leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Report:
Awful scene outside Academy. Road closed. Police out in full. Man on ledge above Barnados, threatening to jump.
Talked down by cops, they say on Twitter.
Report:
Awful scene outside Academy. Road closed. Police out in full. Man on ledge above Barnados, threatening to jump.
if you think of it as a cult practice, it is humiliating. it's mass control. stand there. hold out the newspaper. don't get paid. something brutal about it.It's not just London this is happening everywhere, I have seen it in The Netherlands, Lisbon and Dublin that I can think of off the top of my head. JW have changed how they operate (and count preaching time) and instead of doorstepping they have moved to this new "passive" "preaching" to spread the word. There is an article about it on the very popular website of a British paper that I won't link to.
we have genuine, authentic 100% slum landlords in Thornton Heath. genuine modern day slums. left to decay, with about 10 people crammed into a wreck that should be home to 3. i'd give them 5 years without parole the utter cunts.I can't wait for the day* that greedy, money-grabbing landlords and exploitative Rent To Buy-ers get slapped down fucking hard and made to pay for the suffering they've inflicted. The fucking parasites.
*I accept I may be waiting for some time for that day to arrive
Jesus. A hash tag menu and shout outs to 'sick nam yams'? The fucking cocks.
Close to the Jobcentre - I wonder if he's a JSA claimant who's been sanctionedTalked down by cops, they say on Twitter.
You appear to have forgotten to insert your usual pointlessly sarcastic comment. But there's no complaints from me on that score.[nothing]
I first read that as 'taken down by cops'Talked down by cops, they say on Twitter.
... its not a term I've heard used anywhere else.Its used a bit loosely here.
An example of rentier capitalism is the Dorchestor Court. Through just owning a resource the owners can increase the profit from it by upping rents to whatever the "market" can bear. Instead of available capital being invested in production of goods it goes into acquiring assets that can be milked for profit.
Its not just a term used here.
or bring back rent controls, the possibility of longer tenancies and enforcement of decent housing standards.You need to change the tax rules that have proved so profitable for all landlords, exploitative or not.
or bring back rent controls, the possibility of longer tenancies and enforcement of decent housing standards.
Not condoning the practice, far from it, I think they rank alongside the other topic of conversation, exploitative landlords. Just saying it's their new M.O. globaly, and something that may have actually been trialled in the capital and a few other UK cities first. Even the original door stepping seems to have been designed as a humiliating control technique.if you think of it as a cult practice, it is humiliating. it's mass control. stand there. hold out the newspaper. don't get paid. something brutal about it.
awful really.Not condoning the practice, far from it, I think they rank alongside the other topic of conversation, exploitative landlords. Just saying it's their new M.O. globaly, and something that may have actually been trialled in the capital and a few other UK cities first. Even the original door stepping seems to have been designed as a humiliating control technique.
Comrade Miliband goes some of the way - he wants to bring in 3 year tenancies and make rent increases more predictable (but not anything like rent controls as far as I can see) http://www.labour.org.uk/issues/detail/renting
I don't think Marx ever used the two words together- because to him the rentier class and the capitalist system were inextricably linked. Capitalism produced a class that lived off the work of others: that class invariably stared to move capital around, ergo were rentiers. Rentier capitalist is like saying bad capitalist, as opposed to good capitalist; he never accepted there were good capitalists. I always find it a very odd phrase for Marxist leaning left wingers to use tbhIts used a bit loosely here.
An example of rentier capitalism is the Dorchestor Court. Through just owning a resource the owners can increase the profit from it by upping rents to whatever the "market" can bear. Instead of available capital being invested in production of goods it goes into acquiring assets that can be milked for profit.
Its not just a term used here.
I really like the idea of that notification system.Another week, another license application.............
View attachment 71139
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/brl-redacted-application-Prem1861.pdf
I don't think Marx ever used the two words together- because to him the rentier class and the capitalist system were inextricably linked. Capitalism produced a class that lived off the work of others: that class invariably stared to move capital around, ergo were rentiers. Rentier capitalist is like saying bad capitalist, as opposed to good capitalist; he never accepted there were good capitalists. I always find it a very odd phrase for Marxist leaning left wingers to use tbh
Shall we agree on 'buy-to-let scum' in that case?
Owned by a 'Skeleton Entertainment' from leafy Battersea.Another week, another license application.............
View attachment 71139
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/brl-redacted-application-Prem1861.pdf
Mr Alistair Heathcote is the head honcho, he has a few irons in the fire notably the intriguingly named "red trousers entertainments"Owned by a 'Skeleton Entertainment' from leafy Battersea.
That link says that the aforementioned red trousers lot are 'Private limited with share capital.' Does that mean they'reMr Alistair Heathcote is the head honcho, he has a few irons in the fire notably the intriguingly named "red trousers entertainments"
https://www.duedil.com/director/919603022/alastair-heathcote/directorships
That link says that the aforementioned red trousers lot are 'Private limited with share capital.' Does that mean they're
Share capital is the money invested in a company by the shareholders. Share capital is a long-term source of finance.
In return for their investment, shareholders gain a share of the ownership of the company.
Shareholders benefit from the protection offered by limited liability – they are only liable for the amount they invest in share capital rather than the overall debts of the company.
The founding entrepreneur (/s) is highly likely to invest in the share capital of the start-up. This is a common method of financing a start-up. Ideally the founder will try to provide all the share capital of the company, retaining 100% control over the business.
A key point to note is that the entrepreneur may use a variety of personal sources (e.g. cash, personal investments) to finance the purchase of shares.
Once the investment has been made, it is the company that owns the money provided.
The shareholder obtains a return on this investment through dividends (payments out of profits) and/or increases in the value of the company when it is eventually sold.
A start-up company can also raise finance by selling shares to external investors – this is typically to a business angel or venture capitalist (sometimes also called a private equity investor)
This is where I like US sports teams: There was only one Telegraph. Lambeth Licensing should retire this jersey/number and make them re-apply under a new one. Unless it's a pop-up by the original telegraph owners but then I don't know how they'll rock a 5am "licence" in the village.Another week, another license application.............
View attachment 71139
http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/brl-redacted-application-Prem1861.pdf
Not sure it's the tax laws. If you are a corporate with a portfolio then, yes, you will find ways to pay little corporate tax, just like any company. Tax laws re rental property generally are like the ones for owner-managed/freelance businesses in that you can deduct expenses legitimately incurred in the course of running said business - which many freelancers and sole traders rinse the fuck out of/abuse in my experience.You need to change the tax rules that have proved so profitable for all landlords, exploitative or not.
If you set up a Ltd company for your proposed non profit venture you would be classed as the sameThat link says that the aforementioned red trousers lot are 'Private limited with share capital.' Does that mean they're
Yeah that's just a way of not becoming liable if it goes tits up. There's a hierarchy of preferential creditors, with staff and suppliers at the bottom, and you would be forgiven for being suspicious of anyone who sets up a small enterprise in that way at the outset. Essentially there is an increased reporting requirement but also more protection for creditors than with a sole trader (so the theory goes) and - surprise - many people who set up under this guise don't file accounts like they should and go bust, without paying anyone.If you set up a Ltd company for your proposed non profit venture you would be classed as the same