Obelix Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 So just tell me what you're hammering on about, so even thickos like me can understand. Even if you perceive me to be a lefty, what of it? Hang on - you are perfectly happy to roundly abuse and stereotype anyone whom you consider to be a Tory, yet you complain immediatly when someone considers you a lefty? Pot kettle black I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 you have said previously that someone single living in a 3 bedroomed house should not have it ? that to me says you would take it off them I think you are mixing up two entirely separate issues. Unemployed family in council house, kids move out, family no longer needs a big house so they should be moved to a smaller house anywhere the council deem suitable. Unemployed family in council house, kids want their own free council house, they shouldn’t get one because there is enough room in house they already live in. Unemployed family in council house, parents kick kids out and make them homeless, family no longer needs big house so should be moved anywhere the council deem suitable.; kids should be housed anywhere the council deem suitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I think you are mixing up two entirely separate issues. Unemployed family in council house, kids move out, family no longer needs a big house so they should be moved to a smaller house anywhere the council deem suitable. Unemployed family in council house, kids want their own free council house, they shouldn’t get one because there is enough room in house they already live in. Unemployed family in council house, parents kick kids out and make them homeless, family no longer needs big house so should be moved anywhere the council deem suitable.; kids should be housed anywhere the council deem suitable. im not mixing anything up you would take houses off people because in your eyes they dont need them . we should be lucky that your idea of changing the world only goes a far as being a keyboard warrior :hihi: and your ideals stay in your head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 im not mixing anything up you would take houses off people because in your eyes they dont need them . we should be lucky that your idea of changing the world only goes a far as being a keyboard warrior :hihi: and your ideals stay in your head From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs? Sounds like a fair way to distribute a social resource in short supply to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs? Sounds like a fair way to distribute a social resource in short supply to me.... the world dosent work like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 im not mixing anything up you would take houses off people because in your eyes they dont need them . we should be lucky that your idea of changing the world only goes a far as being a keyboard warrior :hihi: and your ideals stay in your head No I wouldn't take a house off anyone, if it was their house, in the examples I used the house belonged to the state so would be re let to someone with a greater need and the greatest need doesn’t necessarily mean the poorest, it might mean making affordable housing available to people that want to work, and moving people that don’t wont to work to areas where there isn’t any work available. Housing workers near their work and shirkers anywhere that is left after the workers have been housed makes much more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 No I wouldn't take a house off anyone, if it was their house, in the examples I used the house belonged to the state so would be re let to someone with a greater need and the greatest need doesn’t necessarily mean the poorest, it might mean making affordable housing available to people that want to work, and moving people that don’t wont to work to areas where there isn’t any work available. Housing workers near their work and shirkers anywhere that is left after the workers have been housed makes much more sense. im glad your just spouting off on here and not in a position to do anything for real :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 the world dosent work like that How do you think we should manage (or rather pay for) this scarce social housing ? Simple answer is tax the rich. It didn't happen under labour and it won't happen under the Tories. That means you and me paying for it. I want value for money. If you want the unemployed to live in nice leafy suburbs, set up a collection and you pay for them. I'd rather the council raise more money to pay for more housing or a million other things like schools and care homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 How do you think we should manage (or rather pay for) this scarce social housing ? Simple answer is tax the rich. It didn't happen under labour and it won't happen under the Tories. That means you and me paying for it. I want value for money. If you want the unemployed to live in nice leafy suburbs, set up a collection and you pay for them. I'd rather the council raise more money to pay for more housing or a million other things like schools and care homes. you provided the answer yourself but dismissed it just as quick . i too want value for money but it dosent happen the way i want it too. like i said before the world dosent work that way:loopy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 im glad your just spouting off on here and not in a position to do anything for real :hihi: Well since this is the way society is now going you're a little out of date. Benefits are being capped and councils are starting the process of shifting people out. Unless the coalition U turn on this before 2015 then it will be well underway by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.