 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Labour wants to confiscate property
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:13 AM Just when Labour seems to be shrinking the gap with the Tories, Corbyn comes out with the cunning wheeze of rehousing survivors from the Grenfell tower fire disaster by requisitioning vacant adjacent properties. 1) This is a flagrant contravention of the article 1 of the European convention on human rights. This places an obligation on the state not to interfere with people enjoying the peaceful enjoyment of their property. 2)Prior to the recent election Corbyn stated " The Tories want to repeal the Human Rights Act and some want to leave the European Convention on Human Rights." A wonderful example of a typical lying, double dealing, twisting snake of a politician demonstrating his contempt for freedom and property that his knee jerk reaction to the tragedy is to resort class war… Do politicians think we are goldfish not capable of remembering past events on each circuit of the bowl? Or is it politicians that demostrate their stupidity by constantly contradicting themselves? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:23 AM "rehousing survivors from the Grenfell tower fire disaster by requisitioning vacant adjacent properties." The basartds - how dare they suggest that the wealthy be ask to assist the victims of a fire that has devastated so many homes and taken the lives of so many people - they'll be asking them to pay taxes next What's wrong with tents in Hyde Park? Is this a sick joke Iains? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:24 AM By vacant adjacent properties, do you mean properties bought up as "investments" by people who already have more money than they know what to do with, as well as a home somewhere else that they actually live in? You mention the "human rights" of property investors while ignoring the humanitarian needs of people who have just lost everything, in some cases including people dear to them, and who have nowhere to live. Vacant means empty and unused. Look it up. There is no-one peacefully enjoying the "properties" Corbyn is talking about. And I'm sure he isn't talking about doing it without compensation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Johnny J Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:32 AM On a temporary basis, why not? The Tories requisitioned ships for The Falklands from private owners. This is akin to a War time emergency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:43 AM I had a feeling who may have started this thread. He was my third choice so not too bad :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: SPB-Cooperator Date: 16 Jun 17 - 08:03 AM Iain, We are talking about those who own property and keep it empty as investments. I suppose for you that is far more important than those you consider your inferiors having the right to a roof over their heads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 08:58 AM Iain.. don't be such an arse.. It's not as if Kensington tories have long term plans to demolish all those estates and ship the poor people off outside the constituency.. That Labour majority of 20 votes might inspire all sorts of pernicious deranged schemes...????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 16 Jun 17 - 09:38 AM It's an emergency on a large scale. If these properties are indeed vacant, they could be requisitioned on a temporary basis (say, for some months) until more permanent housing is found. It's unrealistic to expect the local authority to magic up dozens of dwellings for these unfortunate people when waiting lists are already yards long. In times of emergency or urgent need, requisitioning has always been a possibility. (eg during WW2, child evacuees billeted with families in safer regions) One could always negotiate with the current owners and reach some sort of agreement. I think it's a good idea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 09:41 AM .. and how about community pulling together in an emergency .. the blitz spirit.. Families spontaneously opening their doors to strangersa - neighbours - to shelter them in immediate days after disaster.. So how many rich property owners in the vicinity have already benevolently volunteered to donate their empty investment properties for the short term...????... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 09:42 AM hi Sen - we cross posted... great humanist minds.. eh.. 😎 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Rapparee Date: 16 Jun 17 - 09:43 AM After Brexit, will the "European Convention on Human Rights" still apply? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jun 17 - 10:28 AM Do politicians think we are goldfish Not you, Iains - you're obviously one sick puppy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Jun 17 - 10:32 AM "Among the many complexities of Brexit is Prime Minister Theresa May's determination to pull the United Kingdom out of the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights (EHCR). This idea, announced in a number of speeches and interviews before the June 2016 referendum while Theresa May was Home Secretary, is now likely to become a central tenet of the Conservative Party manifesto for the 2020 general election campaign. " Institute of International and European Affairs It will be interesting to see what deal she does with DUP with regard to their opposition to Same Sex Marriage, Pregnancy Termination, Creationism and Line Dancing!! At least Corbyn's claimed association with terrorists will no longer be an issue given DUP's TRACK RECORD Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 16 Jun 17 - 10:39 AM i think its a great idea confiscating property. start with the prince wales - if we had the rents from all his lands going into the coffers instead of his pockets, we'd all be better off. then the duke of westminster - then the queen. whats wrong with that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 11:16 AM A reality check http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40303142 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Jun 17 - 11:33 AM "Reality Check verdict: Doing so would not be allowed under current rules, and legislation to allow property to be seized in peacetime would be controversial." Reality check Iains It would be unbelievably inhuman to allow properties to stand empty while there are so many people in desperate need of a roof over their heads, whatever the law says. What kind of people would allow that, and what kinD of people would support it by hiding behind the law? RHETORICAL QUESTION, OF COURSE - the residents of Carrickmines did Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 16 Jun 17 - 11:43 AM Big Al Whittle - 16 Jun 17 - 10:39 AM i think its a great idea confiscating property. start with the prince wales - if we had the rents from all his lands going into the coffers instead of his pockets, we'd all be better off. then the duke of westminster - then the queen. whats wrong with that? I dare say that the present Duke of Westminster is one of the top 1% of "earners" who pays something like 29.8% of all tax recovered by HMRC. The bottom 50% pay something like 9.7% of all tax recovered. As for HM The Queen (Duchy of Lancaster) and HRH The Prince of Wales (Duchy of Cornwall) well they already contribute millions to HMRC. I think those contributions plus those of The Crown Estate come in at something like £320 million a year. Will you still be cheering when they come to confiscate what you have Big Al? Or are you a typical "socialist" who's all for sharing everything until it comes to sharing what they own? By all means let them requisition vacant properties, but accept that the costs associated with the exercise will be enormous (Not normally a factor that ever clouds Labour Party schemes). . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 11:57 AM The Duke of Westminster and the Queer Old Dean (and her extensive band of hangers-on) don't "earn" money, Teribus. They MAKE money. Hardly horny-handed sons of toil, are they! I suppose they may get RSI from all that hand-waving, the poor dears. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:18 PM Hardly horny-handed sons of toil, are they! Not that they have been quoted directly, but I do find it mildly amusing that The Adam Smith Institute and their like seem not to have actually read what Adam Smith wrote. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Nigel Parsons Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:19 PM Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 16 Jun 17 - 11:33 AM "Reality Check verdict: Doing so would not be allowed under current rules, and legislation to allow property to be seized in peacetime would be controversial." Reality check Iains It would be unbelievably inhuman to allow properties to stand empty while there are so many people in desperate need of a roof over their heads, whatever the law says. What kind of people would allow that, and what kinD of people would support it by hiding behind the law? If the question were as simple, and clear-cut as you seem to suggest, why have these homes not already been used to house the homeless? We need (most of us) to have some regard for the rule of law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:40 PM Of course. But laws are there to benefit people and they can be changed. We call it democracy. Iains started this thread with a vicious swipe at Jeremy Corbyn's character for suggesting that the unused assets of the rich might be used in an emergency to help homeless people whose lives have been destroyed, not with an investigation of whether Corbyn was being realistic in terms of the law. The reality check discussion represents a welcome quiet change of tack if nothing else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:46 PM There is a hierarchy of human rights. The human right of the survivors of this disaster to a place to live ranks far higher than the property rights of people with empty property. That's not a particularly leftwing way of seeing it either. Requisitioning resources needed in a crisis has been something governments of all kinds have seen themselves as entitled to do - and have been backed in the courts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:54 PM Steve. The point i make is that Corbyn partly campaigned on the basis the tories would unravel human rights legislation and this encompasses property rights. Now when it suits he demands that those same human rights be overturned and adjacent property requisitioned. To accomplish this legally would take months and be fought in the courts both here and in Europe with little chance of success. It was a cheap political shot that he knew full well had no chance of success within any meaningful time frame. He and his supporters are trying to make further political capital out of it by claiming the government has put a d notice on the casualty figures Both Corbyn and many posting here live in a leftard la la land where the rule of law is sacrificed for expediency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 12:57 PM How much lower can labour stoop? https://order-order.com/2017/06/16/corbynistas-peddle-grenfell-d-notice-fake-news/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 01:25 PM How much lower can you stoop seeking rational for your warped sense of humanity than linking to arsewipe guido's shite-site...??? Law or not.. burnt out homeless families + empty properties = a fairly obnvious humane conclusion... Still waiting for rich property owners to step up and voluntarily do the right thing in a crisis... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Jun 17 - 01:26 PM What the fuck are you doing Iaians Why are you turning a massive tragedy into an attack on a rival party How much lower can YOU stoop? "why have these homes not already been used to house the homeless?" Because it takes a tragedy to galvanise people into doing something about the massive number of empty properties in the Capital These buildings were in the spotlight as long ago as 1969 when an army of Police evicted protesting squatters from an empty mansion at 144 Piccadilly, Marble Arch The deliberate act of keeping these buildings empty for years on end for the purpose of profiteering has always been a disgrace in London Nothing new here "rule of law" - don't you mean pursuit of profit? The law is made by property owners and profiteers - it always has been Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 16 Jun 17 - 01:50 PM You are being an arse Iains. For a start, requisition and confiscate are completely different actions. Property was requisitioned during the war. It was returned once the emergency had ended. For a second thing, they are only talking about unoccupied properties. For a third thing you quote the idiot who disguises himself (or maybe herself) as Guido Fawkes. This idiot is a well known tinfoil hat merchant. For a fourth thing the Mail, which I would never use even to wipe my arse lest it be sullied, has been trying to link this tragedy to environmental legislation. After supporting Hitler, you would think that it was impossible to go lower, but the Mail has managed it. For a fifth point, property rights are not human rights. They are a tenet of capitalism, but that is one system among many. Human rights are on a higher plane entirely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 16 Jun 17 - 02:16 PM He is trying to make political gain out of human tragedy. Sick arsehole. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jun 17 - 02:30 PM Rather like Donald Trump. Could Iains be Twitler incognito? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 04:49 PM David Carter has said it all. Back down, Iains. You have absolutely nothing to complain about, oh, unless you'd like to complain about the fact that your leader wouldn't even meet the people affected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 04:54 PM David Carter. The BBC"The claim: Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says the government should requisition housing if necessary for those made homeless by the Grenfell Tower fire. Reality Check verdict: Doing so would not be allowed under current rules, and legislation to allow property to be seized in peacetime would be controversial." It is Labour making political capital out of a tragic event and even claiming a D notice has been put on the casualty figures. It is labour fighting the Tories for wanting to drop human rights legislation and quite happy to blithely ignore the same human rights legislation regarding enjoyment of property and talking about requisitioning property. What a sick party! . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 05:06 PM When are you going to stop saying "enjoyment of property?" You do not "enjoy" a property you are not living in. If the place was so bloody enjoyable you'd live in it. Those empty properties, worth big mazumas in London of course, are investments. I live in a seaside town that is replete with "properties" that are empty for eleven months out of twelve. The people who own them, as well as the people who own those "properties" in lucrative London, already enjoy their human rights in their main residences, which you can bet your life are not in dangerous tower blocks. How you can set the kinds of "human rights" enjoyed by people who mop up homes for investment and keep them empty alongside the humanitarian disaster delivered by the fire - well, I don't know what planet you're on, frankly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 05:24 PM stop being an idiot shaw! The European Convention on Human Rights, in Protocol 1, article 1 acknowledges a right for natural and legal persons to "peaceful enjoyment of his possessions" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 05:32 PM peaceful enjoyment...!!!@??? The town I live in experienced a spate of fires over a short few years before the banks fucked everyone all over.. Oddly enough, mostly large empty properties that might have had historic restrictions on redevelopment.. and civic amenities buildings.... Easier to get planning permission on burnt out rubble... .. just saying... Obviously that would be unthinkable in these tragic circumstances... Not even the worst heartless sociopath tory rich c@nt would even contemplate doing that.....???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 05:45 PM The European Convention on Human Rights is a piece of paper. Hundreds of people have just lost everything, in many cases including their loved ones, and all you can do is whinge about a vague temporary threat to empty investment properties owned by wealthy people who live in very nice houses already. You need to consider backing off, pal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jon Freeman Date: 16 Jun 17 - 06:03 PM Protocol 1 Art.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides: What constitutes "public interest"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 16 Jun 17 - 06:16 PM No Shaw. You need to consider that idiot Corbyn is calling for the overturning of due legal process and trashing property rights to try to score cheap political points. You may support such miserable tactics for political advantage. I do not. You cannot pick and choose bits of the legal code depending on the phases of the moon or the colour of your hair. You either accept it in its entirety or not all all. None of your trendy leftist posturing can alter this fact. It would be better for all political parties to recognise a human tragedy and work together to ensure it cannot happen again, rather than vying for political kudos on the back of human suffering. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jun 17 - 06:24 PM Say good night, Iains. Or perhaps you just need a cookie, a glass of milk, and a nap. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 16 Jun 17 - 06:36 PM You cannot pick and choose bits of the legal code Does that mean your phrase that idiot Corbyn, being a defamatory statement, should be deleted from this forum? You really are a tosser aren't you. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:03 PM In fact Article 1 of the first protocol allows the state to deprive individuals of their property and possessions if it is necessary to control the use of property or secure payment of taxes and other charges or penalties. I think that if it actually came to court that could be used to justify requisitioning unused housing in an emergency. And in advance of any such court case it would be perfectly possible to act on that understanding of the law, and requisition the property. As has been pointed out, requisitioning is not the same as confiscation or expropriation. If this has happened a week or so, this might not have been a theoretical exercise, since it is hard to imagine Theresa May having won in the light of this disaster and the shabby way she responded to it. However if Labour does pursue this option, it is far from sure that the current government would be able to defeat it in the Commons. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:15 PM "Trashing property rights?" Hundreds of people have just had all their property trashed by a fire that should never have happened and that wasn't their fault. All you can do is whinge on about the property rights of very wealthy people. Get a life, Iains. And a soul while you're at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:43 PM what an astonishingly insensitive inhumane man... hope he's not a landlord of rented properties.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Jun 17 - 07:47 PM "You need to consider that idiot Corbyn is calling for the overturning of due legal process and trashing property rights to try to score cheap political points. " It was Labour who introduced homes for all back in the 1940s when the peopel of Britain needed them most; it was thatcher who burst that dream by turing homes into investments and disenfranchised many millions of people overnight. There is no question of "winning votes" - homes for all has always been Labour's policy. on the contrary, Corbyn's policy is likely to lose him votes in the rich underbelly of Britain and areas where they swallowed Thatcher's policy of respectablising greed. You quote the European convention of Human Rights - totally immaterial in this situation Even the American Constitution guaranteed "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" " - how about the homeless - how do they get that in your property world How about those who have just been burned out of their homes in the last few days - do thehy have no rights to a roof over their heads, or running clean water, or sanitation Are their rights less important than property owners who wish to leaaave their property empty I find threads like these extremely useful for throwing the spotlight on what your word is all about - total inhumanity - wealth before people's right to live decent lives. Your "lefty" epithet is fine by me - in my lifetime "right" politics sent six million Jews to their deaths in extermination camps; right companies in fascist Germany financed the rise of fascism and used slave labour in their factories, it was right wing dictators who massacred and tortured thousands of its opponents in Chile and Greece and it was right wing Thatcher who described his policies as her kind of democracy and those who attempted to bring Pinoochet to trial as "running a police state" The right, historically has the worst record of human rights abuses and war-crimes on this planet. So feel free to refer to me as a leftie, even if it is not strictly accurate - "the right has nothing to recommend it in today world. Would you like to offer a solution for how to assist those who have been made homeless in this fire - wouldn't tents in Hyde Park offend your rich friends in Park Lane? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 16 Jun 17 - 08:19 PM Today and this weekend has been designated a commemoration of Jo Cox's belief that we all have more in common than we are different. All around the nation, this is a cross party apolitical celebration of human unity... This most recent disaster and the aftermath emphasises how communities embrace each other in common bond of shared humanity.. ..yet today some sad sour fool named Iains chooses to show himslf up to be a complete and utter bile fueled arsehole... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Jun 17 - 08:53 PM We're going on an annual walk on Sunday in memory of a gorgeous, lovely, beautiful girl, the daughter of good friends of ours, who died of leukaemia, aged just 25, several years ago. It just so happened to coincide with the Jo Cox day (my sister knew Jo from childhood and is friends with Jo's mum). Sunday will be a poignant day for us lot. Sometimes, focussing on the individual's story instead of trying to see the big picture all the time is what keeps us grounded as human beings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 17 Jun 17 - 12:39 AM several hours of contemplation later... in this weekends Jo Cox spirit of reconciliation. I wish to appologise to that arse for calling him an arse... ..but I'm only human.. I should have called him a fukwitted life draining right wing c@nt... I feel better for that now... it was bothering my conciounce.