Kidorry Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Council houses with secure tenancies should be available to all, currently there are not enough, we should build more. LOTS MORE! Yes but if you did they would only get bought and then reduce the list further.Stop the council house sales I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Prior to taking up his position as leader of the country the last great Labour leader Harry Perkins lived on The Kelvin ,as I recall this was looked on as a virtue . As in Chris Mulins' mind and Ray Macnally-were it only true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 As he's effectively stopping a low income family benefiting from a very scarce resource, I'd say he needs to his big bags of money to an estate agent and buy a house. I agree. Bob Crow earns in excess of £150,000 per annum (when you take into account his expense account) and can well afford to rent in the private sector, thereby freeing up a council property for another family. The vast majority on here are quick to jump on the 'make the rich pay' but don't want to hear anything against a 'RICH' Union leader. One of their own perhaps ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 As in Chris Mulins' mind and Ray Macnally-were it only true! He didn't last very long though did he.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Looking through the list of comments on the Whale web page I see it contains the usual assortment of the ignorant, the worst is some woman called Scragg. She associates him with the Labour party and calls him a hypocrite. She then goes on to say he should have bought it. It's clear that both buying it and not doing so are ample excuse for people to wail hypocrite depending on their version of what should be done with council houses as opposed to a universally accepted principle. The theoretical framework of the arguments against union leaders being paid well are based on ignorance and a tabloidesque understanding of union ethics. All assume union leaders are all dyed in the wool socialists, they aren't, and that they preach hair shirts and a humble lifestyles. On the contrary their broad principles may be socialist, whatever that means, its the vaguest political term of all. However in the real world they aim for their members to have a bigger slice of the capitalist pie and they are no exception. They are not running public sector organisations or charities, they are running businesses. They are in effect private sector businessmen, people don't seem to grasp this. Secondly there is much snobbery, how dare plebs run successful money spinning organisations and be paid well? Well their pay is voted on annually at conference and most union members would agree that someone in a high responsibility, high pressure post that isn't simply 9-5 should be paid well, as in the real world. So in effect some expect and want union leaders to live in a communist fantasy land where they prech gruel eating and live in humble little houses. If there was anger from the members and a ruling that leaders should be paid the same as the average member then they'd have a point but there isn't such a groundswell. I'd expect my union leader to have pay and lifestyle that reflects his/her hard work and initiative and getting elected to the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediumfast Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 He didn't last very long though did he.. Sadly not,probably as long as Allende! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediumfast Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Looking through the list of comments on the Whale web page I see it contains the usual assortment of the ignorant, the worst is some woman called Scragg. She associates him with the Labour party and calls him a hypocrite. She then goes on to say he should have bought it. It's clear that both buying it and not doing so are ample excuse for people to wail hypocrite depending on their version of what should be done with council houses as opposed to a universally accepted principle. The theoretical framework of the arguments against union leaders being paid well are based on ignorance and a tabloidesque understanding of union ethics. All assume union leaders are all dyed in the wool socialists, they aren't, and that they preach hair shirts and a humble lifestyles. On the contrary their broad principles may be socialist, whatever that means, its the vaguest political term of all. However in the real world they aim for their members to have a bigger slice of the capitalist pie and they are no exception. They are not running public sector organisations or charities, they are running businesses. They are in effect private sector businessmen, people don't seem to grasp this. Secondly there is much snobbery, how dare plebs run successful money spinning organisations and be paid well? Well their pay is voted on annually at conference and most union members would agree that someone in a high responsibility, high pressure post that isn't simply 9-5 should be paid well, as in the real world. So in effect some expect and want union leaders to live in a communist fantasy land where they prech gruel eating and live in humble little houses. If there was anger from the members and a ruling that leaders should be paid the same as the average member then they'd have a point but there isn't such a groundswell. I'd expect my union leader to have pay and lifestyle that reflects his/her hard work and initiative and getting elected to the top. When it comes to Trade Unions some people are very ignorant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 He didn't last very long though did he.. I saw Chris recently at a book signing,and he looked as fit as a violin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Prior to taking up his position as leader of the country the last great Labour leader Harry Perkins lived on The Kelvin ,as I recall this was looked on as a virtue . I looked at the footage and he was in the Hyde Park flats with a view of the Town Hall.At the time of screening the Falklands factor had not kicked in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Bob Crow earns a six figure salary and still lives in his council house, his response here http://www.lbc.co.uk/should-bob-crow-have-a-council-house-59141 So should well off people like Bob Crow be entitled to a council house? Or should they be exclusively for low earners, like Hammersmith & Fulham Council with their 40,000 a household threshold. http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/hammersmith-and-fulham-confirms-allocation-plans/6524226.article If so then how is this going to be enforceable when households income like ours fluctuate due to the nature of the work we do? No. Angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.