Apparently beggars can be choosers.
One thing puzzles me. Since we all agree or else that Diversity Is Our Strength and "social housing" users are as Diverse as they come, why aren't other boroughs and authorities queueing up to offer housing and relocation services to displaced Grenfellians and the ever swelling ranks of Bitty Boys like M.C?
It's like they're saying one thing, but doing another. It's quite inexplicable. |
Now Roger you are being deliberately obtuse.
You know full well that there is a shortage of all types of properties in the UK. That Councils were forced to sell off their stock at reduced prices and weren't allowed to plough the money back into housing. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
Posted: 12:40 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
sickpup wrote: |
Again this shows your failure to understand the financial side of what you are talking about. You are confusing potential earnings with cost, they are two very different things.
|
No, you're confusing Labour led councils with what happens in the real world. What you see as "potential earnings", I see as lost revenue and poorly managed assets and funds.
The only reason we're housing asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants in expensive areas, courtesy of the tax payer, is to meet "diversity targets" and carry on the socialist dream of a London without indigenous white people.
They're hardly native "cockerneys" are they?
We could almost double our stock of social housing in the South East if we stopped housing Gimmdats in the most exclusive areas of the country, where space is already at a premium and moved them to more sensible areas.
Even better, we could stop letting millions of them into the land of free handouts. ____________________ TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
sickpup |
This post is not being displayed .
|
sickpup Old Timer
Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
Posted: 13:38 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
sickpup wrote: | mpd72 wrote: | No, you're confusing Labour led councils with what happens in the real world. What you see as "potential earnings", I see as lost revenue and poorly managed assets and funds. |
This is a bit of a catch 22 you have managed to wrap yourself in. If there was adequate social housing there would be no call for private landlords and then there would be less need for housing benefit. You are proposing to sell off all social housing stock for a short term profit which will raise rents and increase the need for housing benefit which will create a long term loss.
You are a very odd man. |
No, you're really not grasping this are you.
Let me explain it again s...l...o...w...l...y...
The state owned housing stock in the most exclusive areas of London is poor value for money. I'm proposing increasing social housing stock, therefore lowering the need for private landlords taking in benefits lodgers.
We sell the housing stock in expensive London areas and buy several times the number of social houses outside of London. We then house the refugees, gimmedats, immigrants and other social leaches outside of London in the vast stock of affordable real estate in Sunderland or where ever.
We could vastly increase the stock of social housing without it costing the state a penny.
Why the feck should gimmedats be housed in exclusive London boroughs which most tax payers can't afford to live in? Do gimedats live in flats in Monaco? do they feck. ____________________ TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
jjdugen |
This post is not being displayed .
|
jjdugen World Chat Champion
Joined: 03 Jun 2011 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
sickpup |
This post is not being displayed .
|
sickpup Old Timer
Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
Posted: 14:02 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
mpd72 wrote: | No, you're really not grasping this are you.
Let me explain it again s...l...o...w...l...y... |
I feel some big mistakes in the proposed plan coming in.
mpd72 wrote: | The state owned housing stock in the most exclusive areas of London is poor value for money. |
I thought we went through this. It is the same cost as else where.
mpd72 wrote: | I'm proposing increasing social housing stock, therefore lowering the need for private landlords taking in benefits lodgers.
We sell the housing stock in expensive London areas and buy several times the number of social houses outside of London. We then house the refugees, gimmedats, immigrants and other social leaches outside of London in the vast stock of affordable real estate in Sunderland or where ever. |
Ah so you will create a need for housing in an outer area that requires building which individual councils cannot afford to build, central government won't build so private investors will step in to fill in the gap thus raising the rent costs.
Not to mention that these areas of no employment will require housing benefit, job seekers allowance, council tax rebates etc so creating massive losses to whichever local council it is placed in.
mpd72 wrote: | We could vastly increase the stock of social housing without it costing the state a penny. |
It would definately cost more than a penny. What you are trying to say is if balanced against sales of properties and land it would save money but you didn't say that. You also didn't plan for the problems it would cause socially and financially.
mpd72 wrote: | Why the feck should gimmedats be housed in exclusive London boroughs which most tax payers can't afford to live in? Do gimedats live in flats in Monaco? do they feck. |
We shouldn't, can't see where I said that would you like to point it out? Where Greenfell was is a bit of a shít hole so that argument in this case doesn't work either.
Try again please, with more angered spitting and spluttering.
If you could actually provide a coherent long term plan that made no losses I might agree with you but you haven't even got close yet. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010 Karma :
|
Posted: 14:10 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
mdp72 is effectively proposing funnelling private money into the public sector.
Shocked, I am.