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Gurney Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:18 AM I'm a stranger to the UK nowadays, so can anyone tell me if the apartments/flats in that burned-out building were rented by their occupants or owned by them? It seems to me from this thread that there wasn't an effective Body Corporate there, or if there was, it was made up of owners and not owner-occupiers. Also, do unoccupied properties over there still attract rates? Here in GodsOwn only private houses do that, not business premises. As an aside, this thread is becoming similar to a lot of others on the wwweb, where personal insults take the place of reasoned argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:30 AM Gurney - i asure you my insults are very well reasoned and deserved... my mudcat persona is usually more moderate than this.. that arse brings all this upon himself... every word I say to him is carefully thought through and measured... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:42 AM "He is trying to make political gain out of human tragedy. Sick arsehole." Gnome that is precisely what Corbyn and his supporters have been doing from day one. On the empty property thing - One of the examples of the blocks of property vacant given belongs to the Algerian Embassy and therefore cannot be touched by the British Government. Don't know who "owns" the others. Like most things in life, especially in large, complex and multi-national cities and there are few bigger than London what appears to be a simple solution to an immediate problem is far from being simple or indeed being any form of solution at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:52 AM I think you have made a mistake and should apologise PFR...your outburst is completely out of character....or I have you figured wrongly. Iains was discussing the legal aspect, not denigrating the victims, and Mr Corbyn, though I support much of what he says, is not above making political points over tragedies.....in common with most politicians. Hope you accept this without rancour, as there is none intended. We should be able to discuss any subject here, as most of us know one another as well as family members. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:32 AM "Iains was discussing the legal aspect, not denigrating the victims, " It is denigrating the victims to suggest that it is more important to suggest that a right to a roof over their head is less important than protecting the rights of property owners who wish to leave their propert empty - property before people in extreme trouble How denigraing is that "One of the examples of the blocks of property vacant given belongs to the Algerian Embassy " A total red herring London is full of empty properties that have been that way for years for investment puposes. Property investment on empty buildings has been one of the major money spinners in the capital for decades One of the monuments of that 'industry' was Centrepoint, a massive high-rise office block on Charring Cross road - left empty for a decade for investment purposes Throughout the 1973 oil crisis the owners were allowed to avoid fuel rationing to allow them to heat this empty monstrosity because, if they not beeen allowed to it would have fallen down. JIm Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:47 AM Huge difference, Teribus. Corbyn may be making political gains but it is a by product of helping people. Iain's is attempting to do so by denigrating those trying to help. Ake, it is you, as ever, that has the wrong end of the stick. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:48 AM we'd obviously be better off if we confiscated the money that the duke of westminster keeps for himself as well as the derisory amount we get in tax. this is the basic problem with this country - too few people have got most of the money. i'm amazed i don't have more support on what i should have thought was very obvious. all these guys have got accountants and pay the bare minimum. if you think he pays a lot now - just think how well off we'd be if we grabbed the lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:48 AM http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4612718/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Shame-playing-politics-tragedy.html Corbyn is playing the politic of the gutter. I would not trust him to be the janitor of the public urinals. If he had the slightest bit of integrity he would resign forthwith. I have made my comments about the catastrophic fire in the appropriate thread. This thread is about a certain grandstanding politician who is demonstrably unfit for purpose. But of course the minority of his supporters on this thread cannot conceive the reality. Sad, very sick people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 05:12 AM If it the politics of the gutter you want to examine, the Daily Mail is certainly one of the places to look. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Jun 17 - 05:17 AM Iains quoting from the gutter press to support his obnoxious stance. Oh, what a surprise. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 17 Jun 17 - 05:32 AM "Do politicians think we are goldfish" The tories, kippers, DUPs, their non-dom press baron bosses and other assorted establishment right-wing nasties positively rely on a large part of the population being goldfish. Selfish, intolerant, unpleasant, subservient and gullible goldfish at that. Iain's original post is proof why this approach works in many cases. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 17 Jun 17 - 05:58 AM Judging by the responses seen on this thread, the leftards do not like to see it pointed out that their hero Corbyn has feet of clay. Well boyos learn to live with it. Insulting me just demonstrates the accuracy of my postings. I would further point out that requisitioning property would require Parliamentary approval. At this moment we have a non functional Parliament. As an Mp Corbyn is well aware of that fact. As I have said he is a pathetic grandstanding politician of the worst kind and if he had a shred of decency he would resign. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 17 Jun 17 - 06:17 AM "leftards" Well done love. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:02 AM i don't think Iains likes Jeremy Corbyn much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:19 AM Iain's and his ilk don't like to have their sense of superiority and entitlement challenged, especially not by the great unwashed. To see them coming together to help each other in times of distress and hardship alarms him... the buggers could start getting ideas. Ha. Fuck that sense of privilege. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:24 AM the leftards do not like to see it pointed out that their hero Corbyn has feet of clay Of course he is flawed. We all are. Nor do have I actually met anyone personally who fits the Corbynista tag (and of all possible ways of naming supporters of Corbyn, isn't that an interesting choice?) I have, however, met an awful lot of people who subscribe to the policies he represents and promotes, and admire his success in doing so. And actually it is of interest to remember where the term 'feet of clay' comes from. It is biblical and refers to something that appears strong but given a slight push collapses because there is not the strength to remain standing. However much one may hate Corbyn, you would have to admit that is not a very accurate description. If I was looking for a politician who claimed strength but collapsed under pressure, different names would sprig to mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: theleveller Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:34 AM "i don't think Iains likes Jeremy Corbyn much." Iains is a complete and utter wanker who doesn't understand that there have been many times in the past when private property has been temporarily requisitioned in the national interest. Like the despicable May, he is also a total coward who wouldn't have the balls to stand up in front of the fire victims and spout his repugnant views. If I had him in front of me I'd be tempted to put aside my scruples and kick his sorry arse myself. Ianas just can't bear to see a politician with courage and integrity because he's used to the spineless, inept Tories. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 17 Jun 17 - 08:25 AM Big Al Whittle - 17 Jun 17 - 03:48 AM That's right Big Al, over simplistic twaddle, by all means take all the money from the "rich bastards", you and your pals can then share it out according to whoever thinks what is fair (You'll not please everybody, I'll guarantee you that - Then Big Al, some of those who are discontented will use your example as precedent then come and strip you of your wealth) and I will guarantee that within 12 months you'll all be poor again and revert to your own good whining selves blaming all and sundry for your misfortunes. Remember that great old "socialist" adage Big Al - "No matter what. It is always somebody else's fault". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 17 Jun 17 - 08:28 AM The important thing is to provide alternative accommodation quickly and unpolitically. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Jun 17 - 08:36 AM "by all means take all the money from the "rich bastards", you and your pals can then share it out according to whoever thinks what is fair " Simplistic Tory twaddle This is a discussion about using empty property to accommodate those who need shelter Nobody believes in taking money from anyone - that is a "Tebbitism" It's about equal opportunity not sharing wealth ""No matter what. It is always somebody else's fault"." As distinct from the Tory adage "Nuffin' to do wiv us guv" I'll take bets that this tragedy is due to ignoring four year old warnings on safety requirements and using the cheapest and quickest material to build high rise homes NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE BEEN HERE Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 17 Jun 17 - 08:45 AM One point I am surprised nobody bother to point out during the recent election. It has to do with that "great" manifesto put out by the Labour Party. If you look at the timeline of it you can easily see why it was such an appealing manifesto. Election called 18th April 2017 Labour Manifesto leaked (On purpose) 11th May 2017 Labour Manifesto officially launched 16th May 2017 Throughout those weeks at no time at all was it ever considered that Labour would have an earthly chance on polling day - so they could put anything that would have a "popular" appeal into their "manifesto of empty and undeliverable promises" because they would never be called upon to deliver on any of those promises. It was traditional Labour votes and Labour voters that carried the Leave vote in the UK and by the time the election ticked round, what with Article 50 being triggered they thought quite reasonably that Leave and Brexit was a done deal - so they reverted to their old voting habits. The result was terrific for Corbyn - but he didn't win - the Conservatives are still the largest party at Westminster - and we, as a country, have still to see Brexit implemented and carried through. Corbyn and Labour will do their utmost to derail that so just watch what happens with the Trades Unions and "industrial" relations in the coming months. Not too fussed about it as if they do as I think they will they will only succeed in shooting themselves in the foot. By the way Iains is perfectly correct, the ramifications of pushing through Comrade Corbyn's scheme would be greatly negative for the country and it would not solve the problem being faced. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 09:16 AM It's much better to ignore contemptable repetitive posts, rather than reward those making them with attention. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 09:18 AM It is of course a mattwr of debate whwthwr it would be greatly negatice foebthe country or not but I fail to see why it would would not solve the problem being faced. As a reminder the problem is some 120 families without accomodation in the short term. There is a long term issue as well which also needs be be addressed. But this proposal is only intended to address the short term. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 09:21 AM Typing even worse than usual there. I apologise to all. I scrolled up to start editing and it got submitted. Sorry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 10:25 AM It's an interim solution for as long as it needs to be. But during the interim ut,s much better for the families involved than being stuck in cheap holtels or lodgings, or dispersed away from where they have lived. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 17 Jun 17 - 11:16 AM The leveller. typical response from an idiot that simple refuses to accept that the solution Corbyn suggested is poppycock for many reasons and on many different levels. 1) Requistioning.Many stately homes were requisitioned as part of the war effort. Bletchley Park, where crucial code-breaking was carried out, was bought privately before the war, but requisition was later used to extend the site.The government had to pass legislation in order to do that - the Defence of the Realm Act in 1914 and the Emergency Powers Act in 1939 - but this does not appear to have happened in peacetime to meet emergency housing needs. "Any property requisitions may therefore require emergency legislation in Parliament to instigate and would "probably" prove controversial," said Mark Woloshak, a lawyer from Slater and Gordon. 2)Parliament is in a hiatus at the moment and there is no guarantee that should legislation be proposed, that it will deliver the intended outcome. 2)Were it to be passed it is unlikely it would take affect in sufficiently timely fashion to help the homeless from this tragic fire. 3)Should requisitioning occur it would probably deliver a massive shock to the economy with an impact affecting all. 4)A typical labour kneejerk soundbite with zero preparation, forethought, timeline, or costings. Your constant whining because St Corbyn has been portrayed as an utter buffoon is getting monotonous. Go find another pram to throw your toys out of. And you fools want this guy to form a government! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: bobad Date: 17 Jun 17 - 11:23 AM Why not house them in Buckingham Palace? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Jun 17 - 11:53 AM I suspect that Liz would be happy with that bobad. After all she visited the site, spoke with the victims and showed as much compassion as Corbyn did. Theresa May on the other hand... DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 17 Jun 17 - 12:06 PM remember the old capitalist shyster adage - sorry guv.....not my responsibility , we can't do fuck all for anybody, cos we're tight bastards, and even though we flogged it to you and it doesn't work - you can't get your money back, cos we went into liquidation yesterday. don't tell me this isn't standard tory approved business practice, cos the bastards still own two of my songs. they own the law and they are morally degenerate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 17 Jun 17 - 12:52 PM Greg F Say good night, Iains. Or perhaps you just need a cookie, a glass of milk, and a nap. Dave tge gnome.You really are a tosser aren't you. David Carter. You are being an arse Iains. The leveller. Iains is a complete and utter wanker Shaw. Get a life, Iains. And a soul while you're at it. punl f rocker.yet today some sad sour fool named Iains chooses to show himslf up to be a complete and utter bile fueled arsehole... What a wonderful litany of reasoned counter argument. You can only respond with insults because every word I have stated is true. Sad, sick, pathetic excuses for human beings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 17 Jun 17 - 12:57 PM "Your constant whining because St Corbyn has been portrayed as an utter buffoon is getting monotonous. Go find another pram to throw your toys out of. And you fools want this guy to form a government! " Absolutely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:01 PM Worth reading the opening post again. Iains wasn't really interested in the feasibility or legal and practical issues surrrounding this. The post was purely an attack on Corbyn's integrity. That only came into the thread later after he was lambasted by a huge humanitarian wave of disgust at his calls for protecting the assets of the rich at all costs. He changed tack to save face. Looks like Jezza isn't the only "twisting snake..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:05 PM You've had plenty of counter-argument. You're well out of order. And now you're demonstrating signs of wallowing gleefully in self-inflicted victimhood. You kicked the thread off on entirely the wrong foot. Isn't life such a learning curve? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:23 PM I hope people are going to resist joining in with pointless insults, however justifiable that might seem. I sometimes the Cat does't have a personal button enabling us to filter out individual posters. Not censorship, they'd still be able to carry on to anyone who likes that kind of stuff. ......... If there was the political will to take over vacant houses and use them to house people in this emergency, it could be done. Crown prerogative is remarkably wide. The government, with the backing of parliament, would act. If owners chose to challenge this through the legal system, they could seek to do so. Even if that proved successful, which is very far from certain, legal efforts to evict the Grenfull Tower survivors would be likely to take considerable time. Meanwhile efforts to provide a more permanent solution would be going ahead, and the people involved would be living in ressonable accommodation locally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:26 PM Shaw the long and short of it is that Corbyn tried to make political capital out of people's misery and suffering. Some of us object to that behaviour. You and your cabal obviously condone and support such low life behaviour. I pity you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:30 PM It is also worth thinking through what would happen if some of these people decided to be squatters in the empty properties. The law would be on the side of the police evicting them. The politics is quite another matter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jack Campin Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:42 PM Meanwhile here are the Tories' cronies confiscating public assets: https://davidhencke.com/2012/09/06/revealed-the-old-etonian-baronet-who-snapped-up-londons-fire-engines-for-2/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Jun 17 - 01:45 PM I hope people are going to resist joining in with pointless insults Not pointless, Kevin. As there is no reasoning with people like this it is often the only course of action. You and your cabal obviously condone and support such low life behaviour. Low life behaviour? You mean like showing that you care for people and want to help them? Like Corbyn and many others have done? Including Liz 2 and a couple of her grandkids? I suppose it is low life to some. How do you rate Irritable Duncan Smith? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:09 PM I could not have put it better. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:46 PM who is this inane iain character - he seems a right poisonous little shit? have we got to put up with him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:54 PM "he seems a right poisonous little shit?" What took you so long Al? Someone who interprets the humanity of attempting to home the victims of a fire as "confiscating property" - a definite 'profit before people' advocate Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jun 17 - 02:56 PM Nah, he's a poisonous BIG shit! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: FreddyHeadey Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:30 PM I've not read all this. Has Iains said how he'd feel about society if he was the one homeless, maybe sleeping on a mattress in a the local village hall while there was a perfectly serviceable unoccupied house next door? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 17 Jun 17 - 03:50 PM No idea about Iain but if you are well enough off and this happens to you, you move into one of your other houses. I remember a conversation a few years back where a couple in the group were moaning about how all the services in their village were disappearing because so much of it was second home owners who were only there occasionally. Nothing too unusual there. But about half an hour later they started talking about their second home in Devon.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 04:08 PM Not pointless, Kevin. As there is no reasoning with people like this it is often the only course of action. Not so. You ignore them. Don't give them what they want. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Pete from seven stars link Date: 17 Jun 17 - 04:10 PM That's a good moral argument , and I think those better off should be helping . But enforcing it would take time Freddy, if due legal process is followed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Jun 17 - 05:54 PM I find the concept of a feet-of-clay attitude to "due legal process" when people are in such trouble and in such urgent need of help to be somewhat perplexing. Maybe I should become a Christian and tell these guys how to behave. Apologies for the whimsy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:09 PM Pope Francis has repeatedly said that private property rights are always outweighed by the right to the necessities of life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 17 Jun 17 - 07:28 PM And here's me thinking he was a Tory! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Jun 17 - 08:31 PM Tories don't as a rule refer to unbridled capitalim as "the dung of the devil". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 04:39 AM 30 Years ago another Marxist tried to bring down a Government. Scargill failed Miserably & so will these Commies!!!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 05:54 AM Several days have gone by since Corbyn's ridiculous suggestion to requisition property (Note requisition-a device normally used in wartime emergencies. Not compulsory purchase or temporarily commandeer) Had his cheap soundbite had any merit I am sure we would have heard a deafening roar of support. Instead we have a solitary tweet from the harridan Hardman. In the intervening period, since the release of his divisive, politics of envy statement, we have had no flesh put on the bones of his solution. Had it been a serious attempt to alleviate the appalling circumstances the survivors find themselves in I would have expected far more from him outlining how he would implement such a outlandish proposal. At the very least he would need to recall Parliament to discuss and vote on his proposals.Between the Election and state opening of Parliament, the house is in recess. Hark! you may hear the herald angels sing but not a further peep out of comrade corbyn on the subject. He may make a budding class warrior but he is a waste of a skin for anything else And incidentally more council homes were built in the last year of Thatcher's government than were built in the 13 years of Labour government, and that's something I think the Labour Party needs to apologise for. Official figures show only 6,330 council houses were completed from 1998 to 2010, compared with 17,710 in 1990 alone, which was Baroness Thatcher's final year as prime minister. In one Labour year, 2004, the number fell to just 130 council homes completed. Had Labour behaved as the caring party they would like to portray themselves as perhaps they would care to explain this set of statistics.Perhaps comrade corbyn feels it is easier to just simply requisition property rather than build it. But even that has severe problems attached. The link below is immediately post war. Society today is far more litigious and the government legal costs would be astronomical because I believe there is no precedent for peacetime requisitioning other than under the terms of the Civil Protection in Peacetime Act 1986 http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1946/may/14/compensation-rents-for-requisitioned |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 18 Jun 17 - 06:10 AM I take your point, Kevin,but to ignore it could allow these obnoxious views to prolifereate. Iaisn - I would have expected far more from him outlining how he would implement such a outlandish proposal. At the very least he would need to recall Parliament to discuss and vote on his proposals. Errr, need I point out that Corbyn is in no position to implement anything or to recall parliament. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 06:33 AM Perish the thought that corbile ever becomes PM! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 18 Jun 17 - 06:34 AM we get it Iain - you don't reckon Corbyn and the Labour Party generally stinks. THe tories are the boys and girls for you. Kind, Loving, excellent administrators - and you wished you lived next door to one, and another on the other side, and one opposite. Have you thought about moving to a tory chatsite - or perhaps starting one. No doubt the party would be happy to fund it. What fun you could have bathing in sunshine of mutual admiration and love! go ahead and do it straight away.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 06:40 AM D the G Glad to see you have woken up at last. Of course Corbyn is not in power.So why did he suggest such an action?????? of course he cannot implement his hare brained scheme without Parliamentary approval. of course that means his kneejerk reaction was everything I have said it was. Glad you agree comrade corbyn is a fool. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 06:50 AM Corbyn asked why new Kensington MP didn't stop cladding being used when she was on planning committee of council: "I don't know" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 18 Jun 17 - 07:46 AM what the fuck would a gasbag politician of any persuasion know about cladding, any more than he or she would know about brain surgery? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 07:59 AM It could be important if serving on a planning committee, or am I just grabbing at clotted cream!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 18 Jun 17 - 08:02 AM "You can only respond with insults because every word I have stated is true." OK. Then: "Sad, sick, pathetic excuses for human beings." Too good to resist was it? A bit piss-poor though. Must try harder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 08:06 AM Stu. And your point is? You have obviously given up trying to defend your tame clot Corbyn! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Jun 17 - 08:50 AM The trouble is they've got rid of the people who understood thse things in councills, and its alll gone to private setups, in charge of people who know all about tendering, and nothing about building and safety. Everything gets dispersed out to subcontractors, who can't be relied on to understand the whole project - and there's no one coordinating it all. And even the fire service has been pared to the bone, which affects their ability to do the preventative stuff. It's poltical insofar as this is the outcome of an ideology of privatisation and "efficiency savings", but its not really political in a party sense. The older style Tories running local government, for all their faults, would never have done it that way. There's nothing particularly Socialist about a Council acting responsibly. Remember Harlold Macmillan protesting about Magge Thatcher "selling the family silver"? If it only was just the family silver. It's the furniture, and the front door key. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 18 Jun 17 - 08:59 AM See, what I don't understand now is why the owners of some these empty properties have not offered to house homeless families in them. Maybe they have but I just havn't heard. It would do them very little harm, if they have no intention of living in or letting the property, and it would go a long way towards defusing the anger currently being felt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 09:56 AM Do you really think so? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 18 Jun 17 - 10:16 AM Yes, thats sort of why I wrote it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 18 Jun 17 - 10:56 AM "And your point is?" WHOOOOOOSSSSSSSSHHHHHHH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 12:48 PM Gladly |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 01:07 PM WHOOOOOOSSSSSSSSHHHHHHH! What a stunningly useful contribution to the debate. Tell me, are you a clown fulltime? or did you fall off your socialist armchair and bang your head? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 18 Jun 17 - 02:27 PM "Tell me, are you a clown fulltime?" Stick with it, son. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:06 PM Corbyn on Peston's program today called for the government to take a look at the many vacant luxury properties in the area deliberately left empty. "In an emergency you have to bring all assets to the table in order to deal with that crisis, and that's what I think we should be doing in this case. "Occupy it, compulsorily purchase it, requisition it: there's a lot of things you can do." 1)occupying a house or squatting is illegal. So now he is encouraging lawbreaking. 2)CPO's take time. Therefore not a useful short term solution but a very good soundbite. https://www.out-law.com/topics/property/planning/compulsory-purchase-orders-and-time-limits/ 3)Peacetime requisitioning has not yet occurred. This is brand new territory. As I have stated previously this would require the government to recall Parliament and drive through new legislation. Again not a short term solution for homeless people. So we have the leader of the opposition encouraging people to break the law and his other short term solutions in a nutshell are not. Time for comrade corbyn to take time out and think of something useful and constructive to say instead blathering totally impractical solutions to a very real crisis. God help us should he ever become PM. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:17 PM If the government were to recall parliament to legislate to requisition property in this emergency, then I am sure that they would have all party support. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:20 PM http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/812026/Jeremy-Corbyn-John-McDonnell-squatter-campaign-General-Election-2017-UK-Labour |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:24 PM Well put Iains. Real problems require practicable solutions, Corbyn and his supporters on this forum seem incapable of formulating any sort of solution blinded as they are by their ideological imperatives |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:26 PM Clear solution: recall parliament and legislate to requisition empty properties for the duration of the emergency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 18 Jun 17 - 03:29 PM Are you being crucially clear or just absolutely clear? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 18 Jun 17 - 05:34 PM Of course Corbyn is not in power.So why did he suggest such an action?????? Because he is is leader of the opposition and the opposition is suppose to question what the government are doing. Because he is a caring human being unlike the automaton that currently occupies Downing Street. Because it is sensible to utilise such empty properties in the circumstances. Sorry I can't come up 6 reasons to match the number of question marks but I am sure 3 is enough. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 18 Jun 17 - 05:58 PM I bet you will hard pressed to find any "better business" that doesn't go on about people holding things back by rasing all sorts of reasons why things can't happen, and that developing a "can do" attitude to find ways of overcoming obstacles as key to success. So hearing lots of people coming up with all the reasons why things can't be done is interesting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 18 Jun 17 - 07:42 PM Nobody's in power at present. Theresa May is in office, but that's not the same thing. When parliament back it would be quite possible for a motion like that to win a vote in the Commons. Could the Tories be sure of getting all their members to vote against it? For that matter could they be sure of getting all their DUP friends to do so? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 19 Jun 17 - 12:49 AM D the G comrade corbyn may well be a caring human being instead of a grandstanding politico grabbing very opportunity to pontificate on yet more totally impractical schemes. However those of us that do not live in a rose tinted, pinky, sandal wearing, tree smothering, huggy huggy world(or bright red in the case of Corbyn) can see through his bullsh*t. All he has done so far is outline courses of action that are either illegal, or require actions either by the council or parliament to bring them to fruition. This is getting extremely repetitive, you leftards must have the attention span of a gnat. squatting is illegal compulsory purchase takes time (see above) Requisitioning requires the recall of parliament and changes to the law and would likely contravene european law which would I believe take primacy. Neither of the latter 2 could be completed in sufficiently timely fashion to ameliorate the present situation.(assuming the legalities were in order and that is a big assumption. What part of "timely fashion" do you not wish to understand? I suggest you jump out of your little socialist bubble into the real world and recognise corbyn's utopian dream is the dystopian wasteland of harsh reality. As I keep saying, the man is a fool. and a very dangerous one at that. Far more to the point he has grabbed much media attention with solutions that are totally pie in the sky and has contributed a big fat zero to a practical solution. He must think he is in a Harry Potter film where he can just wave a magic wand and make everything better. Personally I would cast him as Voldemort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:07 AM It occurs to me that this tragedy (and this argument) has presented us with a symbol of what our society has become, largely post Thatcher On the one hand I've watched, sometimes with a lump in my throat, the residents of Ladbroke Grove lining up to bring relief to the survivors, or simply to lay flowers or express their sympathy and sometimes anger. I know from personal experience that that area is a small island of hardhip and deprivation in the middle of one of, if not the, wealthiest borough in London. On the other, you have Iains speaking up for his team, the group of people who were possibly responsible for this fire, the profiteers and telling us that the law must be adhered to and their empty properties must remain empty and undefiled by the survivors, or at least, paid for. At the same time, he uses this horrific event as a soapbox to make up the ground lost by his glorious leader, Blunderwoman in the recent fiaso of an election. Personally, Iains has my gratitude for presenting us with a picture of how low our society has sunk - keep it up laddie Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:16 AM Worth repeating here, I think, if only to give Iains the opportunity to ignore it. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-fire-london-dead-legal-action-campaign-fire-safety-mariem-elgwahry-nadia-choucair-a7795586.html Can't blue clickie Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:23 AM "Well put Iains" Bwahahahaha! 😂😂😂 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Monique Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:32 AM Blue clicky |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:28 AM Many thanks again Monique I think you said you were in Fraance, which may explain the mystery of the missing blue clickie over here Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Monique Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:53 AM Jim, I don't think it's because I'm in France. The blickifier usually doesn't work if the url is too long so I always do it this way and I try (!) to remember to check "preview" to make sure it works. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:59 AM Thanks Monique - will try it next time Bonne journée Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 04:00 AM Steve Shaw - 19 Jun 17 - 02:23 AM Ahhhh the "emoji-kid" strikes again - typical sort of response you'd expect from a believer in the "rose tinted, pinky, sandal wearing, tree smothering, huggy huggy world" where real solutions to problems are simply not required but the presence of "Kick the Tories Out" placard wielding Socialist Worker eejits invading and damaging property is seen to be of some assistance. High time for everybody not directly involved to simply STFU and let those responsible and in a position to help get on with it - everybody else, especially f**kin' politicians, are not helping at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bugsy Date: 19 Jun 17 - 05:23 AM Personally, I don't give a flying Fuck what political your political persuasion is, or how well you can insult each other. I'd just like to see these people rehoused...QUICKLY!!! Cheers Bugsy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 05:39 AM High time for everybody not directly involved to simply STFU and let those responsible and in a position to help get on with it Are you listening Iains? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:00 AM Nah, he's still blustering around in order to save face. Even worse, he now has BillyToryBoy onside. Oh, by the way, well put, Dave! 👍 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 07:38 AM Iains appears to be the only person talking sense above the hysterical ranting of Tw@ats such as Corbyn and most of those who have backed the line being peddled on this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 07:48 AM "Corbyn and most of those who have backed the line being peddled on this thread." Yeah - we should listen to Blunderwoman instead Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 19 Jun 17 - 09:24 AM I expect the moderators to delete this post. His statements goes too far. Jim Carroll On the other, you have Iains speaking up for his team, the group of people who were possibly responsible for this fire, the profiteers and telling us that the law must be adhered to and their empty properties must remain empty and undefiled by the survivors, or at least, paid for." Carroll even in ireland you are subject to the Defamation Act 2009.This includes electronic media such as blogs, internet articles and even twitter. Seeing as I am not even in the same country as where the event occurred there is no possibility of me having the slightest responsibility for the fire. I think an apology is in order. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 19 Jun 17 - 09:56 AM "Seeing as I am not even in the same country as where the event occurred" It's not all bad news then. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 10:57 AM "even in ireland you are subject to the Defamation Act 2009." Bring it on Iains You are speaking for the profiteers, are you not? I did not suggest you bore any responsibility for the fire "Seeing as I am not even in the same country as where the event occurred" Perhaps an interpreter might be in order then - or should I use shorter words? I said that you were speaking up for the profiteers who were possibly responsible for the fire by using substandard material and are now demanding that their empty properties should not be used to house the victims. Have I mistaken your message? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Jun 17 - 11:12 AM It's notable that the stirring here always seems to start from people well to the right. And it always seems to work. People on the left of politics ought to learn from the example and advice of Jeremy Corbyn and before him, Tony Benn, and refrain from getting sucked into mudfights. Ever read the story of Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 11:39 AM McGrath of Harlow - 19 Jun 17 - 11:12 AM It's notable that the stirring here always seems to start from people well to the right. Really Kevin?? Anyone who is not in automatic "lock-step" agreement with everything and anything the "usual suspects" come out with is branded as being far right purely for the convenience of idiots such as Carroll and Shaw who having dutifully trotted out the Party line find themselves incapable of mounting any sort of coherent argument to support how what "The Great Leader" has proposed can be viewed in any way, shape or form as a solution. Iains quite correctly pointed out the difficulties and legal obstacles that would have to be overcome and indicated the amount of time it would take to overcome them. It would appear that you, by some sort of aberration whereby you have completely ditched what common sense you posses, have pitched in with the rather dangerous notion that the Government of this country can do whatever it wants, whenever it wants as long as it suits those on the left and it is supposedly some "rich bastard" that gets it in the neck, or gets dispossessed of what is rightfully his, or hers. On the subject of Government action, what has occurred is a tragedy, terrible in scale and a national scandal - what it is not is a national emergency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 11:57 AM Teribus 19 Jun 17 - 04:00 AM High time for everybody not directly involved to simply STFU and let those responsible and in a position to help get on with it Teribus 19 Jun 17 - 07:38 AM Iains appears to be the only person talking sense above the hysterical ranting of Tw@ats such as Corbyn and most of those who have backed the line being peddled on this thread. So, I guess the real meaning of the first statement is everyone who is not directly involved should STFU unless you happen to be a right wing Teribus sycophant. Correct? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 12:29 PM Iains quite correctly pointed out the difficulties and legal obstacles that would have to be overcome etc. Iains also stated that Labour wants to confiscate property. (Hint - see thread title) What they actualy want is that the victims of this tragedy are rehoused and if the owners of empty properties can help with a short term solution it would be of benefit. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 12:51 PM Ehmm Gnome show me one single report of that - i.e. "What they actualy want is that the victims of this tragedy are rehoused and if the owners of empty properties can help with a short term solution it would be of benefit." - being what has been suggested by Corbyn. 1: Jeremy Corbyn has called for the empty homes of rich people in Kensington to be seized for Grenfell Tower residents who have been made homeless by the fire. Sound much like asking home owners to help out with a short term solution Gnome - Sure as f**k doesn't sound like it to me. Mind you that might all depend on how much spin you want to put on the phrase "to be seized" - look up some of the synonyms for "confiscate". 2: Jeremy Corbyn urges people to 'occupy' empty homes |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 12:59 PM The headline Jeremy Corbyn has called for the empty homes of rich people in Kensington to be seized The actual words He suggested that 'requisitioning' vacant properties would be a solution to the shortage of available accommodation for those displaced. 'Properties must be found – requisitioned if necessary – in order to make sure that residents do get rehoused locally,' Mr Corbyn told a meeting of MPs. Care to reconcile those two statements Teribus? I am a little surprised that you did not look under the headline before you quoted it. BTW, in what way are you directly involved with the tragedy? It was you that said High time for everybody not directly involved to simply STFU and let those responsible and in a position to help get on with it Wasn't it? :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:04 PM The point I was making was about, when we get into these futile exchanges of insults, that always seems to start the same way. A comment is made geared to provoke, someone gets provoked, the original poster hits back with a personal insult or bit of abuse, and someone responds in similar tone, and we're off. Stay polite in responding to anything you take as provoking, and completely ignore any response which is insulting, and that cuts out that downward spiral. Let people who are abusive talk to themselves, or to each other. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:28 PM McGrath - but it's a British heatwave, a traditional time for getting hot under the collar and enjoying a bit of a shouty sweary fracas to let off steam... Surprised, days later, this thread is still sustaining the bad tempered momentum in these extreme temperatures... I suggest a box of tesco Rocket Lollies.. 😎 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:47 PM "Carroll and Shaw who having dutifully trotted out the Party line" Unlike you state arselickers - I have no "party line" I'm not a member of "a party" nor do I vote for one My line is one of simple humanitarianism - these people (those who survived) have been left homeless by a fire that was, more likely than not, caused by profiteering and corner cutting They should be rehoused as soon as possible - the logic is that as there is more than adequate vacant property in the vicinity, that should be the first stop. Not a party line, simple compassion and humanitarianism - in my world at least. It remains to be seen whether the guilty parties in all this will b called on to rehouse the survivors permanently and with adequate compensation I wouldn't risk my money on that one, given the world we now live in. What do you suggest - a ask Iaians, but he seems to having a sulk somewhere What a fine pair of representatives of 'compassionate Britain' you pair are Jim Carroll Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 02:55 PM Iains sems to be spending time trawling the right wing nutter blogs for clever prefab insults and scripted arguements... Perhaps, instead, he could tell us the legal reasons preventing 'benevolent' mega rich property owners from voluntarily providing short term homes in any nearby habitable buildings they posess for investment... Just think of the positive PR the first one to step forward could exploit... