England Sleepwalking Into Homelessness Crisis

originally posted by: LABTECH767


The idea is to reinstate the Class system to provide cheap service level workers and in Tory lingo to KILL off or otherwise dispose of the EXCESS POPULATION, by that I mean those the Tory's see as not useful to there world and national ideological stance.

One of Mr's T's stated aims in the 80's was the reinstatement of the class system (upstairs masters and downstairs SERVANTS).

Really?? Margaret Thatcher's father was only a corner shop grocer.

She was responsible for many working class people to OWN their own

homes for the first time. Something they would never been previously have

been able to do.

They are also intent on turning our nation into a rich mans paradise by removing as much Taxation as possible for the elite so that it become's for them a defacto tax haven.

I'm sure anyone who has the money can find somewhere more like

paradise than the UK? LOL!!

a reply to: eletheia
she was also responsible for the rise in private landlords who then fleeced the benefit system by driving up rents. most of the homeowners she created bought dilapidated stock from a corrupt council who had milked the rents for decades and couldn't afford to modernise them.

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: eletheia
she was also responsible for the rise in private landlords who then fleeced the benefit system by driving up rents. most of the homeowners she created bought dilapidated stock from a corrupt council who had milked the rents for decades and couldn't afford to modernise them.

Hmmn... That would, in many cases be those who were enabled to purchase

their own council houses? .... See how money can corrupt.


However many improved and were proud of owning their own homes and

looked after their properties. Because of this it was always possible to see

who was buying and who was renting on any estates.

a reply to: LeeAndrewCox

May I suggest a letter or email to your local Councils asking them to sort the mess out and one to the Government at No.10 Downing Street. These people know about the high costs of living but are not doing enough to help people with low-paid jobs, also these rich people keep buying properties and selling them on for higher costs or renting them out for extortionate rates! This was always going to cause problems for future generations. It's unsustainable in the long run and must come falling down at some point.

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

You think they'd listen?, a civil war is coming to the streets of "Great" Britain, maybe not next week but it's brewing.

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: eletheia
What really worries me is that the refugee crisis is being managed as if Syria is not going to exist in the future. We are emptying a whole country. Is it so we can make it safe for them all to return and rebuild.
what are the long term plans for Syria, NUKES?
why are safe zones not established and serviced so the refugees don't have to risk their lives and we could process them and send them to a willing country for the interim.
what are the long term plans for these countries with no able citizens left.

possibly.

(Isaiah 17:1 ESV) An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city and will become a heap of ruins.

(Isaiah 17:1 JPS) The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

(Isaiah 17:1 NIV) An oracle concerning Damascus: "See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins.

Looking at these three different translations, we see the prophecy is not only about the destruction of Damascus, but the thorough dissolution of its status as a city. Its "cityhood" will be taken away. After this oracle is fulfilled, there will never be a city called Damascus again. If Isaiah had only said "Damascus will be destroyed", then presumably, it could be rebuilt. But the impact is stronger than that. "Damascus will be negated from being a city." (Stone Edition Tanach)

A phrase in verse three also confirms this. The sovereignty, the royal power, the kingdom "will disappear from Damascus." Though it is the seat of government, capital of Syria, that status will be removed, and it will no longer function as such.

So we see that this prophecy could not have taken place, or else Damascus would not now exist as a city. Yet some commentators claim this was historically fulfilled in 732 BC by the Assyrians under Tiglath-Pileser III. However, neither the Bible (which records the incident in 2 Kings 16:9) nor the ancient Assyrian inscriptions found at Ninevah say the city was destroyed, just captured. It certainly did not cease to exist.

Also, it is important to note that the three Biblical prophecies about the doom of Damascus (Isaiah 17, Jeremiah 49, Zechariah 9) were written over a span of 200 years. Therefore, even a fulfillment in Isaiah's day would not satisfy the requirements of the other prophecies, written later. Regarding Jeremiah's prophecy about Damascus, the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar did conquer the city in 605 BC, but there is no record of it being destroyed then. Neither did Zechariah's prophecy receive a fulfillment. Alexander the Great did also subsequently take Damascus in 332 BC, but without bloodshed or destruction.