Where his plan falls down is that housing is devolved to local authorities, so Kensington flogging off their socialist housing and displacing their Gibs won't do a damn thing to make more housing available for them in Stoke-on-Trent. ____________________ Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
Posted: 14:30 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
sickpup wrote: | I thought we went through this. It is the same cost as else where. |
Yep, in the same way that a pound of horse shit weighs the same as a pound of gold, but one holds many times more value.
sickpup wrote: | Ah so you will create a need for housing in an outer area that requires building which individual councils cannot afford to build, central government won't build so private investors will step in to fill in the gap thus raising the rent costs. |
Wrong. They're already built. There are loads of derelict houses in many Northern towns. Try reading the words I type s....l.....o.....w....l....y..... Which bit of this did you struggle to understand?
mpd72 wrote: | When we have thousands of empty houses in some areas up North, why are we housing Gimmedats in the most expensive areas in the country, where most middle income earners can't afford to live? |
sickpup wrote: | Not to mention that these areas of no employment will require housing benefit, job seekers allowance, council tax rebates etc so creating massive losses to whichever local council it is placed in. |
And how many Gimmedats, illegals and refugees in Grenfell, do you think worked for a living?
sickpup wrote: | It would definately cost more than a penny. What you are trying to say is if balanced against sales of properties and land it would save money but you didn't say that. You also didn't plan for the problems it would cause socially and financially. |
You're struggling with this simple premise aren't you? Let's say a 2 bed flat in Grenfell is worth £500K and a terraced house in Northernshire is worth £100K. How many houses could you buy in Northernshire, if you sold the flat in the Borough of Exclusiveness?
mpd72 wrote: | Why the feck should gimmedats be housed in exclusive London boroughs which most tax payers can't afford to live in? Do gimedats live in flats in Monaco? do they feck. |
sickpup wrote: | We shouldn't, can't see where I said that would you like to point it out? Where Greenfell was is a bit of a shít hole so that argument in this case doesn't work either. |
A very expensive, exclusive shithole, called Chelsea and Kensington, which most everage income people who actually add something to the country, can't afford to live in. ____________________ TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
M.C |
This post is not being displayed .
|
M.C Super Spammer
Joined: 29 Sep 2015 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Rogerborg |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Rogerborg nimbA
Joined: 26 Oct 2010 Karma :
|
Posted: 15:56 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
M.C wrote: | I believe Newham council were actually paying residents to leave (for Birmingham etc.). |
And Scotland!
Sound like the takeup wasn't too high though. They know which side their shortbread is buttered.
mpd72 wrote: | the burden should be spread and paid for by central, not local government. |
How much is that going to cost each MP? It might sting a bit.
I do agree though that back in 1940 we probably shouldn't have said "I say, Kent, if that rascal Jerry pokes his nose over the channel, give him a damn good thrashing and send him packing, will you? Best of luck."
I'm not really seeing that the situation today is much different, just a little more drawn out over time. ____________________ Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike
Last edited by Rogerborg on 19:41 - 22 Aug 2017; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
sickpup |
This post is not being displayed .
|
sickpup Old Timer
Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
hellkat |
This post is not being displayed .
|
hellkat Super Spammer
Joined: 12 Jul 2004 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
sickpup |
This post is not being displayed .
|
sickpup Old Timer
Joined: 21 Apr 2004 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Im-a-Ridah |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Im-a-Ridah World Chat Champion
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Karma :
|
Posted: 20:32 - 22 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
M.C wrote: | People are already being shipped out of London on a regular basis, I believe Newham council were actually paying residents to leave (for Birmingham etc.). Obviously with Grenfell it's high profile so there has been public pressure not to do this.
Look into the Heygate Estate, mpd's masterplan has been going on for a while. I suspect they couldn't pull down Balfron Tower because it's a listed building, so turning it into hipster housing's the alternative.
It's a great plan until you force all the low-skilled workers out, then there's no one to drive the buses, sweep the streets etc. I'm sure London can survive without those things, right? |
But we don't care about the survival of London. It's not exactly part of Britain is it? Last I checked it was more like Afghanistan. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
M.C |
This post is not being displayed .
|
M.C Super Spammer
Joined: 29 Sep 2015 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
M.C |
This post is not being displayed .
|
M.C Super Spammer
Joined: 29 Sep 2015 Karma :
|
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
- |
This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.
|
- Super Spammer
Joined: 22 Oct 2013 Karma :
|
Posted: 15:45 - 23 Aug 2017 Post subject: |
|
|
M.C wrote: | Sure, until she realises it's a waste of time. She'd be better off working minimum wage locally. |
I worked in London for 7 years and commuted in. It wasn't for the money, it was for the experience on my CV. Mind you, rent was also so cheap out of London, I didn't have to live with my Mum.
Yes, public sector in particular get a weighting on their London based salaries, which includes the street cleaners were talking about here.
The people I know in retail who work up in the smoke, also get around £5K more than if they worked locally. All of this is probably swallowed up by the extra train fare, but housing is reasonable priced and you can pop to the coast or the country at weekends, in a 15 minute drive.
All this "cleaners and bus drivers must live in central London" nonsense is just that. The rent is so much higher that most middle income workers can't afford it.
The entire excuse is held up by those sucking on the teat of the benefits system to justify their existence in an area, even hard working middle class people can't afford. ____________________ TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG. |
|
Back to top |
|
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 6 years, 248 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
|
|
|