|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On June 17 2017 20:16 RvB wrote: Because they're not for requisitioning buildings? There are more ways to help these people... I hope this is what this 13% means, and not "respecting the holy private property of the super-wealthy still matters more than helping those people"
|
United States42831 Posts
On June 17 2017 19:39 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 19:17 MoonfireSpam wrote: The stuff around contractors and building regs is just the end product of politics and management practice all over the public sector (maybe its just how business works in general, I don't know). Cut cut cut, until someone disasterous happens, no single person is actually accountable because everyone collectively caused harm.
Other spin for the Corbyn thing is "only 28%" oppose his idea. We also learn that 13% of the population is fairly cold-hearted lol Government should pay the market price for any housing they use, thus avoiding the whole requisitioning issue. And the entire issue is opportunism, there are a large number of homeless people in the UK and those displaced by this fire are a small minority who previously had somewhere to live and will have an insurance claim for their lost property etc. He's not suggesting requisitioning to fix homelessness, he's suggesting requisitioning to help this specific wedge of high profile cases who need it less than most.
Either way housing benefit already exists, the government will already pay your rent to a landlord for a property deemed suitable to your needs. Corbyn is trying to make something from nothing.
|
On June 18 2017 02:38 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 19:39 TheDwf wrote:On June 17 2017 19:17 MoonfireSpam wrote: The stuff around contractors and building regs is just the end product of politics and management practice all over the public sector (maybe its just how business works in general, I don't know). Cut cut cut, until someone disasterous happens, no single person is actually accountable because everyone collectively caused harm.
Other spin for the Corbyn thing is "only 28%" oppose his idea. We also learn that 13% of the population is fairly cold-hearted lol Government should pay the market price for any housing they use, thus avoiding the whole requisitioning issue. And the entire issue is opportunism, there are a large number of homeless people in the UK and those displaced by this fire are a small minority who previously had somewhere to live and will have an insurance claim for their lost property etc. He's not suggesting requisitioning to fix homelessness, he's suggesting requisitioning to help this specific wedge of high profile cases who need it less than most. Either way housing benefit already exists, the government will already pay your rent to a landlord for a property deemed suitable to your needs. Corbyn is trying to make something from nothing.
The population seems to agree with him, also he seems pretty pro requisition in general, I agree. I'd happily trade literally any politician for him.
|
Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs?
|
On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London
|
On June 18 2017 04:59 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London Glad to see someone is testing the limits of the "free market" and what governments are generally willing to put up with. Because governments have to deal with the fall out of rising housing costs, not the property investors.
|
On June 18 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2017 04:59 Acrofales wrote:On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London Glad to see someone is testing the limits of the "free market" and what governments are generally willing to put up with. Because governments have to deal with the fall out of rising housing costs, not the property investors.
As if the housing market in the UK is anywhere near free is just lul, also less than 1% of properties in London are vacant a lot of it is propaganda by people like Corbyn.
|
United States42831 Posts
Stamp duty already acts as a disincentive to flipping investment properties and holding to sell.
|
On June 18 2017 05:58 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:On June 18 2017 04:59 Acrofales wrote:On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London Glad to see someone is testing the limits of the "free market" and what governments are generally willing to put up with. Because governments have to deal with the fall out of rising housing costs, not the property investors. As if the housing market in the UK is anywhere near free is just lul, also less than 1% of properties in London are vacant a lot of it is propaganda by people like Corbyn. I'd like to see the non-propaganda view of putting up displaced residents from people not bemoaning private property rights in general. There's too much stick-it-to-the-rich mixed in with how to show compassion.
|
On June 18 2017 05:58 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:On June 18 2017 04:59 Acrofales wrote:On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London Glad to see someone is testing the limits of the "free market" and what governments are generally willing to put up with. Because governments have to deal with the fall out of rising housing costs, not the property investors. As if the housing market in the UK is anywhere near free is just lul, also less than 1% of properties in London are vacant a lot of it is propaganda by people like Corbyn.
I don't know anything about London's specific real estate market, but below 1% for any real estate market sounds unrealistically low. Where is that number from?
|
On June 18 2017 05:58 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2017 05:02 Plansix wrote:On June 18 2017 04:59 Acrofales wrote:On June 18 2017 03:46 Plansix wrote: Am I reading it correct that the properties are vacant simply because they are investment properties and there is some attempt to drive up surrounding housing costs? Welcome to London Glad to see someone is testing the limits of the "free market" and what governments are generally willing to put up with. Because governments have to deal with the fall out of rising housing costs, not the property investors. As if the housing market in the UK is anywhere near free is just lul, also less than 1% of properties in London are vacant a lot of it is propaganda by people like Corbyn.
I will refer you to this article: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/apr/20/over-200000-homes-in-england-still-lying-empty-despite-housing-shortages Which is now two months old:
The wealthy borough of Kensington and Chelsea was the worst performer in London as super-rich owners rejected renting them out or selling up in favour of leaving their properties lying idle.
The royal borough had 1,399 empty homes worth £664m, compared with second-placed Croydon, which had 1,216 empty homes worth £577m.
Simply looking at the percentage of vacant properties is devoid of context. This article clarifies some of the context of recent events.
|
Just watched the Theresa vs Boris "Documentary" what a load of shit seems all sides agreed lets just throw mud at Gove while bigging up Boris. Gove had no-one putting his point of view across at all, could have at least spoken to some people from his team.
|
A vehicle has struck pedestrians "leaving a number of casualties" in north London, police said. One person has been arrested following the incident on Seven Sisters Road in Finsbury Park. Officers were called at 12.20 BST and are at the scene with other emergency services, the Metropolitan Police said. A London Ambulance Service spokesman said: "We have sent a number of resources to an incident in Seven Sisters Road."
www.bbc.com
|
some additional information
Several people have been injured after a van struck a crowd of pedestrians near a north London mosque in what police have called a "major incident". One person was arrested following the collision near Finsbury Park Mosque in Seven Sisters Road. Officers were called at 00.20 BST and remain at the scene, the Metropolitan Police said. The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said a van "intentionally" ran over worshippers. Many of the victims are believed to have just left evening prayers after breaking the Ramadan fast. London Ambulance Service said it had sent "a number of resources" to the scene.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40322960
|
United States42831 Posts
Now all that remains is to see whether driving a van into some Muslims solves terrorism. If it does then that'll be an exciting development and we should start testing whether driving a van into food solves third world hunger.
|
a point can still be made here about the internalization of the problem at a muslim community level.
|
On June 19 2017 11:31 KwarK wrote: Now all that remains is to see whether driving a van into some Muslims solves terrorism. If it does then that'll be an exciting development and we should start testing whether driving a van into food solves third world hunger.
I dont think anyone says that terrorism is proper response to terror. I think most people who advocate violence as solution to this problem have government violence in mind. Mass arrests/deprtations and the likes.
|
Is this an example of how Governments fall overnight?
|
Not sure why David Davis is an idiot? The man is given an impossible task. The only idiocy was accepting the charge, but the alternative of having someone less qualified negotiating for UK would probably be worse for everyone involved.
EDIT: I like how you spammed the same post across two threads.
|
That idiot is highly tipped to be our next PM.
|
|
|
|