Therefore, we can conclude that all three of these prophecies about Damascus are referring to a tragic event yet future.

basically syria will no longer be fit to be inhabited along with Iran which the bible gives a similar treatment. a few other places only fare slightly better.

a reply to: eletheia
I think you aught to go back and read your history. When a certain lady was running the country, Yes she forced the local councils to sell their stock to residents getting them on the property ladder. But the problem came when she changed the goalposts.
Firstly she told councils to sell houses and the money they generated would be used to build council houses to replace those sold off. Great idea.
Then she changed the agenda. She saw the millions that some councils made by flogging off their stock and STOPPED them rebuilding and said the money generated was to be used for council payments instead of claiming government money.
The same people in charge now are trying the same tactic. So all of you on here who want to blame their local authority, they have their hands tied behind their backs.
Now how do I know all that!! Cos I worked for my local borough and went through the process.

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: eletheia
she was also responsible for the rise in private landlords who then fleeced the benefit system by driving up rents. most of the homeowners she created bought dilapidated stock from a corrupt council who had milked the rents for decades and couldn't afford to modernise them.

I was a private landlord .... Asked a fair rent and wouldn't take

DHS tenants.

I had to take my tenants to court to evict them for non payment of

rent. I got the eviction order and the judge told them that they had

been very silly as did they not realise 'they were on a very fair rent.'

They day before they were due to leave, the police came to me as

the owner of the property, due to not only trashing the property

they had torn the gas metre of the wall causing a dangerous gas

leak,


I watched a TV programme on benefit fraud. An immigrant was given

a property in the London area, she was on disability and other benefits

It was investigated and found that she was sub letting the property

at a profit and living in France. When she was required to see the

council for regular checks of her circumstances she came over on

the Euro Star!!!


But Hey don't you know there are only bad landlords and councils who

wring every last cent from the poor

originally posted by: crayzeed

I think you aught to go back and read your history. When a certain lady was running the country, Yes she forced the local councils to sell their stock to residents getting them on the property ladder. But the problem came when she changed the goalposts.

LOL!! No one was forced to buy the house they lived in ...

they were Given the opportunity to purchase the property they

lived in And many tenants were very happy to do so.There are

very many people who now own their own homes, who previously

would never had a hope in hell of being a home owner.

The houses sold were heavily discounted so vast sums of money were

not being made.

a reply to: eletheia

I take it you missed out the part of her biography in which she hated the working class people and saw her father a business owner as a higher class of person, she hated how he had to stoop to there level and serve them from behind his counter, remember this is the woman whom changed the way ice cream is made so that we can now call churned oil based crap with no dairy in it at all ice cream and she also changed how it was sold from weight to volume, a process to fold tiny bubbles into the mix means that a large percentage is actually air, honest woman eh?.

Then remember her international CRIMINAL link's to Pinochet (coup leader and human right's abuser) and other's, her own husbands rumoured multi billion pound wealth which was hidden in many holdings outside the UK tax system and a part of which her son tried to recover by helping to stage a failed coup attempt in Africa while officially Dennis was only a HUMBLE millionaire, remember how she tried to take the milk from the small children in junior school - something of a tradition with Tory's as Osbourne and Smith have illustrated.

As for the sell off of council housing you do know that in most cases you could already apply to buy your own home before she changed it so that you did not have to live in it as long as before.

You do know that we had great affordable home builders such as Barret and Wimpy as well as several other's whom were churning out private housing estates that were both high quality and affordable all over the country for sale and private rent before she set about sowing the seed's for the destruction of our social housing.

There are too many ignorant or rather hoping we are all ignorant of these fact's whom keep falling back on that tired old rubbish about her giving the home owners the Right to buy there property or claiming she turned the 1970's-80's recession around (which she most certainly did not, it turned around in Asia as it was led and cured by Market conditions in Asia), over the pond our cousin's call it reganomic's and equally erroneously attribute the turn around to Regan's policy's when once again it was the Asian markets that dictated it not them.

Another thing that get's my goat is the attitudes of politics student's whom THINK they know when in fact they are Dog Crap ignorant and have had there attitude shaped by there lecturers or the material's they reference, WE LIVED THROUGH IT? so we are not so ignorant and sadly that is what is wrong with British politics there are no genuine politicians only a house full of former politics student's and that means top heavy on the upper middle class background's.


SO what have the torys done for you, they have moved the goal posts on child poverty impoverishing tens of thousands of already poor children from poor family's so that they are not now officially recognised as poor so that they will now get no special help when they are the most vulnerable.

