boohoo
No.
Have a look at the other thread. These changes are never just about providing more housing opportunities for those who are less fortunate.
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-social-cleansing-of-social-housing.336344
Carlton Mansions co-op, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton - history and news
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Have a look at the other thread. These changes are never just about providing more housing opportunities for those who are less fortunate.
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-social-cleansing-of-social-housing.336344
edit: took it to the other thread.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
So you're another of those dismal mugs who can't do the maths involved in showing that the majority of council and housing association tenants don't have "taxpayer subsidised rent".
How very unsurprising.
Doesn't council housing still make a net contribution to the Treasury?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It does, despite supposedly being "subsidised".
What these "subsidy" fools don't/won't "get" is that a body choosing not to set a market rent for their owned assets (and about 85% of local authority social housing is bought and paid for) isn't taking a subsidy to do so, it's merely exercising the same rights over its' property as any landlord, albeit to provide housing at an affordable, rather than an exploitative rent.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
This is a subject for a separate thread.
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
No need to be rude. I already understand the majority don't have subsidised rent. And neither did it require maths to work that out
editor
hiraethified
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
If you already understood, then why the carping in the post I replied to?
SpamMisery
Pretty comfortable here right under your skin
Wrong.
Crikey, I never thought about it from that perspective. Feel a bit silly now. Have you ever thought about a career in education?
Puddy_Tat
naturally fluffy
and then there's the question of whether the daily mail definition of "fairness" - as in "everyone - except the very rich of course - should be shat upon equally" is genuine fairness, or whether it would be better to think about the tories creating an artificial shortage of social housing (and new labour doing bugger all to change that) rather than scapegoating those who have got social tenancies...
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Sometimes people say stupid things (and Spammy can be quite good at this!)
He knows what he is doing. He is far from stupid. His posts are deliberate windups.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
He is not making assumptions. VP has gone into this often here. As regular posters will know.
I am not sure what u mean by being "schooled in lefty politics". If that means one reads and thinks a bit I think your phrase is somewhat dismissive.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
VP posting style is the opposite of mine. However he cannot be accused of writing his posts using a lot of obscure marxist jargon. He is always to be point and readable. Dont see what the problem is to be honest.
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
can you give that advice to the justifiers nit pickers too please?
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
yes in response to the nit pickingyou nit pick too - I've seen you.
I have said things to people on either sides of the urban divide.
not seen you tell Rushy, Spammy or others to be nice publicly, defend them yes
boohoo
No.
And my answer is that I have said things to people on both sides. If it makes you feel better, I'll pm VP next time or any of the others. They are all welcome over to mine for a cup of tea.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
But you are super brainy about various subjects. And what might be clear to you isn't always clear to others.
Now ur annoying me.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
But you are super brainy about various subjects. And what might be clear to you isn't always clear to others.
I normally do what you told VP to do. Be polite and use links to back up posts.
So if one does that one is guilty of being "super brainy"?
This isn’t going well is it.
