Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Towering Inferno

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:03 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:00 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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. Thumbs Up


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
View user's profile Send private message 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.

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:11 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 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.

jjdugen
World Chat Champion



Joined: 03 Jun 2011
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:58 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

F OFF! We don't need any of your rejects up here, we've got enough of them as it is. We are the ones being raped by the London-centric government(s), we just cannot afford any more drains on our resources. You've gottem, you bloody well deal with it!
____________________
The CBR900RR has been sold. Aprilia Falco worms its way into my heart.
Try Soi 23 on Amazon for a good read.... Self promotion? Moi?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:02 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:10 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message 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.
- This post is not being displayed because the poster has bad karma. Unhide this post / all posts.

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 14:48 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Unless the central government takes over control.

Да, товарищ.
____________________
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
View user's profile Send private message 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.

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:50 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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?

Rogerborg wrote:
Bitty Boys like M.C?

I like it, great name for a street gang Smile
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:56 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

M.C wrote:
I believe Newham council were actually paying residents to leave (for Birmingham etc.).

And Scotland! Shocked

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
View user's profile Send private message 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.

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:10 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Ah that old chestnut again. It's quicker to get into London from 50 miles out than it is to get from one side of London to the other. This "must be local" nonsense is just that.


I can get from Docklands to Heathrow in less than an hour during a weekday, in fact I can do it in less than 40 minutes at night which is considerably quicker than you could get to Heathrow from your place in Kent so try again.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

hellkat
Super Spammer



Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:26 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

M.C wrote:
I believe Newham council were actually paying residents to leave (for Birmingham etc.).

Oh come now, that's an old trick, getting rid of peeps by making it financially interesting for them to start afresh somewhere else, starting with £10 Poms going to Australia, and followed up several times, not least by the home office offering to pay £4K to "migrants" who would agree to repatriate themselves home, back in the ?Late 1990s?/early 2000s

Rolling Eyes

Are Newham still coughing up? I'm a Newham resident (albeit housing association) ... I'd like to see their list of suggested places to fuck off to for lotsofmoneys, Gimmedat list.
____________________
Not nearly as interesting in real life.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail 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.

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:51 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
Who's talking about Heathrow on a bike at night? We're talking about street cleaners and bus drivers needing to live in Kensington and Chelsea in central London because they can't face a 30 minute commute on a train, like hundreds of thousands of others manage every day.


Or maybe, just maybe if they live in Central London and go to work when there are few buses or trains they maybe, just maybe walk or use Boris Bikes. Thumbs Up
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Im-a-Ridah
World Chat Champion



Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:32 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail 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.

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 22:06 - 22 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
M.C wrote:


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?


Ah that old chestnut again. It's quicker to get into London from 50 miles out than it is to get from one side of London to the other. This "must be local" nonsense is just that.

It would be cheaper to pay London weighting (which they do) and let them live in subsidised housing outside of the exclusive expensive areas and commute in, like every other worker has to do.

And we come full circle to prove you weren't paying attention. There's no point commuting in from Kent etc. for low earners, I think I work with one person who commutes in from that far and he's the worlds biggest mong, probably spends the rest of his money on magic beans.

Do some people watching during rush hour at the main stations and you'll see the types who commute in (from afar) are not working at Tesco.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 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.

M.C
Super Spammer



Joined: 29 Sep 2015
Karma :

PostPosted: 15:26 - 23 Aug 2017    Post subject: Reply with quote

mpd72 wrote:
My mate's daughter is starting on £18K and will be commuting in when she starts.

Sure, until she realises it's a waste of time. She'd be better off working minimum wage locally.

mpd72 wrote:
Almost all London roles include weighting.

Do they now?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 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.
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 6 years, 219 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
Page 22 of 37

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.16 Sec - Server Load: 0.07 - MySQL Queries: 17 - Page Size: 162.23 Kb