You want to pull someone down go and lie about Mr Corbyn because I have a very strong feeling the Tory's will have to RIG the next election AGAIN as even with the repeated character assassination's in the press he will probably win, why well under the tory's thing's are going to get VERY, VERY, BAD indeed.

If the Chinese Recession filters through to our economy which it will there will be more people out of work, more people on Zero hours contracts whom are officially employed even though they will likely not be in receipt of a wage they can live on due to reduced hours (the Tory way of getting around the Living wage - work the kid's on long hours and the rest on reduced hours with zero hours contracts - remember it is essentially the CBI that run's the country when the Tory's are in power)

Cameron, Smith and Osbourne are TRAITOR's and by there actions they are also MURDERER's and that guilt is also thoroughly on the head of there supporters.

TO prepare they brought in a official guidline telling the police to use firearms to protect property (this was never the way we did it in the UK) and those police are armed with DUMB DUMB rounds in there gun's so each shot is likely to be fatal.

Before the last Election Osbourne said in a leaked memo that he was going to bring the national expenditure down to 1930's level's, so he is intent on demolishing the welfare system entirely and that included the pension system, how did he know they were going to get back into power?.

Of course if you support those scum you likely think it is kosha what they have done no matter how they did it but you would be totally wrong wouldn't you.

Considering your use of a greek word for an avatar your opinion on what is factual and real are somewhat subjective are they not.

originally posted by: LABTECH767


I take it you missed out the part of her biography in which she hated the working class people and saw her father a business owner as a higher class of person, she hated how he had to stoop to there level and serve them from behind his counter, remember this is the woman whom changed the way ice cream is made so that we can now call churned oil based crap with no dairy in it at all ice cream and she also changed how it was sold from weight to volume, a process to fold tiny bubbles into the mix means that a large percentage is actually air, honest woman eh?.

LOL!! That's only half a story, how can she hate working class, she came

from it. How on earth does one stoop to a level when business is being done

He was selling - they were buying = he was turning a profit ... where's the shame

in that? an honest days work... no more than is expected from every citizen of a

country? Ice cream? you're not being serious?

manufacturing is constantly changing ingredients in foods. I'm sure there were far

more important things for her to do running the country. Give her some credit

she was the first woman prime minister of this country. She may have made

mistakes in some eyes but she wasn't the first and she wont be the last to make

mistakes ... there's an old saying ... *the man who never made a mistake, never

made anything*

Then remember her international CRIMINAL link's to Pinochet (coup leader and human right's abuser) and other's, her own husbands rumoured multi billion pound wealth which was hidden in many holdings outside the UK tax system and a part of which her son tried to recover by helping to stage a failed coup attempt in Africa while officially Dennis was only a HUMBLE millionaire,

What about all the other PM's through out history who have cosied up to

dictators, despots ... Blair?

In business and world affairs it is sometimes necessary to put ones personal feelings

to one side.

I know when I was in business (although in a small scale) I had to deal with

people I didn't necessarily like.

remember how she tried to take the milk from the small children in junior school - something of a tradition with Tory's as Osbourne and Smith have illustrated.

Not that old chestnut AGAIN. Milk was introduced

at the time of rationing during the war when food was rationed - So that

children would get calcium which due to the severe rationing they may not

have got, there was also a special orange juice from clinics for the under 5's

The milk was withdrawn long after the war and rationing ended....(many

children wouldn't have the milk they didn't like it anyway!) Its just as well it

was withdrawn anyway as we now have an obesity crisis?? I hope that can now

be given a rest ...put to bed as it were?

As for the sell off of council housing you do know that in most cases you could already apply to buy your own home before she changed it so that you did not have to live in it as long as before.

They were sitting tenants and had been in their houses a long time in most

cases and would in most cases not have been able to afford to purchase

houses from the Barret and Wimpy housing estates.

There are too many ignorant or rather hoping we are all ignorant of these fact's whom keep falling back on that tired old rubbish about her giving the home owners the Right to buy there property or claiming she turned the 1970's-80's recession around (which she most certainly did not, it turned around in Asia as it was led and cured by Market conditions in Asia), over the pond our cousin's call it reganomic's and equally erroneously attribute the turn around to Regan's policy's when once again it was the Asian markets that dictated it not them.