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:23 PM I suggest a box of tesco Rocket Lollies Nooooo - How will my Morrisons profit share go unless you stick to buying Morrisons lollies. Even us Trotskyists enjoy a bit of capitalism you know! :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:40 PM Why keep it going like that Jim? There's been a horriying act of corporate barbarism, with hearbreking stories still coming out about it. Indulging in a squalid little slanging match with a couple of people who aren't worth a moment's attention is a bit like joining them in spitting across a grave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:41 PM uh oh.. morrisons and tesco lolly lickers about to square up for a rumble.. its mods and rockers, skins versus punks, tories versus bolshy oiks, summer madnesss all over again... Must soon be time soon for a thunder storm and the flying ants.... 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:50 PM The flying ants will hopefully come out when Corbile is rolling around with abbott woman!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 19 Jun 17 - 03:53 PM Traitors. All true lefties buy co-op lollies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 04:08 PM Have you any idea how obnoxious your statements about an intelligent and successful woman such as Dianne Abbott are Bonzo? Just pack it in or be shown up as a misogynistic racist as well as a complete knob. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 19 Jun 17 - 04:20 PM So punky rocker you think all the sources below are right wing nutter blogs. Did you ever pay attention in school? D the G as usual suffering comprehension problems. Perhaps all the good socialist sources such as the BBC and Guardian are peddling false news or perhaps you simply made up your responses. Steve shaw totally unable to counter my arguments so resorting to his usual blustering and attempted bullying. Jim Carrol unable to comprehend how the real world operates, where all are subjected to due process and the rule of law. Now boys read the links carefully and try to refute my arguments with reason and please try to explain to me how any of comrade corbyn's recommended actions can be fulfilled legally within any meaningful timeframe If you cannot do this please try to stay quiet while others try to counter my arguments. Corbyns exact words " "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do," he said. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/jeremy-corbyn-empty-homes-owned-rich-should-requisitioned-grenfell/ https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/18/labour-emergency-house-seizure-laws-could-ease-grenfell-tower- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/18/jeremy-corbyn-urges-people-occupy-empty-homes-supporters-plan/ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/empty-homes-owned-by-overseas-investors-should-be-requisitioned-to-rehouse-grenfel http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40303142 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 19 Jun 17 - 04:50 PM If you prefer you can watch the interview in "Peston on Sunday", round about 9:20 minutes from the start. Now you are entitled to form your own opinion of course but while those words were said it, is part of a longer discourse saying it cannot be beyond the wit of us all to cone up with solutions to rehousing these people. I suggest it would be more productive to hear Iain's and Terebus' proposals for a solution To my ears Corbyn was saying there must be ways and here are some. If they can't work for some reason, let's come up with others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 19 Jun 17 - 05:01 PM Perhaps all the good socialist sources such as the BBC and Guardian are peddling false news or perhaps you simply made up your responses. Well done, Iains. If you had done your homework you would have found that my quote comes from your very own bible The Daily Heil. So, are they now a good socialist source? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 19 Jun 17 - 05:20 PM "Have you any idea how obnoxious your statements about an intelligent and successful woman such as Dianne Abbott are Bonzo? Just pack it in or be shown up as a misogynistic racist as well as a complete knob." I sure do appreciate your appreciation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 05:50 PM "Did you ever pay attention in school?".. what a silly attempt at being patronising... .. but yes thanks... I was one of the council estate kids who passed the 11 plus.. At Grammar School I learned much to my academic benefit and personal development from the good teachers.. .. and also learnt much about human nature from observing and being humiliated & clouted by the sadistic right wing bully teachers.. [one of those teachers was years later arrested for boy buggering..] thanks for reminding me... ah school summer holidays... lollies and snogging girls... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:07 PM I'll patiently point out to you, Iains, that you started this thread with a raging polemic against Jeremy Corbyn. Your first post made no reference to the practicalities or legalities of what Corbyn was suggesting might happen. It was a vicious attack on his personality and integrity from a dyed-in-the-wool Tory. After a number of posts which all condemned the inhumane nature of your rant and which pointed to the fact that you were blatantly protecting the very rich from attack, you tried to save face by switching your argument to the impracticalities/illegalities of Corbyn's suggestion. That represented a far greater piece of snake-twisting than what you accused Corbyn of. You lost tbe argument, you were sorely embarrassed, so, instead of backing down like a man you tried to change the subject. No bluster this end, no bullying from me, just pointing out what any sane person reading this thread can easily see for himself or herself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:19 PM "Iains sems to be spending time trawling the right wing nutter blogs for clever prefab insults and scripted arguements..." OK then pfr start the process whereby those properties can be legally "requisitioned" then tell us all when the first former tenant of Grenfell Tower would be able to move in - give us your best guess - where are you going to house them in the meantime? Like Corbyn you're very good at knocking things, but not so hot when it comes to finding real answers to problems. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:34 PM Terry - Have I at any time even suggested the properties should be taken unwillingly from the owners...???? [clue: 2 letter single word answer...] Do I have a naive belief in the goodness of the human heart and that rich property investors might do the right thing and voluntarlily offer their nearby habitable empty buildings for short term temp emergency housing...??? well.. we can dream.. yeah right... But I have made that sarcastic suggestion at least twice in this thread... BTW.. yes I do knock things... inhumane hostile arsehole tory attitudes.. most definitely.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:39 PM BTW Terry, have you been mentoring Iains.. is he your heir apparent at mudcat..??? his writing style, belligerence, and limited blinkered horizons merge almost uncannily with yours ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 19 Jun 17 - 06:48 PM Ah like Corbyn then pfr - no answer at all - so why castigate Iains for actually pointing out the obstacles that make a nonsense of Corbyn's idea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 19 Jun 17 - 07:06 PM Tezzer - oooh you caught me in a cleverer trap... errrmmm.. oh no you didn't.. Have I been castigating Inanes for blathering on about the law, and other distractions from the key moral issues raised by this catastrophe..?? No I've, not I've been having a fair pop at his shite attitudes that underlies his need to come here stiring up arguements, at a time when many UK citizens have been respectfully observing the crosss party truce of reflecting on the things in common that unite us, rather than divide us... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bugsy Date: 19 Jun 17 - 09:02 PM There'll soon be no oxygen left on mudcat at this rate! In the meantime, has anything been done to rehouse these people? Bugsy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 02:55 AM " has anything been done to rehouse these people?" Noy yet Bugsy, thogh someone has suggested that they be given accommodation in vacant property You can see the likely Tory response to that one on this thread All politicians (up to now) have to be thumb-screwed and racked before they do something about the messes the help create and when the solutions affect those they represent, in the case of Kensington and Chelsea, the weaalthy and privileged, they are happy to see the piles of charity donated by the lesser well off and the halls full of survivors sleeping rough. Hopefully, that will change - it was encouraging to see the people taking to the streets immediately after the fire - that is the the type of thiing that will bring about an appropriate solution. Our papers are full of it at present - in a week or two they will have found a Royal Wedding or a dog show to fill the front pages That really is why it is necessary to have a government which cares enough to handle these things compassionately and practically I'sd tend to steer clear of people who describe immediate solutions like housing homeless people in vacant property as "a party line". I have family in Somerset who told me of local government officials during the flooding instructing the flooded-out farmers to "Go away and don't come back - we can't do anything for you". I sencerely hope they don't get away with it here Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:19 AM Some are being housed in self catering student accommodation about a mile away. County Clare is nice this time of year, as is Bude - Offered any holiday accommodation Carroll, Shaw? Only problem is Jom is that what you describe as "immediate solutions" aren't. The reasons why have been explained a number of times now quite clearly. Oh and a bit less emotive twaddle - none of the survivors are "sleeping rough", if they were it would all over the world's press let alone the UK media. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:29 AM "Offered any holiday accommodation Carroll, Shaw?" Why should we do the job of the people whose job it is to provide accommodation for the victims of a fire which was quite likely to have been caused by establishment greed and neglect (it was the K and C Council who thratened legal action against two of the victims when they raised matters of safety. Shipping refugees across to Ireland because the local authorities don't want to frighten the horses of thee rich Yout stupidity and inhumanity appears to run neck and neck in this particular Tory point-to-point, so please don't stop providing us with examples of current establishment thinking " none of the survivors are "sleeping rough"," "SLEEPING ROUGH" More "made-up shit", no doubt Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:56 AM Teribus, the whole point is that people want to be rehoused in the borough. Sure, if it was me, I would go to County Clare like a shot (unfortunately my Irish ancestry is two generations too far back to qualify me for citizenship). But they don't want to move away from their community. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jon Freeman Date: 20 Jun 17 - 04:18 AM I think Corbyn was just coming up with ideas that might be possible. Regardless of whether it would prove practical in this instance, I think the idea is a good one in principle. There will be other disasters, "man made" or "acts of god" and I would favour the government establishing where long term vacant property could be used and, if needed, creating legislation to ease any such usage in future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 17 - 06:38 AM Ah Jom what a good little "socialist" you are - quite willing to demand that others "share" - completely different when it comes to sharing what you own. Very true it is for the Council to rehouse the Grenfell Towers survivors - let them get on with it. I presume that that housing is required now - requisitioning houses, compulsory purchase and the rest of Corbyn's daft ideas take a great deal of time - so that is of no help at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 07:30 AM "Ah Jom what a good little "socialist" you are - quite willing to demand that others "share" -" And what an obnoxiously dishonest person you are by ignoring the fact that you have just landed your foor squarely in your mouth and ignoring the facts that contradict your stupid statement What kind of an inhuman moron describes providing relief for a monumental disaster like this fire as "sharing" THERE A LARGE NUMBER OF EPTY BULIDINGS IN THIS BOROUGH WHICH COULD PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCOMMODATION FOR THOSE LEFT HOMELESS - TO REFUSE TO DO SO IS SICK INHUMANITY IN THE EXTREME Isn't it a good job people like oui weren't around when the Jews were fleeing Nazism - Hitler might well have been able to notch up a few more million to his score This is predatory inhumanity on speed Thanks for sharing your philosophy so frankly Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 20 Jun 17 - 07:51 AM I'm afraid Mr Corbyn was playing politics at a very delicate moment. I think it will turn out to be a costly mistake. I'm hoping for a proper socialist system in the future when we have begun to understand our position in the world, this sort of posturing undermines the credibility of would be socialist leaders. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 20 Jun 17 - 08:01 AM Jim, you seem to be deeply embedded in the 1940's....how "old" are you, and isn't it about time you pulled back the blackout screens? There is a whole new world out there, colour no longer matters, the Union barons and their cannon fodder have left the field, the profit motive is winding down, you need to work on a new vision for humanity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 08:25 AM "Jim, you seem to be deeply embedded in the 1940's....how "old" are you, and isn't it about time you pulled back the blackout screens?" How dare you quesion age or my ability to reason you little squalid In yopur cowardly manner you respond to nothing but throw stone like this at a safe distance Personally I am delighted to join this pair - a full house of extremist right-wingers displaying their inhumanity - who could wish for anything more? Kindly have the balls to respond to the points I have made If you7 ever quesion my sanity in this way again I shall demand your removal from this form Pleasew do not infect this site with your Trumpist fascism Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 08:40 AM This is 2017... a lot of right wingers on the interenet [ and here ] seem to be embedded in the thinking and rhetoric of 1917... There are far right idiots who are convinced the labour party are planning a coup, a revolutionary storming of parliiament and buckingham palace... These dangerous far right activists are acting on their sad delusions as if they are reality,.. plotting and planning their own counter revolution.. dangerous idiots... madness.. Reading links to shit sites like guido's linked in this thread by one or our own rightist fruitcakes, then following further links from there,, soon enough we find anti social postings by far right extremists who would probably happily agree with a deliberarte nstrategy of burning out then deporting the residents of central london tower blocks... Hysterical fantasy...??? not mine... but reality of 2017 far right attitudes and dogma fueling hate crimes... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Jun 17 - 09:46 AM It would be perfectly possible to pass the required legislation tomorrow, after the Queen's Speech, and people could be moving into decent places in Kensington before the weekend. That won't happen, not because it couldn't happen, but because the will to do it is lacking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jun 17 - 10:03 AM colour no longer matters ... the profit motive is winding down Ake, please seek psychiatric help immediately. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 20 Jun 17 - 10:03 AM I don't question your sanity Jim your posts do that all by themselves. I was simply observing that you are living in the past...in political terms. Your rhetoric is stale and outdated. As far as stature goes, you have no idea whether I am small or large, you are just being your personally abusive self. I cant be bothered responding to every thread which repeats the old worn out excuses for you having nothing pertinent to say. I'm amazed that your opponents here have the patience to indulge you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 10:19 AM " I don't question your sanity Jim your posts do that all by themselves." You are lying - thuiis is not the first time you have been warned about your unacceptable behavior The last time you speweed your vitriol over several members Your cowardlky behaviour on this forum is unacceptable If you believe my views are outdated you have every opportunity to put alternative ones - you refuse becaus4 you are "too busy" Instead you employ a hit and run technique of making your outrageous statements then riding back to the safety of your anonymity. Of voure I have no idea of your statute - you skulk in the sshadows so nobody knows who you are and from there you target us all with your extremism Homosexualls, humanists.... and now victims of a hrroific fire all fall within your sights. Nobody can do anything aout your horrific views, but the conditions of being a member of this foru aqllow us to make these personal attacks on our age and sanity One more time - that's all Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 10:47 AM Simple question Ake Iains has opened this tread to condemn Corbyn's suggestion that vacant property could be used to how refugees from a horrific fire Teribus has joined him in supporting a suggestion that you describe as "living in the past" and you joined this pair by throwing your hat in that particular ring? Can you say why you feel it is wrong to move survivors into property that is not being used and can you tell us exactly what obligation, if any, the Kensington and Chelsea Council has to these people. Sorry to impinge on your obviously invaluable time but you do seem to have enough of it to hurl abuse at those who don't agree with you I look forward to your reply but I won't hold mt breath Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:08 PM I don't think it is wrong per se, I think it is impossible to accomplish legally as well as throwing up many complications when setting a precedent. It would take far too long to bring out new legislation which would never pass through parliament anyway.... I am quite certain Mr Corbyn knows that full well and as I said is simply paying politics. I am disappointed in Mr Corbyn for the use of this tactic and his attacks on the Prime Minister especially at this time when all our energies should be going into the effort to make Brexit a success. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:16 PM Accusing the leader of an opposition party of "playing politics" in a crisis.. is a bit like accusing a trauma surgeon of "playing doctoring" in that same crisis.... or a victim liason worker "playing interefering busybody"... or a..... yeah ok .. get the drift..... 🙄 all folks payed to do a job, with a purpose, at the highest professional level... ... in a crisis... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:19 PM it's Corbyn's job to propose and suggest ideas that could be taken on board in any discussion about short and long term solutions... ...but not necessarly May's job to listen... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:22 PM Waffle Ake It is an emergency and perfectly possible to be dealt with by passing emergency regulations It is a disgusting suggestion that it is a "tactic" for Corbyn to suggest the use of readily available accommodation It is bad enough when admitted right wingers make it, but it is ludicrous when somebody who claims to be a Socialist (and describes anybody who disagrees with him "liberal" which you defined as meaning "fascist") does so. It is a statement totally devoid of compassion and humanity and shows an incredible ignorance of politics to boot What makes you three monsters tick it totally beyond me You have chosen your friends very ell Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:29 PM Jom I dare say that there is empty property all over the place, only problem is that it is owned and the owners of that property are protected by laws, which if you remove, set up all sorts of dangerous precedents, that could ultimately lead to you getting turfed out on your ear. That is why Kevin's rather idiotic notion that it could be brought in overnight is complete and utter nonsense. By the way Jom, why didn't Corbyn put this (Seizure and requisitioning of vacant properties) in his manifesto as a means of solving the problems of the homeless - I would imagine he didn't because he knew it wouldn't fly, so why did he grandstand with it just because there was a fire? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 01:43 PM "only problem is that it is owned and the owners of that property are protected by laws" Ony problem is that there are hundreds of people desperately in need of accommodation following this fire and if our leaders are incapable of passing emergency measures they are not fir for purpose |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 02:20 PM still waiting for a benevolent property owner to step up and voluntarily offer his habitable empty buildings for short term emergency housing... wouldn't even begrudge him the wave of exploitable positive PR and an honour or title from her majesty rewarding such a public gesture of charitable goodwill....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 02:21 PM It's fascinating to see the contracting attitudes of the haves and have nots to this tragedy To lesser well off queue up to offer blankets, food and any relief they can manage while the better off whine about "compensation" and hide behind laws before they will allow their empty property to be used I hope nobody ever drops a big bomb on Britain - 'Lord of the Flies' wouldn't compare to the reversion to savagery that would take place in those circumstances Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Jun 17 - 02:50 PM "contracting " Contrasting - bloody spellcheck!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:03 PM "there are hundreds of people desperately in need of accommodation" PERIOD Jom, there always has been, fire or no fire, my questions still stand - Why was this "solution" for the homeless not in Labour's Manifesto? Why is it only considered as a "solution" for those made homeless by the fire? Why did Corbyn chose this incident to attempt to score political points in the midst of tragedy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:07 PM There Ya Go PFR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 20 Jun 17 - 03:52 PM I am still waiting for all you leftards to tell me how comrade corbyn's compulsory purchase, occupy and requisition will work within a meaningful and legal timeframe. Your silence on the subject rather confirms the view he is just a grubby little grandstanding politician with no morals and no scruples. And if you are going to comment try and be realistic and take account of the real world we inhabit and not that socialist bubble that only exists within a brainwashed mind. So Shaw, d the g and carrol you can try to bend it twist it shake it and whatever other contortions dave, deee, dozy, beaky, mitch and tich got up to bur the fact remains corbyn is nothing but a cheap rabble rouser encouraging people to break the law and suggesting totally impractical solutions. He should be ashamed of himself. Seems the express agrees with me. http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/818581/London-fire-Grenfell-Tower-Jeremy-Corbyn-accused-trampling-over-bodies-victims |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jun 17 - 04:43 PM Alex Jones couldn't have said it better. Michael Savage, perhaps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 20 Jun 17 - 04:52 PM Greg F Is that your idea of a meaningful contribution? or just a barely comprehensible attempt to troll.As usual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Donuel Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:05 PM Greg, you forgot Glen Beck. That's OK everyone has. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:15 PM Iains - here's the impasse... you think you are really clever, incisive, and triumphant... we think you are struggling to concoct a trumped up anti Corbyn diatribe out of the fetid imaginings of your subscribed far right blogging propaganda scripts....??? Neutral observers might just think you are simply nasty minded and hostile to human suffering...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:26 PM "I am still waiting for all you leftards to tell me how comrade corbyn's compulsory purchase, occupy and requisition will work within a meaningful and legal timeframe. Your silence on the subject rather confirms the view he is just a grubby little grandstanding politician with no morals and no scruples." But, you see, Iains, when you started this thread you didn't mention the "meaningful and legal timeframe" stuff. Not even a whiff of it. You just had a go, in the most immoderate language, at Corbyn's character and integrity. Go on, read it again. You only mentioned the "meaningful/legal" bit once you'd been snowed under, quite justifiably, by criticism for your defence of the rich at all costs and your sheer naked inhumanity towards the poor. Your opening post in this thread stands for all to see. The only person twisting and wriggling here is you, with the help of poodle-Teribus, of course. Live with it. Admit it. Own up. Make an honest man of yourself for once. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:32 PM Jim Carroll."only problem is that it is owned and the owners of that property are protected by laws" Ony problem is that there are hundreds of people desperately in need of accommodation following this fire and if our leaders are incapable of passing emergency measures they are not fir for purpose. Property owners are protected by laws. Well Jimmy what else do you suggest should protect property owners? Perhaps private armies to keep out the unwashed if the rule of law has broken down or been supplanted. Do you realise just how asinine your posturing is? I would expect a more meaningful statement off a five year old. Without the rule of law the result is anarchy. If you are seriously proposing that as a solution to homelessness, words escape me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and just what emergency measures do you propose, bearing in mind Parliament is in recess. This is getting really repetitive, can you try to pay attention! You are very good at suggesting a course of action that may work in your socialist dreamworld but in the real world your suggested solutions are not worth the paper they are printed on. They will not grow wings, they will not fly, they will crash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:38 PM "Why was this "solution" for the homeless not in Labour's Manifesto?" For the same reason that there was no stated contingency plan in the Tory manifesto for a sudden outbreak of cholera. For the same reason that there was no stated contingency plan in the LibDem manifesto for a sudden outbreak of a drug-resistant, vicious variant of the HIV virus. For the same reason that there wasn't a contingency plan in UKIP's manifesto for a nuclear attack by Russia. For the same reason that there wasn't a contingency plan in Cameron's last manifesto for Brexit. For the same reason that there wasn't a contingency plan in May's manifesto for a sudden run on the pound. Hey, Billyboy, it's a good job no-one hires you to write manifestos, innit. Each one would have to be printed on reams of paper stretching from here to Gibraltar. How else would you cover everything! 😂 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:42 PM "Perhaps private armies to keep out the unwashed" And there you have it, folks. The poor, the deprived, the people rendered homeless and/or bereaved are now "the unwashed." Beautiful whiff of fascism... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:49 PM Well Shaw I think occupy is illegal, compulsory purchase does not occur overnight, and requisitioning has not occurred in peacetime conditions. Also Parliament is in recess at the moment. Most people are well aware of these facts, as was Corbyn, That is why he is a grubby little politician. It is only your leftard ignorance that requires the above to be pointed out repeatedly and at great length. Some of us catch on a bit quicker. Just ask yourself if these facts were not true there would be no case to make against comrade corbyn now would there? Now go away drink you cocoa and try to construct a real argument instead of your usual blusterings and posturings. Perhaps you should tell us about your weeds or your latest wine bargains or perhaps 5000 ways of peeling spuds, or better still just shut up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 05:54 PM Iains - cool down fella... have a lolly...😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Jun 17 - 06:07 PM But you started this thread with a vicious attack on Corbyn's character and integrity. The rest came later only when you'd been comprehensively outed as a defender of the very rich and a disser of the poor, the deprived, the homeless and the bereaved and when you were trying to save face. I don't give a monkey's mickey what you call me. Be my guest. What I know is that you twisted away from your original point once we'd all attacked you for your sheer inhumanity. Address that or be ridiculed. Down to you. No-one else around here is wriggling, believe me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Jun 17 - 06:36 PM I really can't even begin to understand how it can be possible... ..but Iains really is so uncannily close in character & stylistic traits to being the love child of Keith and Terry... Could German Scientists have been co-opted by the Allies into establishing a top secret post war cloning program.... presumed closed down after the cold war, long forgotten, but discovered and reactivated by UKIP and Daily Mail financial backers.. .. to produce the perfect fanatical right wing propaganda soldier....????? 🤔 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jun 17 - 06:53 PM Iains' uncle was Martin Gibson, and his half brother is Bearded Bruce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 20 Jun 17 - 08:57 PM Requisitioning is not confiscation. It would be perfectly possible to pass a short bill that would authorise the government to carry out the requisition of empty property that was deemed suitable for these people. The owners could seek to challenge the legality of this. I very much doubt if they would be successful. In the meantime the displaced survivors of this criminal fire would have a decent place to live, close to their network of support. If Theresa May had a shred of political intelligence she would recognise picking up this proposal as an opportunity to salvage some of the credibility she has lost by her inadequate response to this tragedy. In fact, even that, all it takes would be a handful of Tory MPs backing this, either because they are honourable in their way, or because they are on razor thin majorities, and such legislation could be passed. There are some occasions when cutting through red tape is actually needed, and this is such an occasion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:53 AM "Bearded Bruce." Explains a lot "Martin Gibson, " Must be tough to be related to two guitars (even if one does have a very good reputation). "Property owners are protected by laws." It appears that you are happy that ordinary people should not be What kind of society leaves victims of a fire which was probably caused by neglect and profiteering, homeless and reduced to temporary accommodation while there are the facilities to at least give them somewhere comfortable to stop? What kind of people take the side of wealthy profiteers rather than that of masses of people in need? What type of heartless moron suggests treating survivors of a fire as refugees and shipping them abroad rather than allowing them to stop in readily available shelter? "County Clare is nice this time of year, as is Bude - Offered any holiday accommodation Carroll, Shaw?" What kind of agenda-driven prick uses a horrific fire as a soapbox to attack a political party he doesn't agree with? The world is full of unanswered mysteries!! It remains to be seen what was responsible for this fire but the indications are that indifference to human safety played a part in it No prizes whose side this trio of humanitarians will take what that argument begins! "Well Jimmy " Always a sign that the water is running out of the bath when you people dop the veneer and revert to schoolyard name-calling to try to talk down to people fromyour holes in the ground (Teribus seems permanently wedgd in that particular hole) In your case, you totally lack the imagination to come up with something new and resort to something tried and discarded by others - the long-departed Bearded Bruce tried and failed to over-awe me with that one Grow up for crying out loud - adulthood may make demands on you, but at least it helps you keep up with your hormones Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:59 AM ANY GOOD AT CROSSWORDS IAINS? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 03:18 AM I am still waiting for all you leftards to tell me how comrade corbyn's compulsory purchase, occupy and requisition will work within a meaningful and legal timeframe. Tell you what, Iains, you give us details of what was was actually said and I will try to explain it to you in words that you may understand. Until such a point as you give us chapter and verse on what was really said rather than what the Daily Heil headlines said there is little point in even trying to tell you. BTW - I presume you are using the phrase 'leftard' as a derogatory term by combining left and retard. Were you aware that is not really insulting to anyone with any sense and shows that you have neither imagination nor the sensitivity to not refer to anyone with mental health issues as a retard. I could of course just combine a couple of words myself, such as right cunt, but I will not :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 21 Jun 17 - 04:35 AM Tell you what, Iains, you give us details of what was was actually said and I will try to explain it to you in words that you may understand. If that happens, you need the context. So don't pick out 4 or 5 words. We need the two or three sentences on either side as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:00 AM Timeline: 1)At the emergency meeting in westminster hall corbyn called for requisitioning of property.Date thursday 15th June "During the election and before Jeremy Corbyn campaigned against the government's intention to seek a derogation or exit from the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. He claimed: "The Tories want to repeal the Human Rights Act and some want to leave the European Convention on Human Rights." Article 1 of the First Protocol of the Human Rights Act enshrines the protection of property, a right that would be breached by the requisitioning of other people's properties. The victims of the Grenfell disaster can be accommodated without communist-style expropriations, tearing up the rule of law and breaching innate human rights. It is a sign of Corbyn's contempt for freedom and property that his knee jerk reaction to the tragedy is to resort class war… Now no doubt you will concentrate on shooting the messenger because you find the message unpalatable although the veracity is self evident. Now pay attention again as we move on in time and the quote above on Peston's program is aired: Corbyn: "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do.Date Sunday 18th June As you can see as the timeline expands the man likewise expands his idiocy. Now I think the impracticality of what the halfwit suggested have been done to death here. But note the deathly silence on the last part of his statement " a lot of things you can do." There probably are many things he could do,starting with putting his ideas into action while in Westminster Hall, but he had not the wit to do it. Now you can carry on spinning what he said until you give a gyroscope vertigo, but you cannot escape from the fact that his suggestions cannot be acted on within any meaningful timeframe. Now we come to Shaws rantings:"But you started this thread with a vicious attack on Corbyn's character and integrity. The rest came later only when you'd been comprehensively outed as a defender of the very rich and a disser of the poor, the deprived, the homeless and the bereaved and when you were trying to save face. I don't give a monkey's mickey what you call me. Be my guest. What I know is that you twisted away from your original point once we'd all attacked you for your sheer inhumanity" My theme developed as Corby's stupidity evolved over several days. 1)He wants to overturn human rights legislation. 2)He wants to occupy property (lucky the old offence of incitement is no longer around) 3)He wants to compulsory purchase property. When are you socialist lackwits finally going to appreciate none of his suggestions can occur overnight. As I have said repeatedly, the man is a rabble rousing fool. Now in case the argument is a little too complex for you to follow I will summarise it. 1)Thursday. Comrade corbyn wants to overturn human right legislation, to requisition housing despite campaigning for it's retention as part of his election platform 2)Sunday Comrade corbyn adds squatting and compulsory purchase to his supposed quick fixes. 3)comrade corbyn by encouraging crimminal action clearly shows he is unfit to hold office. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:11 AM "What kind of agenda-driven prick uses a horrific fire as a soapbox to attack a political party he doesn't agree with?" That is exactly what Corbyn and his supporters did |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:12 AM So, what did Corbyn actually say then, Iains? As DMcG suggests, context would be crucial too. Where does he say that he or any government he would be head of wants to overturn human rights legislation. 2)wants to occupy property (lucky the old offence of incitement is no longer around) 3)wants to compulsory purchase property. Not your interpretation. Not the Daily Heils interpretation. The full text of his speech. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:55 AM D the G. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uum79bCtFI I minute 23 seconds in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:08 AM The veracity is not self-evident, Iains. What you call, rather hopefully, the veracity is actually just your lop-sided (aka right-wing) interpretation of Jezza's motives. And your theme did not develop. It took a sudden swerve as you tried to save face under a deluge of indignation from the people here who possess the humanity that you appear to lack. All here in the thread, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:09 AM A stunning example of leftard thinking! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI8UPHMzZm8 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:21 AM The link, for anyone who can't link to it for whatever reason, is to the speech where Corbyn confirms that he would consider all possibilities and all assets need to be put on the table to help in such a crisis. No mention that he would perform any of the actions suggested. Just that all possibilities should be considered. And so they should. Stupid link posted in reply to Steve and considering the country the caller is far more to be a Trump supported than anything remotely left wing. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:37 AM "leftard" is just one of the copycat insults that indicate the general sub cultural source of your unoriginal right wing thinking... It has only very recently been explained why you could fairly be called a 'right cunt' for this... However, from a point of view of language and better joke writing technique.. a more precise amalgam would be "rightard"... see... it even looks and sounds more accurately like the crux of the pun 'retard'... Of course us leftards have better judgement, higher standards and sensitivity to social diversity, to stoop so low and childish a level.... We prefer manly insults like 'arsehole' and 'wanker'... 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:48 AM Could we not even say 'He is a right arsehole' or 'a right wanker' PFR? That way the pun is on the word 'right'. No? OK. I suppose they would not really understand it anyway :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:58 AM righty right oh.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:13 AM Ehmmm Gnome you asked Iains what Corbyn actually said. Iains provided you with a link of Corbyn actually saying what Iains said he said - and it is still wrong???? He was suggesting occupation - that is illegal Compulsory Purchase - Takes a great deal of time to complete - for very good reasons - so in this case it would be useless as a solution. Requisition - Requires an Act of Parliament - Takes a great deal of time to complete - for very good reasons - so in this case it would be useless as a solution. Can't you lot get it into your thick heads Corbyn isn't offering any solutions he is merely rabble rousing. See in today's Press the Grenfell Tower survivors do not want the mindless Corbyn "Day of Rage" crowd hijacking their misfortune for their own ends - as Jom stated - ""What kind of agenda-driven prick uses a horrific fire as a soapbox to attack a political party he doesn't agree with?" - we shall see my money is on the fact that they will just not be able to resist the temptation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:15 AM Corbyn: "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do".Date Sunday 18th June Is it so difficult to understand the implications of such actions as suggested above? Obviously for some of you it is. I suggest you get a nice cup of tea and start at the top of the thread and slowly work your way down. Have a dictionary beside you, because some of the words used are long ones. I am sure that whoever was responsible for teaching the usual crowd above would have had an easier time teaching the finer nuances of astrophysics to a cockroach rather than successfully teaching them their ABC's. The argument has been clearly presented several times. Are you deliberately obtuse, or do you have some other problem? You are still spinning everything I see, with no real success. You obviously paid no attention to Alistair Campbell while he was teaching the art of the darkside to your hero Bliar blair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:22 AM Terry - even if you and Inanes had any points worthy of consideration.. you render them unlistenable by your persistent bitter tone of out and out belligerence & hostility... Chill out... look to the positives in life, and getting on with folks.... btw.. that Student accomodation is at least a start in a positive direction.. If we take it at face value, then well done to that person who made that decision.. mind you though, how much a week for student digs...!!!???!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:34 AM D the G "No mention that he would perform any of the actions suggested." Tell me if he was not about to carry out the suggested actions why did he mention them. Is this the hallmark of a rabble rouser or a fool? I should get back to the insults. Logic is obviously not part of your repertoire. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:42 AM there's a lot of things you can do Such as this Let me bw clear. I do not suggest for a moment this is because of what Corbyn said. But it fits perfectly into his call (in a sentence shortly after then one you are focusing on) for us all to think of ways of helping, rather than focusing on reasons why things can't be done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:53 AM Tell me if he was not about to carry out the suggested actions why did he mention them. Because he said all things should be considered and that is true. Giving something consideration is not the same as doing it. Or did you not get up to 'C' in your dictionary? As to insults - glad you appreciate mine. Yours really are crap :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:10 AM Oh, and good on them DMcG - thanks for pointing out that some, who actually can do something, are getting the message. Maybe those who are not directly involved should just STFU. What do you think Teribus? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:14 AM The only person spinning is you. Inviting people to follow the thread from the top is unwise of you. It would clearly reveal your sharp change of tack once you realised that you were displaying your inhumanity and that we were on to you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:15 AM d theg There are many things that could be done, that is very true. However the ones he articulated were poorly thought out soundbites that would take time and new legislation to come to fruition as has been pointed out many times. His third option was to encourage people to break the law. You obviously condone this suggestion. The logical extension of this encouragement is that no doubt legislation will insist that you leave a bag labelled swag at your front door for any passing lowlife to fill with your property. Failure to comply would no doubt breach their human rights. Resorting to insults just demonstrates the paucity of your counter arguments. Now about those deer signs!. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:21 AM people make laws.. people can change them... .and blathering on about the law requires no real skill or intelligence.. it is certainly no signifier of a superior intellect. It doesn't impress anyone here... ..and I should know.. I studied law and could have become a solicitor if it hadn't been for the higher calling of girls, guitars, and music... ..ah memories of those interviews.. those local solicitors and their bloated egos and sense of self importance.. .. what a bunch of dicktards... 