And for the poster who was saying about health problems etc, two of the other residents are elderly, and have no other place they can afford, I myself had to move here 18 months ago as I could no longer afford to live in my previous house due to a long term health condition that has left me unable to work (am on the mend now though and as soon as I can, I intend to get the heck out of here) But it is precisely the people who have health issues etc that are often forced to live amongst some of these people, who, by choice, live this way and for those of us without a choice, we just have to put up with it.

So yes, I agree, let them all live together and annoy the heck out of each other, where there are no decent people to clean up their mess and see how long they last.

You want to know where America is going to put the people . look at GE where the tons of propellant was recently found stored outside and look at all the railcars stored. There has to be thousands rows of buildings and railcars all out of sight.

Just north of DOYLINE, La

Seems a rather stupid premise to keep all your rotten eggs in one basket. You just know for the Police these places will become no go areas. IMHO of course.

Originally posted by andy06shake
Seems a rather stupid premise to keep all your rotten eggs in one basket. You just know for the Police these places will become no go areas. IMHO of course.

Yes, but then they can only annoy each other, rather than decent law abiding people and then maybe when they are on the receiving end of their own behaviour, they may start to learn that what they do is unacceptable!

Just imagining the priceless look on the face of a policeman who is called out to ask one set of antisocial neighbours to keep the noise down, because the other antisocial neighbours can't get to sleep! Or when they start phoning the local council to come and lift the rubbish that everyone, including themselves, have left everywhere and the place is starting to smell really bad and is infested with rats! Lol!

Excellent idea.

The Dutch are always avant garde; be it legalising recreational drug use, curtailing the potentially dangerous Muslim influx, or this.

This creates a precedent. Enough said.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD

Originally posted by earthalien50
How quickly these Dutch conservatives forget about having to eat tulips to survive during WWII occupation and beng treated like cattle. Now they are creating their own ghettos to satisfy their desire to remove antisocial behavior from their utopian society.

What a messed up world when a liberal country like Netherlands makes antisocial behavior a crime! Shame on you!

Do you really blame them , thousands of really nasty idiot drug addicts from all over the Europe have gravitated to that place because they can not get on with the normal people in their own countries and they think they will be accepted in Amsterdam. Now the poor people in Amsterdam have to put up with their anti social behavior.

Im not talking about the average pot smoking hippies but the hard drug taking thieves.

edit on 3-12-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

Sorry but you're referring to people who break the law,

apparently these people being moved are not law-breakers.


You put negative people around more negativity, the problems just become more severe. how about developing solutions to societys problems rather than just trying to hide the failures?

It's all that waccy baccy mate....
How did they come to those conclusions, it's something peeps (like me) would think about on a half baked night.
Yea...by em all caravans and send em camping mate.

If I was to be serious about the dutch solution, then I'd say it's going to bite them in the ass one day.
These people haven't been to places like Naples, obviously.
Yep, just group up all the anti-socials, because that's going to solve the problem

The people who run the show studied, but it doesn't look that way does it sometimes.
My observation anyways.

The word " ghetto " comes to mind.
and it was a total accident that it will burn down
killing the trap't scum!

it would not be long be for the police could not enter it at all.
look at mexico! run by gangs.
they will regret this.

Originally posted by ParaSpy2012
It's all that waccy baccy mate....
How did they come to those conclusions, it's something peeps (like me) would think about on a half baked night.
Yea...by em all caravans and send em camping mate.

If I was to be serious about the dutch solution, then I'd say it's going to bite them in the ass one day.
These people haven't been to places like Naples, obviously.
Yep, just group up all the anti-socials, because that's going to solve the problem

The people who run the show studied, but it doesn't look that way does it sometimes.
My observation anyways.

So how do you suggest the problem is solved? What should I do about all of the problems I encounter on a daily basis? I phone the police...not much they can do. I phone the council...not much they can do!

So come on, what do you suggest (and moving is not an option, I can't afford to)

Hmmm...no responses from the "poor souls at the fringes of society who just need our help" brigade..no practical solutions or suggestions for those of us who have to live among the antisocial, just pointless soundbites

Welcome to "Campsterdamn"....a bad precedent for the folks at FEMA to consider.

This happens 'naturally' to an extent anyway. It doesn't take much to rip the heart of an area. A large local firm goes under, unemployment goes up. Money disappears. The economic state of the area goes down, other people in similar circumstances might be be drawn to the place because of lower property values, taxes and so on. This, in turn, reinforces the economic state of the area as those with money &c. become fewer in number and, eventually will want to move out what has, over time, become, a 'bad' area.

Also, this works the other way with 'gentrification' which is, arguably, just as big a problem. Urban 'regeneration' rarely works for the benefits of existing residents. A local area is allowed or left to run down by business, local government, national government &c, the situation above happens. Eventually, someone decides something needs to be done, and money is pumped into the area with new homes, businesses and possibly associated jobs. However, the new homes will inevitably be out of reach of the people in the area, the new business will often be relocations rather than genuinely new (drawn to low business rates) and will bring the bulk of their labour force with them. As the 'state' of the area increases, there's less and less for the existing local community and more for 'outsiders', which pulls in more and more outsiders until, eventually, the whole situation is reversed and the long-standing residents no longer fit the economic picture.

This may result in the position that London, and other areas of England is facing. The people who no longer fit the picture are being forced away and out of the area because are now needing financial help to stay in areas that they might have lived in all their lives. Now the government can't afford this help, allegedly, due to the removal or reduction of that financial help (benefits, including benefits for working people) local councils are looking to forcibly move people hundreds of miles away.

I'm not sure what the answer to what's happening in the Netherlands, but I'm not convinced this is a real answer. It's like when people tidy the house but don't really - they just move stuff from one place to another, hiding stuff as they go. Eventually, the stuff brushed under the carpet will be that big, society will start to trip over it and then it will be too late to do anything about it.

Hey, who cares though? As long as we can't see it for now and it's other people's problems, right?