It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

this seems so wrong !

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
I'm not having a rant as such, but it just seems so goddam wrong in a way for people to own more than one home ---

To me it's kinda immoral, when you see souls homeless and living on the streets with no roof over their heads.
I used to work with the homeless, so have some experience and empathy with the difficulties facing them.

On the flipside, you see greedy,money-obsessed people owning multiple houses and in the process destroying communities and the countryside with their "must have" holiday homes

For goodness sake, they only live in them for possibly a couple of weeks a year !!
And in the process, by buying up these properties, they have inflated prices so local people just can't afford to buy in their home towns.
Where is the justice in all this ????

If this is capitalism, then it sucks big time.

A home is a roof over your head---you only need ONE house to achieve this !!

certainly if I was homeless, I would for sure squat in any of those empty for 50 weeks a year holiday second or third homes, with no feelings of remorse whatsoever.

anyway, this is how I feel on this issue-----
I'm not ranting, just expressin my opinion.

Peace




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 


I know what you are saying and yes most who own 2 or more houses only occupy 1 for most part..... we have all seen homeless people walking the streets but i often wonder why some of them if not most of them don't squat or use a homeless persons unit for the night, if i was on the streets i'd try and find a squat or i'd commit a crime so i would at least be inside getting all the benefits which come with that such as meals, bed, TV etc etc........ not to mention medical care when needed..... and about the property prices? It is stupid people buying for the asked price which has knocked everything up and now they are ging up again after there little fall......... most people can't afford these prices...... Nurses work very hard yet only earn a fifth of what a footballer earns a week (an example).

BTW I think this should be in the rant forum

[edit on 11-8-2009 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 

Thanks for your reply

Unfortunately accomodation is very limited for the single homeless, unless they meet a certain criteria.
Councils are obliged to house or put in hostel accomodation, people with kids, minors, mentally or physically vulnerable souls. But for the rest, its the streets and hope for the best.
In Harrogate, we only have one shelter for them---when it's full that's it !

And yet, when I look around, there are just soooo many empty houses.

I understand councils now have powers to take over occupancy of empty homes after 6 mths------a move in the right direction.
But I'm sure 2nd homeowners will get round this somehow !!

And if all the 2nd properties came onto the market, prices would plummet.
Supply n demand and all that.
First time buyers could actually afford to buy comfortably.

I did'nt put this in rant, cos I'm not really ranting. But I feel very anti--capitalist at the mo and disillusioned.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 


Disillusionment? Been there many times....... this is why i like the Matrix


It seems that this Government & Councils are only interested in Cash.... just look at all the cash being spent on the Olympics!! There's a lot happening in the World yet cash comes first to them..... for me i think there are already way too many buildings in the World..... no need to build anymore........



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 

Oh I agree entirely with you--
There are more than enough buildings around, and that is why it's tragic that people are homeless, whilst others are in the enviable position of being able to leave a property vacant ---it's just all wrong


Yeah, cash is the driving force behind it all. Pure greed.
The sooner people realise that capitalism will self destruct, the better.

And re: the MATRIX
Was that red pill a mistake ?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 


I live in a region in which more the 50% of the houses are holidays ones: in some towns, even 70+ %;
in Summer, when their owners come, everything collapses: water pipes, power etc. and you have to queue whenever you need to do anything. In winter, the towns look like ghost towns. But the worst side effect is that since it's some touristic area, the more they build, the less the real tourists are willing to come: they wanna come in order to se our wonderful sea and our nice lascapes, not a bunch of concrete.
Another side-effect is that the owners are used to buy everything they need in the town where they usually live, so they are basically of no economic benefit for the local communities, they create only issue after issue, and often they don't even pay taxes to the local administrations.
But of course the saddest facet is the one that you have pointed out in the OP: i can't say whether it's immoral or not, but of course there's something crazy in buying (or, worse, building) an house in order to use it two/three weeks a year while the only roof that many people have over their heads is the sky. I wish that there weren't homeless, and I also wish that there weren't second houses: too sad that they both do exist.

P.S.: here actually they often DO squat in them, it's still some unusual event, but it happens



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 

Hi internos--thanks for your reply.
Makes you want to say " Come The Revolution "


I remember reading somewhere that holiday 2nd homes were being destroyed in parts of Wales, cos the locals were so fed up with it all.

Must be a nightmare on the coast, and also in places like the Lake District.
I know these holiday homes have a real detrimental impact on things like local schools and even fire services.

Said I was'nt goin to rant but here it comes------



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 



If this is capitalism, then it sucks big time.


It IS Capitalism, which is destined to fail in my opinion, we are seeing the death throws now IMHO.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Capitalism HAS to fail---its unsustainable.
Why is GDP expected to grow each yr -----we don't need more "stuff" !!
The planet can't sustain it all any more.

I'm not a communist, but building all these houses , many on flood plains and stuff, when there's really no need, is madness imo !!!
One house is the answer---not 2, 3 or whatever.




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 


A new monetary system and paradigm is the answer, something that provides the necessities of life (home, food, water, schooling, etc) for FREE TO ALL. Then, anything else that is not nessicary (ie; eating out, movies, alcohol, clubs, etc) would have to be earned. I know it sounds impossible but if certain technologies were released (which I am sure the government has) we would be able to easily do this on a GLOBAL SCALE. Now lets assume there is no ZPE technology being hidden by the government, well then IMO we should still try to modify the current system where it is balanced as far as needs go, we can work on the technology to expand it. But I just do not see any incentive system for livening needs EVER being successful in the long run, due to the very things you have already mentioned.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Ok, i need to know what IMO stands for



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 


In My Opinion.......IMHO means in my humble opinion.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by uk today
 


A new monetary system and paradigm is the answer, something that provides the necessities of life (home, food, water, schooling, etc) for FREE TO ALL. Then, anything else that is not nessicary (ie; eating out, movies, alcohol, clubs, etc) would have to be earned. I know it sounds impossible but if certain technologies were released (which I am sure the government has) we would be able to easily do this on a GLOBAL SCALE. Now lets assume there is no ZPE technology being hidden by the government, well then IMO we should still try to modify the current system where it is balanced as far as needs go, we can work on the technology to expand it. But I just do not see any incentive system for livening needs EVER being successful in the long run, due to the very things you have already mentioned.


Your ideas make perfect sense, but I think we both know sense is not something governments excel at !!!
I suppose we can dream




top topics



 
2

log in

join