🙄 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:25 AM His third option was to encourage people to break the law. You obviously condone this suggestion. And you complain of the lack of logic in my arguments. If you can come up with a link where I said I condone any criminal activity I will join Teribus in showing my arse off Blackpool tower. From: Iains - PM Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:15 AM Corbyn: "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do".Date Sunday 18th June Is it so difficult to understand the implications of such actions as suggested above? Obviously for some of you it is. I suggest you get a nice cup of tea and start at the top of the thread and slowly work your way down. Have a dictionary beside you, because some of the words used are long ones. I am sure that whoever was responsible for teaching the usual crowd above would have had an easier time teaching the finer nuances of astrophysics to a cockroach rather than successfully teaching them their ABC's. The argument has been clearly presented several times. Are you deliberately obtuse, or do you have some other problem? Followed by From: Iains - PM Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:15 AM ... Resorting to insults just demonstrates the paucity of your counter arguments. So, by your own logic you have just demonstrated the lack of substance in your own posts. Well done! :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:37 AM This has become a wonderful guide to left and right humainism When's the next election, I hear that Blunderwoman is considering another one as soon as she can find another terrorist-linked Party to offer support - she seems to be having a little difficulty with the present one Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:37 AM ..and as for Inanes hilarious default fall back position " if you dont respond, or insult me.. that must prove I am right".. ... classic...!!! 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 21 Jun 17 - 09:12 AM a more precise amalgam would be "rightard".. May I suggest righturd? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 09:44 AM .. and 'comrade'...?? Comrade Corbyn...????? i swear the only folks who still need to use the word 'comrade' are hoplessly past entrenched gormless right wingers.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:15 AM So pfr and Co. Were these luxury flats requisitioned? - No they were not. Were they simply "occupied" - No they were not. Were they subject to compulsory purchase by the Council - No they were not. These former HMRC Offices that had been converted were simply sold to Kensington Borough Council at cost. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:19 AM ".and as for Inanes hilarious default fall back position " Not really PFK - they don't come any "righter" than this pair of clowns Fine examples of the species Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:25 AM Tezz - have I at any time advocated requisitioning or occupying...???? [remember that 2 letter word...???] I'm a pragmatist who tries to retain some optimism in human nature, and hoped the positive will exists to motivate relevant authorities in acting swiftly to provide suitable homes..... Requisitioning could only ever have been a theoretical last resort if all else failed to get their thumbs out of their rear offifices... I'm no mind reader, but if Mr Corbyn mentioned requisitioning merely as a tactic wake up and to spur on lackadaisical officiladom....??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:32 AM btw.. it's interesting that the mudcat ID Inanes was only recently reactivated after an absence of nearly 16 years....?????? oooohhh... let's guess.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:48 AM And now I see that the government has done what Corbyn has been asking them to do. London fire - luxury flats acquired for survivors |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 10:57 AM No, that is completely different, Kevin. Corbyn has insisted that, as property is theft, all private accommodation is given to the poor and needy while this is an act of kindness and generosity from philanthropic capitalists. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:03 AM well punky rocker. btw.. it's interesting that the mudcat ID Inanes was only recently reactivated after an absence of nearly 16 years....?????? oooohhh... let's guess.... and your point is?????????????????????????????????????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:04 AM Corbyn: "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do".Date Sunday 18th June Terebus rhetorically asks: So pfr and Co. Were these luxury flats requisitioned? - No they were not. Were they simply "occupied" - No they were not. Were they subject to compulsory purchase by the Council - No they were not. But were they purchased as one of the "lots of other things you can do"? Yes. But if you want to see human nature at its worst, I suggest keeping your eyes open for complaints that some of the people who get these flats are immigrants. As far as i know it hasn't happened yet, but I fear it will. It is one of those things I hope to be wrong about. Also appalling, but not quite as bad, would be anyone complaining they paid millions for their flat and then these "unwashed" turn up and reduce their flat's value. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:12 AM Acquiring them in this way was one of the ways Corbyn suggested in order to obtain them for survivors. If the owners refused to cooperate, or made unreasonable demands, other ways could be brought into play. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:18 AM Reading down the story I see that the flats will not actually be available until the end of July, since they are still being completed. That is not good enough. There are propeties standing empty which could be used immediately. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:33 AM Inanes - My point... welcome back mate whoever you are or have been, or still are; and where ever you were lurking or released from....??? Mudcat is a very friendly inclusive community, may your stay here be joyful and rewarding... 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:38 AM DMcG, you're quite right about the complaints. Yahoo (inhabited by lowlife cretins, but it's my e mail provider) has several 'comments' by subscribers about these luxury flats, including racist, anti-Muslim, derogatory remarks that 'they'll ruin the property in a few weeks', they 'don't deserve them', 'what about white working people?' and so on. I think it's a brilliant idea to house them there. If people are jealous, I suggest they go through a similar night of horror, lose all their possessions and members of their family to boot, sleep on the floor of a community centre night after night and be pushed from pillar to post by 'The Authorities'. They could also suffer the after-effects of smoke inhalation and a few bad burns if they like. They might (though I doubt it) change their views. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 11:50 AM Sen - what this brings to light is the absolute chaos and disruption that is the aftermath of only one tower block disaster.. Now let's try to comprehend how the authorities could cope if our cities were ever subject to terror attack with dirty bombs, or bombed in warfare by conventional weapons / missiles.. let alone the mutual assured distruction of those keen to press big scary buttons to show our 'enemies' a lesson... ..now then let's google Anderson shelter construction... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 21 Jun 17 - 12:25 PM Grenfell Tower families to be rehoused in flats at luxury complex Poor old Brexity right-wingers, always wrong but never able to comprehend their own limited capacity for any degree of reasoned understanding of an empathic, compassionate approach to building a society. The world is truly befuddling to them, it's why their misanthropy and fear dominates and limits their thought processes; they genuinely cannot see beyond themselves. It's also why right-wing intellectuals are as rare as hen's teeth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jun 17 - 12:40 PM pfr, I well remember Anderson shelters. There were several in the grounds of our Community hall where I went to Brownies. They're basically a deep hole in the ground with a curved corrugated iron roof over the top and steps down. Rather damp and spidery, but of course fairly good protection against flying shrapnel, though not a direct hit naturally. Stu, I voted for Brexit in the referendum, ad also for our Tory candidate in the recent elections (dons tin hat and hurries away to the nearest Anderson shelter) I'd say I'm an intellectual and I hope I don't lack compassion or empathy. Does this make me as rare as hen's teeth? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 21 Jun 17 - 12:51 PM In my book, Sen, there are smart Bexiteers and stupid ones, smart leavers and stupid ones. There as intellectuals of the left and right and people who never think at all on both sides. Life is complicated like that. Jon Freeman made a comment below that no one reacted to explicitly, but I think was very wise and tied into pars comment just below. A lot of the complaints from Iain and Terebus are concerned with the length of time needed to pass the requisite laws. There is certainly a case for considering passing laws concerning use of vacant properties for future occurances of disasters, whether fire, flood or plagues of frogs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 12:55 PM My mum's family got bombed out by the nazis.. lost everything apart from the clothes they were wearing, lucky to still have their lives... evacuated hundreds of miles from their home community... never to return. 70 odd years later.. and the govt still gets caught with it's knickers down... bureaucrats....... gotta love 'em.... 😣 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:39 PM Corbyn: "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do". There are those that seem to have the belief that these words were spoken as some kind of verbal bludgeon to force the tories to take action. I think that view is seriously mistaken and the links below suggest the man was deadly serious. After all he has previous form. Also those that suggest addressing him as comrade is anachronistic are making a huge mistake as to his true allegiance. Once again read the message. Shooting the messenger does not let you off the hook. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4564736/Corbyn-backed-group-issued-squatting-guide.html http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/796103/Jeremy-Corbyn-Labour-Communist-General-Election-2017 http://www.thedailybeast.com/jeremy-corbyn-hails-the-communist-joining-his-election-campaign https://heatst.com/world/forget-the-bullying-corbyns-communism-is-the-real-problem/ http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13621016.Corbyn_will_renationalise_former_public_assets_with_no_compensation/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: David Carter (UK) Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:41 PM Pfr, what on earth are you expecting? I mean in WWII which was a much greater emergency. Families were evacuated, some returned, some didn't. Most of those who didn't chose not to. I would think that given a place in a rural community, the idea that you should move back to a deprived area of (for instance) London's East End, wouldn't be entirely welcome. Same here to some extent, I know that people are clamouring to be rehoused in the borough, but sometimes I wonder why. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:49 PM Corbyn - "A scum too far"!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:49 PM I think that view is seriously mistaken Ahhh. So now we have the crux of the matter. You believe you know how to interpret Corbyn's words better that others. Well, that is fine. If you have an opinion feel free to state it. But remember that is all that it is. Just like my opinion is that you talk through your arse. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:49 PM Thank you DMcG, my last post was rather tongue-in-cheek, but I agree no-one should be pigeon-holed merely by their political allegiances, educational standard or any other factor. One thing I've learned over my long life is that each person is an individual, but the similarities are what we should look for and focus on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:52 PM I'm just idly riffing on a theme while dinner cooks.. But WE could expect a greater level of preparedness and competence from our govt here and now in the 21st century, past lessons having been learnt and all that... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 01:54 PM that was in reply to David Carter (UK) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:02 PM Iains - we are not shooting you because you are 'the messenger'.. we're having a pop at you becuse this thread of yours only exists, was started and founded entirely in antisocial right wing 'hate ideas'.. Please stop trying to play the innocent, that's a tactic well recognisable from one of our favourite mudcat old righty adversaries. It never works for him either.. We see through it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:35 PM "...but I agree no-one should be pigeon-holed merely by their political allegiances," I don't agree. A Tory is a Tory. Toryism is defined by greed and self-interest, nothing else. Certainly not by the lame excuse that Tories are somehow more competent in government. They are clearly not, as recent events have demonstrated. Tories look after their own, no-one else. A brexiteer is seriously misguided. A Tory brexiteer, even worse. You may be a very decent Tory for all I know. I worked in schools for many years and I never met a decent Tory that was on the side of the kids or of the profession. If you're a decent Tory you'd be the first one I've ever encountered. OK, I lived in a northern slum for my first ten years. I come from northern working class stock, and all my mum's side are from that dirty old town. That dirty old town, along with many other dirty old northern towns, was full of hard-working people who were kept poor by Tory exploiters. It may not be the northern powerhouse now but it bloody well was then. There are no good Tories and never will be. Sorry, Senoufou. I love you anyway! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:46 PM Of course Corbyn meant it. We need to whatever is needed to ensure that these properties can be available for the survivors of Grenfell Tower. And since Labour is not in power, the people in a position to do it are the Tories, and the hope is that they could be induced to act to open up someficient property to meet that need. It seems to have worked in a very limited way though the end of July is far to long to wait. What appears to have happened if the government have done a deal with a developer that means it can unload these flats in advance, which is very convenient. And I am sure that the developer will be getting very generous terms. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jun 17 - 02:56 PM Oh dear Steve. Never mind, I love you too! :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 21 Jun 17 - 03:05 PM D the G I do not have to interpret corbyn's words, they are self explanatory. You can spin away till you get dizzy but the meaning of occupy, requisition and compulsory purchase mean precisely what they say.There are no variable degrees of meaning. I was being kind to those like yourself that have a total inability to understand plain english and were attempting to tone down the reality of his statement.I gave sufficient links to show that any other interpretation is flawed and that your hero st corbyn of clusterf**k meant every single word that he uttered. As I said previously he is a buffoon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 03:10 PM ..but he's our buffoon and much more likeable and capable than any of your interchangable buffoons... ..who've you got lined up for the rest of this month's tory leader.. and next month's... and next........ 😜 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Jun 17 - 03:36 PM No you don't need to explain the meaning of those words but I think you need to learn the meaning of context. For instance you refer to Comrade Corbyn regularly. I take it from that that you are both members of the same party? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: akenaton Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:01 PM From Steve "I don't agree. A Tory is a Tory. Toryism is defined by greed and self-interest." I don't think there is such a thing as "Toryism", if you mean "Conservatism" it is certainly not defined by greed and self interest. Your definition would sit better on the acolytes of Mr A Blair, ex Prime Minister of the UK, warmonger and leader of New Labour. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jun 17 - 05:50 PM Shut up, akenaton. You don't count. Inanes, you DID interpret Jeremy's words in your very first post and you went for his jugular. Good for you. But you were out for pure character assassination only. But when we exposed you as a defender of the very rich, who in your view have the inalienable right to "enjoy" their empty investment properties, while the poor and homeless (the unwashed, in your words) could go hang as far as you were concerned, you sharply changed tack in order to show how Jezza's ideas were totally illegal and impractical. A completely different argument. So, it's not us spinning. I'm sticking very doggedly to your original point (I can be quite good at that) as I'm a simple man. All the spin and evasion is coming from you. Inanes, you are a laughing stock. I recommend another sixteen years of silence. Failing that, let's carry on having fun with you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:33 PM Jeremy Corbyn's words that set this off were ""The ward where this fire took place is, I think, the poorest ward in the whole country and properties must be found – requisitioned if necessary – to make sure those residents do get rehoused locally." There was no suggestion of confiscation, requisition was suggested as a possibility if that became necessary. It was an extremely moderate suggestion. It could have been a pre-Thatcher Tory talking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 21 Jun 17 - 06:49 PM Oh dear, Kevin - those pesky facts again! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 21 Jun 17 - 07:36 PM Inanes seems very fond of the law... Just wondering what my old Law lecturer would make of his blatant distortions and misrepresentations of reported statements, and his presumptions of certain guilt based on the flimsiest evidence....??? Let alone his hilarious hyperbole and sneering invective.... Not sure if my lecturer would have scrawled big red crosses over every page of Inanes essays, or recommended a career as a lawyer for an exclusive wealthy corporate clientele...????? 🙄 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 21 Jun 17 - 08:29 PM his blatant distortions and misrepresentations of reported statements, and his presumptions of certain guilt based on the flimsiest evidence... Sounds like one of Trump's advisors, don't he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 22 Jun 17 - 04:48 AM "Does this make me as rare as hen's teeth?" I think it might ;-) I'd be genuinely interested in understanding how one can reconcile conservatism with compassion and empathy. I don't see modern conservatism as being in the slightest bit compassionate, in fact to my mind it represents the politics of self-interest and is quite divisive by nature. As for the Brexit thing, I put it in there for devilment and nothing more. All I want to do is survive it, I can't say I want to live in the country we're going to become though. I'm tired of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 22 Jun 17 - 05:21 AM Shaw I do not have to go for the jugular, the man condemns himself by his own actions, This is the man that wants to extend the right to buy to private landlords, to have a garden tax. and an economic policy presumably based on pennies from Heaven There were many practical steps that could have been taken immediately after the fire to have instant results.None of Corbyn's soundbites could have been initiated immediately as has been stated. Please continue trying to spin excuses! I have a few items that below that can help you remain divorced from reality. 1)T aid misinterpretation and concentration for corbynista spinmeisters https://www.amazon.com/As-Seen-Tv-Twistlets-Accessory/dp/B01AMNWNJU?th=1 and for embryonic spinners. http://www.miniinthebox.com/fidget-spinner-hand-spinner-spinning-top-toys-toys-ring-spinner-metal-edc-novelty-gag-toys_p5891987. and for those totally worn out by producing a barrage of spin and in need of inspiration, http://www.fantasycruises.com/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 22 Jun 17 - 05:30 AM I'd be genuinely interested in understanding how one can reconcile conservatism with compassion and empathy Let's take an example. "A slightly different case is that of businessman John Timpson, who is the controlling shareholder in an eponymous chain of shoe repair and key-cutting stores that dot shopping malls across England. Over the past six years Timpson has donated 478,000 pounds to his son, Edward, a Conservative member of parliament, via his company, Timpson Ltd, records show" (reuters) On the other hand they have always had a policy of accepting ex-offenders as employees, which you might think a bit 'bleeding heart' leftie thinking. "We pay our colleagues as much as we can afford rather than as little as we can get away with" "Timpson really are an equal opportunities employer. We consider anyone for our vacancies as long as they are able to do the job. This includes ex-offenders and other marginalised groups." These are not just empty words: it can be backed up by seeing how many ex-offenders they have compared to other businesses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 22 Jun 17 - 05:57 AM Here is a clipping from THe Guardian ===== "It's so unfair," said Maria, who was reading the news in the Evening Standard with two neighbours. She bought her flat two years ago for a sum she was unwilling to disclose. "We paid a lot of money to live here, and we worked hard for it. Now these people are going to come along, and they won't even be paying the service charge." Nick, who pays £2,500 a month rent for a one-bedroom flat in the complex, also expressed doubts about the plan. ... "I'm very sad that people have lost their homes, but there are a lot of people here who have bought flats and will now see the values drop. It will degrade things. And it opens up a can of worms in the housing market." ==== I would be interested in hearing whether Iain and Terebus agree with Maria and Nick. As yet, while both have complained extensively about Corbyn's ideas, neither has as far as I can see actually offered any of their own. So finding out what they thought about a solution that is under way could be informative. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 22 Jun 17 - 06:26 AM Well then I suppose my sister is rare as hen's teeth too. She's worked for the NHS as a consultant anaesthetist all her working life, and is now retired. She's a practising Christian (and I mean practising) does no end of charitable work for various world health organisations, donates liberally to schemes such as well-digging and setting up African women in small businesses, has given untold amounts of dosh to untold numbers of worthy causes, volunteers in her village as a counsellor for people with difficult emotional problems, and like me .... she's always voted Conservative!!!! My father was brought up in an extremely impoverished community in North Shields. His family had only oil lamps and an outside earth closet. They cooked on coal with a black pot on a chain. My father started work at fourteen. His people had been miners and fishermen. He always worked hard in his free time doing handyman jobs for the elderly free of charge. He was renowned in his Norfolk village (where he retired to be near me) for spending every minute of every day redecorating the village hall, taking old folk to the supermarket, gardening and installing extra electrical sockets (he was a qualified electrician among other things) for all his neighbours. When he died, there was no room for all the folk who arrived for the funeral. They had to stand in a huge crowd outside. A plaque in his honour was erected in the foyer of the village hall and is still there to this day. And....... he voted Conservative all his life!!!!!! (Large flock of hens strut past, gnashing their teeth...