Tom Bailey Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 How come everyone else understands what was meant but you don't? I understand what the word Ghettoised means it seems that you, others and Rupert don't or have we invented a new meaning of the word Ghetto. I bought my home and certainly don't live in a ghetto. So why hasn't Rupert_Baehr answered what his definition of Ghetto is. Be intersting to see which bussybody jumps in next to answer for dear old Rupert_Baehr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 He would have accepted it if it had been Labour’s idea, unfortunately the only idea they had about housing was to demolish more than they built and to create a property bubble in order to give people the means to use their houses has cash machines. Can't Mecky answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 I understand what the word Ghettoised means it seems that you, others and Rupert don't or have we invented a new meaning of the word Ghetto. I bought my home and certainly don't live in a ghetto. So why hasn't Rupert_Baehr answered what his definition of Ghetto is. Be intersting to see which bussybody jumps in next to answer for dear old Rupert_Baehr. It's an open forum not your own private message room..if you don't want other people to say anything then I suggest you don't post anything... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 He would have accepted it if it had been Labour’s idea, unfortunately the only idea they had about housing was to demolish more than they built and to create a property bubble in order to give people the means to use their houses has cash machines. Ah, yes pathfinder. Social engineering at its finest and in far bigger numbers too. It wouldn't surprise me if a large chunk of the 700k properties he mentioned were pathfinder ones. But, in all honesty that's another, worthy IMHO, thread. I feel making the most of state owned housing stock is a good thing. He doesn't. It doesn't make mecky a bad person, just wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Can't Mecky answer? I wouldn't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Does the state own 700,000 vacant properties ? Are they habitable ? Are they about to razed to the ground for a bypass or shopping centre ? Council houses are assets. Why can you not accept that selling those assets to build more is, if done correctly, a good thing ?? Here's the story, it was the first link I clicked and it wasn't hard to find, but I think you're just trying to grind out a point without doing any research because you don't want to believe it. It doesn't give a breakdown of which you want but they do exist, maybe one of the other links does. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/penalties-should-be-increased-after-research-shows-700000-properties-in-england-are-left-unoccupied-8073402.html Which point do you want to try and grind out next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Here's the story, it was the first link I clicked and it wasn't hard to find, but I think you're just trying to grind out a point without doing any research because you don't want to believe it. It doesn't give a breakdown of which you want but they do exist, maybe one of the other links does. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/penalties-should-be-increased-after-research-shows-700000-properties-in-england-are-left-unoccupied-8073402.html Which point do you want to try and grind out next? Ok, let's review. There are 700k vacant properties in the uk. I get that. A union leader wants to tax the owners. Shocker. It still doesn't comment on the condition of them. How does that affect the issue at hand, the selling of council properties to build more council properties ? Are you suggesting buying some of these 700k for social housing, and if so with what ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 22, 2012 Share Posted August 22, 2012 Here's the story, it was the first link I clicked and it wasn't hard to find, but I think you're just trying to grind out a point without doing any research because you don't want to believe it. It doesn't give a breakdown of which you want but they do exist, maybe one of the other links does. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/penalties-should-be-increased-after-research-shows-700000-properties-in-england-are-left-unoccupied-8073402.html Which point do you want to try and grind out next? From your link The population in all regions has grown between 2001 and 2011, and house prices have increased in nearly all areas. "Private rents are up. There are also many families on waiting lists for social housing. "Politicians and the public authorities need to look again at the level of tax levied on properties that are empty. 1 November 2011 Councils to be given power to tax empty and second homes Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles is seeking views on plans to give town halls the ability to remove council tax relief on empty and second homes. At least this government is doing something about it unlike the last one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 No you are wrong for exactly the reason I mentioned in post 33, you just refuse point blank to admit it ... and considering most of your posts on these forums, it just reinforces what I say. There are something like 700,000 vacant properties in the UK, why remove council tenants from more affluent areas? What have empty private properties go to do with selling off valuable social housing in order to build more cost effective social housing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Well maybe if you looked after your posts and let Rupert_Baehrlook after his we'd know what he meant instead of you minding his bussiness and not your own, if he made the post surely you don't need to answeer for him. I'd still like to know why he considers that I live in a Ghetto. It's an open discussion, I'm free to explain what I think he meant to someone who's trying desperately to take offence. If you choose not to accept that explanation then I suppose we'll just have to carry on won't we, but please stop banging on about it in that case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.