I am ordinary working class and comfortable, far from ignorant, lived

through many governments and the one I was best off under was

the government of Margaret Thatcher

SO what have the torys done for you, they have moved the goal posts on child poverty impoverishing tens of thousands of already poor children from poor family's so that they are not now officially recognised as poor so that they will not get no special help when they are the most vulnerable.

You want to pull someone down go and lie about Mr Corbyn because I have a very strong feeling the Tory's will have to RIG the next election AGAIN as even with the repeated character assassination's in the press he will probably win, why well under the tory's thing's are going to get VERY, VERY, BAD indeed.

Trouble is the last labour government with the PRUDENT (excuse me)LOL!

Gordon Brown made people dependent on hand outs and created an

entitlement culture, and left empty coffers for the incoming new government

Before the last Election Osbourne said in a leaked memo that he was going to bring the national expenditure down to 1930's level's, so he is intent on demolishing the welfare system entirely and that included the pension system, how did he know they were going to get back into power?.

You appear to be privy to a lot of leaked information?

Or is it just pub talk/rumour?

Considering your use of a greek word for an avatar your opinion on what is factual and real are somewhat subjective are they not.

No hidden agenda there

It apparently means 'truth' and also happens to be the name of one of

my grand daughters

I live in a nice semi-detached 2 bedroom property, with 7 rooms in total, plus an external brick built outhouse, in a middle to upper class area. I've lived here all my life. I took over the tenancy from my mother when she died, and she had in turn, taken over the tenancy from her mother.

The property was originally council owned, but got sold off to a 'housing trust' a number of years ago. I explain this, just to be clear how long this house has been my home, my mothers home, and her mothers home.

About 3 months ago, my landlord, the housing 'trust', contacted me to inform me that they had a small 1 person bedsit available, if I wanted to move to a smaller home. It was in a very run-down part of Manchester. I declined.

They then pulled 3 'landlord inspections', quite obviously looking for breaches of the tenancy, with which to arm themselves for a possible eviction. They found nothing.

They then sent a senior manager to talk with me, who told me, quite frankly, they want me out of the house. I'm a single person occupying a family home. They can't get me out unless I leave or break the tenancy because I am a secured tenant. I took the tenancy on before the laws about secured tenancies were changed.

He explained that the housing trust made a commitment to absorb some refugee tenants, so were trying to identify tenants that can be moved into bedsits or other smaller accommodation, to free up homes for the refugees, and would I cooperate?

No I sodding wouldn't. This has been my home for a long time, and I will fight tooth and nail to keep it.

They really do care more about the refugees though, than they do about their own citizens.

Also, important to me, is the fact that if I do leave, and move into a smaller property, it starts a new tenancy, which means I lose the secured tenant status. Which means they can evict me at will, for any reason. Not going to happen.

This is something I have been complaining about in the US for a very long time now.

We have to take care of home first. Home should always be first on the list. Always.

If my neighbors children are hungry of course I feel the need to help him. I don't think any child should have to go to bed hungry. But I will not feed my neighbors children if it means my own children will have to do without. My responsibility is to my family first. Once my family has eaten, anything I have left I will gladly bring to my neighbor and I will feed his children myself if that is what it takes to make sure they have something to eat. But I will not make my own children go hungry to feed someone else's. No one would do that. We don't do that on a house to house basis because we know we will just end up with two houses full of hungry children instead of one. If we are smart enough, and care enough about our own home, to not do that on a home to home basis, why on earth would we do it on a nation to nation basis?

In the end, we know we will just end up with two nations full of hungry children instead of one. We will soon find ourselves in the same position as those we are trying to help now. The only difference is, no one is going to go out of their way to feed our children when we cant. No one.

a reply to: BMorris



Your problem being it is your home ... but it is not your property

and I sympathise with you.


That is why from day one leaving home I wanted to buy and not

rent. I first bought something very modest and without some

facilities, My mother cried when she first saw what I was moving

to, but with hard work I made it a home. I did the same again and

again till I ended up where I am now.


My reasons for wanting to own is so that unlike you, no one can

tell me what to do .... I do like my independence!!


I do hope you manage to get sorted. I am incensed though that they

want your property not for the needy or homeless in this country

who I believe should be taken care of before any new comers.