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Howard Jones Date: 22 Jun 17 - 06:29 AM I have been reluctant to join in this discussion as feelings are understandably running high, and I don't really want to get dragged into a slanging match. However, leaving aside the moral and political arguments, there are considerable practical and legal difficulties with this suggestion, and these can't be overlooked. If Parliament is sovereign it could presumably pass emergency powers to allow property to be requisitioned. It might also be able to legislate to short-cut the usual CPO process to allow this to happen quickly. However the target here seems to be luxury properties, owned but not occupied by the wealthy. I doubt Corbyn has in mind seizing empty properties where the owner is, for example, in hospital or temporarily working elsewhere. It would be difficult to frame legislation in such a way which would single out rich people's property that would not be discriminatory and contrary to human rights law. It would be wide open to legal challenge, and the people it is aimed at are well able to afford to challenge it. The delays this would cause are alone probably sufficient to make this unworkable. The other issue is the cost. Requisition is not confiscation, and compensation at market value would have to be paid. According to the Guardian the value of empty property in Kensington and Chelsea is around £644m. Owners might also be entitled to claim for other losses, and have their legal and professional costs paid. Even if they were only taken temporarily the rental cost would be many thousands of pounds a week. The victims have other urgent needs besides housing, and money has to be found to address these as well. £644m+ could go a very long way. It would almost certainly be both much cheaper and much quicker for the government or local authority to rent or purchase empty properties of an acceptable standard which are already on the market. To spend more than is necessary to acquire luxury properties to make a political point is not a sensible use of public money, which would be better spent addressing the victims' other needs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 22 Jun 17 - 06:37 AM The other issue is the cost. Requisition is not confiscation, and compensation at market value would have to be paid. According to the Guardian the value of empty property in Kensington and Chelsea is around £644m. Owners might also be entitled to claim for other losses, and have their legal and professional costs paid. Even if they were only taken temporarily the rental cost would be many thousands of pounds a week I agree it would all be difficult to work out. That's partly why I think Jon Freeman's suggestion of preparing the groundwork now for the next disaster is interesting. Compensation is more difficult. Certainly compensation would arise for damage and restoration of fair wear and tear. But I don't see how rental values come into it because these properties are not being rented out - if they were, the council or other body would just be renting them. Being compensated for loss of rent you were never charging seems odd to me. But there is another benefit that seems to be being overlooked as well. By purchasing these flats the council continues to own them. So eventually they can be used a council housing more generally, or resold. Either way, there is a benefit to the council over and above the immediate crisis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Howard Jones Date: 22 Jun 17 - 08:07 AM Compulsory purchase can be used to acquire property temporarily, this is often done where land is required during construction of a project but is not needed afterwards. My meaning was that if properties were requisitioned temporarily then compensation might be based on rental value rather than sales value. This would still be far higher than the cost of renting ordinary but acceptable accommodation. There is a well-established basis for calculating compensation, with an appeals process if it can't be agreed. Determining value isn't the issue. My point is that if upwards of £644m is to be spent on assisting the victims, it is a nonsense to spend it all on requisitioning luxury properties when perfectly good accommodation could be acquired for a fraction of that, leaving the rest to be spent on tackling other problems. As for using these properties for future council accommodation, are you really suggesting that a council should spend millions on a one or two bedroom flat to house a single family in luxury, when for the same money it could house several families in perfectly good quality accommodation? Or that it should indulge in property speculation in the hope of making a profit when it sells? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 22 Jun 17 - 08:24 AM Sen - back in the early 80s I was studying a Humanities based degree called something like "Concepts of Belief & Ideology / Ideas & Society" Thatcher was our generation's enemy, and her policies were biting hard. On my home council estate factory workers were bribed to buy their homes at a very low discount - we could tell which, because they replaced their front doors and / or paited them any colour they liked to express individuality and ownership. Then within a couple of years the factory was allowed to go into administration, and all these new mortgage holders found themselves suddenly redundant and unable to keep up payments... Wonder who snapped up multiple cheap houses on the estate at auction....???? Anyway, back then we still differentiated betweeen new ruthless greedy amoral thatcherites, and what seemed in comparison like a 'golden age' of old fashioned christian philanthropic Conservatives... ... just saying... I believe you are the compassionate kind of conservative, with the potential to be convinced one day to at least vote Liberal or Green, if not Labour...??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 22 Jun 17 - 09:21 AM Sen - btw.. the tory party likes you to continue voting for them.. but they don't particularly like you... It's a harsh unforgiving party that refers disrespectfully and disdainfully for voters like you as "red tories", "tory wets"; and whatever new insults their old bully boys club can conjure up to marginalise & dismiss 'soft hearted' caring conservatives.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jun 17 - 10:37 AM There's a distinction between having conservative beliefs and supporting the current Tory Party. The essential conservative belief is that change should be viewed with suspicion, and probably be avoided unless it can be demonstrated to be an improvement or at least not made things worse. It baically comes down to "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". That has always seemed a very sensible attitude, which should be shared across the political spectrum. There can of course be wide differences about what changes are needed, and what things are broke and need fixing, and how to go about doing that, and that is the basis of reasonable political differences. The present Tory party is set on going in completely the opposite direction, "neoliberalism", imposing radical changes without recognising the damage they cause. This is based on a radical ideology of commitment to privatisation and to rolling back public controls over the activity of private and corporate enterprise. Confusingly many decent people with a conservative orientation do not seem to recognise that the existing Tory party does not represent their beliefs. Or perhaps in some cases they are hanging on supporting the party in the hopes that it might return to its principle, in the same way many people hung on in supporting Labour during the New Labour years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jun 17 - 12:51 PM "Shaw I do not have to go for the jugular, the man condemns himself by his own actions" So what was this in your opening post then? "A wonderful example of a typical lying, double dealing, twisting snake of a politician demonstrating his contempt for freedom and property that his knee jerk reaction to the tragedy is to resort class war…" Er, going for the jugular big-time, I'd say... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 22 Jun 17 - 01:20 PM The reason I guess why so many internet right wing blockheads write in a similar stylistic manner, utilizing the same vocabulary.. mudcat included.. [heaven forbid the same individuals behind multiple IDs..nooooo...] ..the reason I guess is they crib, copy 'n' paste from the same scripts issued by their favourite fanatical internet star bloggers... It gives them a shared sense of identity & purpose, that they can recognise and agree with each other, give their peer group members a wink and a pat on the back [or arse.. it's the 21st century after all..] ..and saves them the hard work of original thinking... But how on earth they think they can influence and convert ordinary forum members with their comical deranged rantings....???? 😕 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 22 Jun 17 - 02:07 PM It gives them a shared sense of identity & purpose Rather like a cult. And you know how difficult deprogramming can be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Big Al Whittle Date: 22 Jun 17 - 02:19 PM let me put an end to all this controversy. Tomorrow night Jeremy 'Coshboy' Corbyn is going round to Keith's with the heavy mob and demanding all his money. and if he has any sausages in the fridge - Keith better watch out. WE won't leave him with a sausage. Watch out for DEnnis 'Scary' Skinner and his lead pipe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 22 Jun 17 - 03:00 PM Shaw."Er, going for the jugular big-time, I'd say.." Had I been exaggerating I would agree with you, but sadly I was not. Now I think this dead horse has had sufficient of a flogging, unless you are a masochist of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jun 17 - 03:10 PM Jeremy Corbyn's words that set this off were ""The ward where this fire took place is, I think, the poorest ward in the whole country and properties must be found – requisitioned if necessary – to make sure those residents do get rehoused locally." And here is iain's cmment on those words: "A wonderful example of a typical lying, double dealing, twisting snake of a politician demonstrating his contempt for freedom and property that his knee jerk reaction to the tragedy is to resort class war…" No need for further comment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 22 Jun 17 - 03:31 PM M of H Tell me, are you equally selective when making patchwork quilts? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 22 Jun 17 - 03:58 PM "Crucially", "I want to make this absolutely clear" that I agree - "A wonderful example of a typical lying, double dealing, twisting snake of a politician demonstrating his contempt for freedom and property that his knee jerk reaction to the tragedy is to resort class war…" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 22 Jun 17 - 04:36 PM Like I said..... its a cult. You can't reason with Scientologists either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jun 17 - 05:20 PM I imagine I would try to use the patches that fit. That pair there seem to fit qhite well. They illustrate a contrast between words that are moderate and well balanced, and words that are the reveres. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jun 17 - 05:26 PM You're belly up, Inanes. You could stop now, but be our guest... 😂 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Jun 17 - 06:23 PM Now I think this dead horse has had sufficient of a flogging I think he is right, Steve. Better stop flogging him. I think it is only motor response now. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jun 17 - 06:28 PM Stop flogging him, Dave? But he seems to love it. I thought I was helping him! Damn!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jun 17 - 01:15 AM Masochist: Whip me, please! Sadist: No. :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jun 17 - 06:55 AM I have a theory about the 16 year gap, PFR. Back in 2000 Iains senior had a passing interest in folk music and made a few posts here. His son was then born and he lost interest due to family commitments. Move forward to April 2016 when Iains senior bequethes his old laptop to his 15 year old son, whom we shall call young Iain. Young Iain finds Mudcat in dad's browsing history and the cookie is still set. Young Iain decides to try to wind up the old folks on there using decidedly poor manners combined with youthful arrogance. Most of the posts come across as those of a stroppy teenager so it makes sense. Picture Harry Enfield's 'Kevin' beavering away on here in between masturbating over his latest unreachable fantasy. I reckon I am right :-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 07:23 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sxAnejb9bs |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stanron Date: 23 Jun 17 - 07:34 AM Well done guys. If you can't win the argument you can at least attack the man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 23 Jun 17 - 08:04 AM Oh, is it supposed to be serious? I assumed it was mocking the wild exaggerations of some of his opppnents. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Jun 17 - 08:07 AM There is no argument. There are two half-arguments separated by a fault line once Inanes realised that being inhuman wasn't going to go unnoticed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 17 - 08:27 AM Stan - but is he a man... ??? and not just a truculent man-child.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 08:34 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDdBY5sKAU His singing is of the same standard as his politics. No doubt he sang the following as he had just been re elected. " The working class can kiss my arse I got the foreman's job at last. You can tell old Joe I'm off the dole He can stick his Red Flag up his 'ole!. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jun 17 - 08:35 AM "If you can't win the argument you can at least attack the man." The argument speaks for itself, what you can't do is inject humanity into someone who apparently been immunised against catching it Iains is quite capable of insulting - he came to this forum dishing it our and has continued ever since Easily confirmed or disproved - 'It's all in the book' as the old song used to say Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 17 - 09:06 AM Stan - ok.. serious... A] "Stan you are wrong because......" - that is a fair disputation of your arguement B] "Stan you make no sense because you are a known ***** *******" - that is an example of an outrageous ad hominen attack. A and B are clear cut examples. With Iaines here, it is not so simplistic or easy to make accustaions of unair ad hominen attack. His opening salvo post was nothing less itself than a completely venomous ad hominen attack on a respectable individual. That was at the foundation of his reason for starting this thread in the first place. His 'arguement' is virtually non-existent as he completely undermined it with unecessary abuse himself right from the very begining. We responded in typical sarcastic mudcat fashion by attacking the extremist hate ideas that underpin his need to be so obnoxious in a public forum. If you are familiar with the concept "the personal is political", then as his hateful views and personality are so meshed together and intertwined, then it is fair game to respond to an abusive individual's insulting accusations in similar kind... No longer can that be written off as simplistically as as Ad hominen atttack. Free speech here is one thing, we should respect that as much as possible, but if a minority of political / sociopath / extremists abuse the privilege like little kids running into school staffroom and yelling vile made up accusations about the headmaster...??? There is a limist to what is tolerable behaviour. Sorry for being so serious.. normal Pfr service will be resumed asap.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 09:12 AM Ah but Jim I do not have to travel with a pack of leftard lowlife hyenas that have yet to mount any kind of defense for their hero commie corbyn, and can only hunt in a pack. The fat little gnome and shaw are notorious for it, along with several others You are the only person on this forum living in cuckoo land,that wishes things to happen without any kind of costing, assessment of legal process, or any kind of rational approach. You seem to think that putting your pathetic frothings into capitals and Bold 12time roman red ink solves all the problems of the world. Some might say you are a dreamer.==That would be far too kind. And if you have zilch to contribute to the argument, then like incoherant greg, you are only attempting to troll. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 17 - 09:19 AM ... see what I mean... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stu Date: 23 Jun 17 - 09:46 AM "Large flock of hens strut past, gnashing their teeth..." Well that's me told! I have family from working class backgrounds who are lifelong tories, and indeed I was a Young Conservative myself until I met a socialist who came to give us a talk and I saw the light. Many people I know, like and respect would call themselves conservative, so this isn't unique. I don't vote tory because I seem to share few values with them, or the values they seem to hold dear I don't. That said, I'm sort of off party politics anyway as it's way too divisive and not the best way to get things done, the only way to make a difference is to work within your community locally, with likeminded people and for the common good. Ignore politicians (local and national), deal with authorities only when necessary and keep them out of the way as possible of anything needing creative input or innovative ideas. This approach works very well, and although local politicos try to tag on they're not part of it. It works a treat then, although you need some people with vision and drive to get these projects going and keep them on track over the years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Jun 17 - 10:13 AM The word I'd use is "cheap". And not worth paying a moments attention to. We don't have any physical filttering system here, but that's not necessary. His (or of course her, let's not be sexist) have ceased to be visible so far as I am concerned, and I advise others to do the same.. There are people here with whom who I disagree profoundly, but I accept they belong here. Katie Hopkins clones do not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jun 17 - 10:36 AM "I do not have to travel with a pack of leftard lowlife hyenas" Your chidishly spiteful behaviour marks you out for what you are You take after your half - sibling in right wing extremism, only he had the nouse to piss of when he saw he was wasting his time You really don't need coherence when it comes to childish name calling - any moron can do it, as you are proving Grow up for christ's sake Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 17 - 10:53 AM We've seeen this sort of abuse so often before, it's almost as if the right are employing automated abuse bots on targetted forums... spam bots pre-programmed with key hate words and phrases that can be perpetually ramdomly generated into sentences and posted in 'lefty' forums.... Iainsbot.v.2017.exe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 10:57 AM Jimmy. To quote your own words of several months ago. "you are only a Johhny come lately (2006)" Me 1999. "You need to remember your place and don't argue with your elders." Remember Jim or are you going to demonstrate your selective amnesia in front of us all. Now say goodnight, to quote incoherant Greg. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 11:37 AM Jimmy memorable quotes. ""Try not to talk to people and remember you are a mental midget Iaians People with far more knowledge and experience have had their fingers burned on this forum by forgetting their place. You really are an obnoxiously smug bastard, aren't you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxpZkKKbDgA Where is your place Jimmy? By your own words my seniority to you on this forum must place me above you. Personally I think your criteria a joke, but it takes all sorts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Jun 17 - 12:20 PM Stop wasting your energy, Iains. You'll only go upsetting yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jun 17 - 12:35 PM "Try not to talk to people and remember you are a mental midget Iaians" As you are - if you care to remember it was in response to a string to abuse from you Since then, you have not ceased to be an obnoxious troll. Just a point Your use if the term Leftared (left retard) makes you th cultural thug you are -retard is a disgusting term used only by lowlife I always recall when you refer to the left, that your side of the house gave us the killers of six million Jews, the factories that used them as slave labour, heroes of democracy like Assad, mass murderer Augusto Pinochet (not forgetting his friend, Mad Maggie, who described him as "her kind of democrat", Pappa Doc, and every piece of fascist scum from Mosley's Blackshirts to the B.N.P. .... and rest of the dregs of humanity that have polluted this planet So feel free to describe me as left as you wish - it's a compliment "Jimmy" Still haven't come up with anything more imaginative as that conjured up by the hirsute on, Bro Bruce, all those years ago. You people really aren't the brightest buttons on the SS uniform, are you Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 23 Jun 17 - 01:13 PM Poor old jimmy. Still frothing nonsense in a timewarp I see. What Jews and Pinochet have to do with this thread totally escapes me. Even the brightest button on the ss uniform can see that was introduced because sensible contributions are not a part of his severely limited repertoire. Go and inspect your grass. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 23 Jun 17 - 01:42 PM Any entertainment value left in this thread.. or is it now bogged down in the usual inevitable boring soul destroying bollox..??? At least Glasto is on the telly to have a laugh at the knobhead BBC presenters.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jun 17 - 02:27 PM "What Jews and Pinochet have to do with this thread totally escapes me. " Pincochet was "Right" - the Nazis were "Right" you are "Right" (and proud of it) three of a kind Doesn't take much Iaians - just a little imagination, which is probably why it's beyond you Still "Jimmy" You should ask the Bearded one" to see if he can think up something else You fellers really have no self-respect, do you? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 24 Jun 17 - 03:20 AM Jimmy when someone like you takes such extreme positions you lend yourself to ridicule. Your namesake Lewis Carroll, when he was writing, was high as a kite on magic mushrooms, and opium. No doubt he was the original urban spaceman. He had a reasonable excuse for being away with the fairies, as an explanation for his bizarre scribblings. What is your excuse? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Jun 17 - 03:45 AM Knock it off, Iains. You're just being an idiot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Jun 17 - 03:57 AM Why do you inevitably revert to a childish slanging match when you run out of ideas Iaians You've moved from depriving refugees from a fire with a roof over their heads to childish name calling in the space of one thread - your mental scope, it would appear. "Lewis Carroll" - think that might b one of the Bearded Blusterers as well - it's certainly been used and abandoned on this forum by the lesser intelligent before now (anybody who offers nothing but name-calling has to be a sandwich short of a picnic) I thought I'd left that one in mid junior school - even your attempts at insulting show a total lack of imagination I'd get back to stopping the fire survivors from being given shelter if I were you - it seems to be where you shine best. I notice that residents in the area of the wealthiest borough in London where the survivors have been given homes are complaining bitterly about the effect that it might have on the price of their property - perhaps you might take up the cudgels on their behalf - seems to be your métier - mustn't abandon your wealthy friends in their time of need Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 24 Jun 17 - 04:15 AM The reasoned view of the Financial Times.(strange they largely agree with me) "If we were living in a movie, the ash-blackened cage looming over West London would be a metaphor for something. Instead, the Grenfell Tower disaster — so catastrophic that we are told we may never know how many people died — is a distinctly un-metaphorical national disgrace. The least we can do now is learn the lessons of the fire, as we did not after the Lakanal House fire of 2009, which killed six people. Some of those lessons should emerge from the public inquiry. Grenfell Tower was built in 1974 but had recently been renovated. In a sane world such a renovation should have improved safety standards. Apparently we do not live in such a world. But beyond the life-and-death details of fire safety rules and enforcement, a bigger picture has long been apparent: the British housing system, particularly in London, is in a shocking state. Decades of policy failure have left us with unaffordable housing. That is why the residents of unsafe housing feel trapped and voiceless, unable to afford to move, and powerless to demand change. A better politician than Theresa May might have used this tragedy to justify housing reform, announcing a bold plan to build a million new quality homes before 2020. That target is less ambitious than it sounds, merely making up many years of undersupply. Having many more decent homes on the market would lower rents and make other housing policy goals — choice, fairness, quality, safety — easier to achieve. But perhaps that is expecting too much of Mrs May. Stronger prime ministers in luckier circumstances have failed to make headway on housing. What of Jeremy Corbyn, the man who is keen to remind us that he'd be quite willing to run the country? The Labour leader certainly made a better job of appearing prime ministerial after the fire, showing concern where Mrs May seemed distant. But this — the performance part of the job — is not what matters most. Boris Johnson could also have played the necessary role to perfection, but that would hardly qualify him to lead the country. What we really need from our politicians is a willingness to advocate and execute wise policies. Mr Corbyn, instead, focused on grabbing and redistributing property. "There are a large number of deliberately kept vacant flats and properties all over London," he told ITV journalist Robert Peston, arguing that these properties should be used to house the victims of the fire. When pressed for detail he added, "Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there's a lot of things you can do." This is a telling statement — even leaving aside the use of the word "occupy", which seems to wink at the idea of breaking into other people's homes. Since Mr Corbyn's remarks are often uncharitably interpreted by the British press, let us assume that was not his goal. Still, there is little ambiguity in the word "requisition". This reflects a consistent theme in Mr Corbyn's thinking: that the British public can best be served by forcing others — including international corporations and foreign property investors — to bear most of the cost. It's not hard to see why this seems appealing. It taps into the same ideals exploited by Donald Trump and the Leave campaign: that there's money being left on the table, that foreigners are rigging the game against us. Time to give the "Gnomes of Zurich" a poke in the eye. Such xenophobia-tinged ideas have taken nations to very dark places in the past, but today it is more likely that they will simply lead to inept policies and bad outcomes. Seizing foreign-owned property in London — even proposing seizure — will reduce the tax base and do yet more harm to the reputation of the UK as a grown-up country." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 24 Jun 17 - 04:39 AM Your namesake Lewis Carroll, when he was writing, was high as a kite on magic mushrooms, and opium As a change of topic, there is no evidence at all for that, as far as I am aware, though low level drug taken was common in that period. What is certainly true is people tend to seek an explanation for his imagination and in the flower-power era quite a few books were written as 'evidence' he was taking drugs. However, the documented evidence shows the Alice books evolving over quite a long time, beginning with a tale told while boating with the Liddell family, a pastime I do not recommend while high. Lewis Carroll wrote a large body of work. One I recommend is a series of formal logic puzzles where the matters being reasoned about are every bit as imaginative as Alice, but need crystal sharp reasoning - not easily written while drugged out of your mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 24 Jun 17 - 05:27 AM DMcG difficult to prove or disprove. However taking drugs was widespread at that time with little regulation.Also the scenes portrayed suggest drug use,e.g. the shisha smoking caterpillar http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/carroll/aiwl5.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 24 Jun 17 - 05:37 AM You will see I said in my post that low level drug taking was common. For that very reason a smoking caterpillar is no evidence that Lewis Carroll wrote under the influence of drugs. I have not read that much about it, to be honest, but to the best of my knowledge no-one made a link between Carroll and drugs until the 60s, which is a great exemplar of confusing correlation and causation: "I see weird stuff when high; Carroll wrote weird stuff; he must have been on drugs". That is one of the invalid forms of logic known since the Greeks and as a teacher of logic he would have given it short shrift. As you say, it is difficult to prove one way or the other. But the circumstantial evidence like that book of logic (have you read it yet?) shows he is at least capable of writing highly imaginative stuff while not high. However, after all that, you did not start with "it is difficult to prove one way or the other". You started with the assertion he was on drugs. That is what I am picking you up in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Jun 17 - 05:47 AM 4000 residents in London have been removed from their homes due to safety concerns highlighted by the fire Hotpoint have issued a warning on one of their fridges one of which was beleived to have been the initial cause of it "strange they largely agree with me" A less arrogant person would say you agree with them - but maybe you inspired their article - stranger things have happened at sea! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 24 Jun 17 - 06:05 AM My belief is that he was in drugs. I cannot prove it. Likewise you cannot disprove it. I presented a kind of evidence and carefully pointed out it was ambiguous. You pay your money and take your choice. Another explanation proposed is the result of migraine auras. Who knows?It all happened a long time ago. https://www.livescience.com/51444-alice-in-wonderland-syndrome-acid-flashback.html Anyway I claim poetic license as I was using the analogy to make a point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 24 Jun 17 - 06:47 AM I agree neither of us can know for certain. That is precisely why it is a good idea not to make statements as if you do. Even the site you referenced which says that some people were addicts, like Wilkie Collins, but for Carroll they are careful to say "possible", "some say" and other phrases to be cautious As you say, there are lots of possible explanations. I read on that site that drugs a possible explaination for Alive changing in size, the long neck and so forth. But it is equally possible that had been to a hall of distorting mirrors at a fair, and actually seen Alice Liddell with a long neck. A possibility. Not a fact. So it is wiser to avoid suggesribg things as fact. Poetic licence won't do. Anyway, no need for me to take this further. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 24 Jun 17 - 09:54 AM "I see weird stuff when high; Carroll wrote weird stuff; he must have been on drugs". And Socrates is a fish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 24 Jun 17 - 10:03 AM Iains seems to be an entirely different person today...??? is "Iains" one of those team names.. the right's eqivalent of the old "musket" band of brothers...??? or does Iains just have multiple personality disorder....???? Weird... and all this talk of drugs.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Bonzo3legs Date: 24 Jun 17 - 11:01 AM Just eaten some excellent coronation chicken from Sainsbury's, which was quite high on the shelves!! There are apparently some freely available plants in Tasmania, parts of which make you high! The Abos apparently eat them when on "walk-about"! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Stilly River Sage Date: 24 Jun 17 - 11:11 AM Where are all of the displaced surviving residents now? And those from other poorly-clad buildings determined to be fire hazards who have been removed from their own buildings since the fire? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Jun 17 - 11:22 AM "Where are all of the displaced surviving residents now?" Some of those from the fire have been housed in empty luxury accommodation, much to the disgust of some of the wealthier residents, other are scattered all over the place, some in halls, others staying with residents. Those moved last night (8pm) slept on the floor in local halls and some have temporarily put into hotels Some of those put into hotels last week have told that they are being moved around at the whim of the owners. There are hundreds of properties with suspect cladding to be examined yet Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 24 Jun 17 - 11:43 AM The tories beter hurry up building cheap drab 'New Towns' to ship all those undesirables out of highly valuable redevelopable city tower block sites... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 25 Jun 17 - 02:50 AM What pfr? No more calls from the "Great Leader" to "Occupy", "Requisition", "Compulsory Purchase" vacant properties legally owned by others as a "solution" to the "emergency". As a general question to anybody still reading this. How many of you have had the fire prevention officer from your local fire brigade to carry out a fire safety check of your home? I would suspect very few of you. How do you know whether or not you are living in a dangerous death trap? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:12 AM I have and haven't, Terebus. My brother-in-law was a senior fire officer for years, in the general community, and then moved to have specific responsibility for some of the chemical works in the north east (yes, it is a few years back now) The consequence is he can barely walk into any building without continually assessing it against both the legal regulations and the best practice. I can assure you I have received all sorts of commentary, including breaches of fire regulations in various rentals I have had. One down, half a dozen regulars to go.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jon Freeman Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:18 AM As a general question to anybody still reading this. How many of you have had the fire prevention officer from your local fire brigade to carry out a fire safety check of your home? I would suspect very few of you. How do you know whether or not you are living in a dangerous death trap? Perhaps I'm reading things wrongly but that question does seem to be a bit of a deflection from what I'd consider the council's (or other landlord's) duty. However, to answer your question. We've not had ours checked by the fire service. We do try to take a couple of small precautions, eg. there is a (battery) smoke detector in every room except the kitchen, there is a fire blanket in the kitchen and a fire extinguisher in the living room which has a wood burner. There are no other properties that would be at risk from a fire here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:31 AM Yes, it does sound a bit of a deflection, Jon, and. landlords do have specific fire responsibilities. But having said that, and leaving all the general antagonism aside, as a straight question without any spin, Terebus' question is a good one. Whoever says it, an occasional reminder to check such things is a good idea. Every office and workplace has to have all their moveable electrical stuff PAT tested. Does anyone do that at home? I certainly haven't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Teribus Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:35 AM " a bit of a deflection from what I'd consider the council's (or other landlord's) duty." Sorry Jon, no deflection, bit, or otherwise. YOU are responsible for your own safety at all times. Having said that life is not "risk free" risk has to be assessed and managed. In the case of the question I asked, you are responsible for getting the check done and putting things to right if you own the property, if you are renting the property YOU are responsible for notifying your landlord in order that he/she/they put things right. In the latter case if nothing is done you get the fire prevention officer who carried out the check to report the matter, you also withhold rent and report the matter to whoever is insuring the building. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jon Freeman Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:36 AM Actually my father's laptop and possibly a usb charger (I'd need to check) were PAT tested recently but that's only because he was in hospital for a while. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Steve Shaw Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:44 AM Ever lived in a tower block with hundreds of other families, Teribus? I have. And the last thing on my mind was the state of someone's fridge freezer several floors below or whether I should have been taking a exam to qualify me to carry out a structural survey of the building. Try not to be such an arse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 25 Jun 17 - 03:58 AM "What pfr? No more calls from the "Great Leader" to "Occupy", "Requisition", "Compulsory Purchase" vacant properties legally owned by others as a "solution" to the "emergency"." ...wtf.. you still going on about this...??? .. jezza was at glasto today, and all over the telly, solidifying the politicization of a mass new generation of young anti tory voters... Corbyn has really got all you bitter old men worried.. really he has.. hasn't he.. whether you admit it to yourselves or not... 😎 definitely something worth celebrating... ..anyway, it's just gone 9.00am.. i'd better go to bed and get some kip... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: DMcG Date: 25 Jun 17 - 04:11 AM Corbyn has really got all you bitter old men worried.. really he has.. hasn't he.. whether you admit it to yourselves or not... 😎 I have to say I found today's Sunday Express front page today a prime example of that (via reviews of the papers - I didn't buy it£ The full page was occupied with huge text that Corbyn was not at Armed Forces Day. "Corbyn snubs forces heroes". No one says the armed forces are unimportant or don't deserve attention. But that approach demonstrates a profound dislocation between the papers view of their readers and the rest of the U.K. Presenting Jeremy Corbyn as either God or Satan is silly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 25 Jun 17 - 04:13 AM Teribus. You raise an interesting question about risk assessment, both in the home and elsewhere. By extension this would also include "the duty of care" This extends right the way through from the individual flat dwellers through to those that: 1) have charge of the building 2) Those that proposed to clad the building 3)Those that had charge of specifications the suitability of the cladding material 3) those who signed it off(and what qualifications they had to legitimately sign it off 4)the method statement of the contractors both supplying and installing the materials. 5)The inspection regime of the council's building control officers. 6)The inpsection regime of the fire officers for the building From the little we know so far it would seem that a coach and horses could be driven through the existing legislation and inspection regime concerning this sad affair. Perhaps building control should be passed to central government and be a branch of the Health and Safety executive.( I believe after the Piper Alpha disaster the HSE took over certain powers from the the Dept of Energy-so the proposal is not without precedent) I would think that as a result of the coming public enquiry the points above(plus numerous others) will be encapsulated in a comprehensive set of measures to attempt to prevent a repetition of this catastrophe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 25 Jun 17 - 10:48 AM I see I must have hit the spot with the young Iains theory to get him so wound up :-) Didn't spur him on to find anything original though. Still copying the MO of his role model Teribus and not very well at that. Talking of Teribus. You still posting on here after telling everyone who is not directly involved to STFU? Bit strange that isn't it? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 25 Jun 17 - 11:03 AM Well, Boo, I treat your maunderings for what they're worth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: punkfolkrocker Date: 25 Jun 17 - 11:10 AM Iains - thanks.. that's a genuinely helpful contribution to this debate. More constructive posts like that would be far better and help ease off animosity... At root should be a discussion about provision of good quality safe affordable social housing and the attitudes and ideology of local councils towards such. This terrible fire disaster spotlights much deeper seated longer term problems.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Dave the Gnome Date: 25 Jun 17 - 12:55 PM Crazy Marxists want to give homes to Grenfell survivors – thank God we live in a fair capitalist society :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 25 Jun 17 - 05:18 PM Punkfolkrocker. The link below gives a potted history of safety regulation and inspection regimes from their inception to the modern development of risk assessment, environmental impact statements, health and safety, etc. http://www.historyofosh.org.uk/brief/index.html From a superficial study of what is available today(encapsulated above)I would hazard to guess that the necessary regulatory regimes exist, but perhaps a building in multiple occupancy should be regulated with the same severity as a factory. (or maybe it is but I doubt it) Somehow it appears the use of this cladding "fell through the cracks"of the regulatory regime. Sadly safety legislation has a history of advancing on the back of disasters 1)The 1952 great smog of London reputedly killed 12000people and led to the clean air acts. 2)The Abervan Tip Disaster. Resulting in the deaths of144 including 116 children. The The mines and Quarries (tips)Act 1968 resulted from the public enquiry into the disaster To the distaste of many the Labour government took 10% of the donated disaster fund to help clear the remaining tips. Many others could be quoted, but my premise is that often the risk is not recognised or acted upon until disaster strikes. The evolution of risk assessments, method statements, etc are an attempt to quantify and manage risk and even guide pre-emptive legislation, but risk can only be minimised when it is recognised. Having said this, the fact remains that a fire of this magnitude should not have occurred in a high rise building in multiple occupancy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Greg F. Date: 25 Jun 17 - 05:56 PM Another question arises: has the U.S. manufacturer of the cladding panels been mis-representing the flammability/fire rating of their product? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Iains Date: 25 Jun 17 - 06:26 PM Greg Cannot vouch for the accuracy but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 26 Jun 17 - 03:15 AM "has the U.S. manufacturer of the cladding panels " If the authorities are allowed to concentrate on the building materials, nothing will change The problems don't just lie with safety here, but with the philosophy of high-rise ghettoising the poor in order to leave as much land as possible free for investment. High rise development of the type designed in Britain has created social rat-traps - I can't speak for other countries, but from what I've seen elsewhere parts of Europe seem to have the same problems Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Senoufou Date: 26 Jun 17 - 03:42 AM Jim, I know Paris well, and my Ivorian brother-in-law lives in a slum tower block out in the 'banlieues' (St Denis), with numerous other immigrants and poor folk. They are a hell-hole, and there must be dozens of these buildings on the outskirts of all the major cities in Europe, not to mention around the world. The amazing Stade de France in St Denis was built in 1995, at a cost of millions, while the unwanted and neglected immigrants and poor people continue to live crammed together in these festering abominations in the locality. It worries me that (God forbid) there may be other terrible fires one day due to the sub-standard cladding and non-existent fire precautions. I imagine it's only a matter of time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Labour wants to confiscate property From: Jim Carroll Date: 26 Jun 17 - 06:40 AM The last time I saw Paris (as the beautiful song says) was the day the students were going back after the 1968 uprising - I have no doubt your descriptions are accurate - such dwellings can be found all over Europe We've just learned that the safety problem includes Ireland where there have been serious fires involving faulty cladding in Limerick and Kildare, which were not of a headline-grabbing size to be followed up If the suppliers were international the it's an international problem Jim Carroll |
