Current Affairs How old were you when you grew up and stopped voting Labour?

[Bruce Wayne]

Firstly, it seems apparent you saw my name and had an instant conclusion. The tinfoil reference, disingenuous and wholly uncalled for and unnecessary.
The point isn't argued as to the existence of a recession but as a recession for who exactly.
My point is the response to the cause that you used 'we', which is undoubtedly general, which, again, undoubtedly isn't the case. This 'recession' as you call it is very selective in who it affects.

That's the nature of recessions (or indeed any sizeable change) though isn't it? There will be people in society better able to ride out those changes than others, whether through wealth, education, geography, sector or any number of factors. I wouldn't ever suggest that a recession impacts all people equally because to do so would be rather silly.

The recession had a whole bunch of reasons, and I'm not sure many believe one of those to be one big conspiracy to screw over the little guy. Probably at the heart of it though was that very human thing - greed, but that greed wasn't confined to the chancers in the City, as it afflicted regulators, public officials and the general public too.

 

[orchard]

Your frequent use of the popular concept 'conspiracy' and references to metallic foils to bypass debate is sophistical. Decisions were/are made, people were/are effected, how about sticking to that?

I know you believe in corporate liberty at the expense of human liberty, but surely the elephant in the room is parliament and lobbying.

That's the nature of recessions (or indeed any sizeable change) though isn't it? There will be people in society better able to ride out those changes than others, whether through wealth, education, geography, sector or any number of factors. I wouldn't ever suggest that a recession impacts all people equally because to do so would be rather silly.

The recession had a whole bunch of reasons, and I'm not sure many believe one of those to be one big conspiracy to screw over the little guy. Probably at the heart of it though was that very human thing - greed, but that greed wasn't confined to the chancers in the City, as it afflicted regulators, public officials and the general public too.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Your frequent use of the popular concept 'conspiracy' and references to metallic foils to bypass debate is sophistical. Decisions were/are made, people were/are effected, how about sticking to that?

I know you believe in corporate liberty at the expense of human liberty, but surely the elephant in the room is parliament and lobbying.

Conspiracy is kinda how it seems to me at the moment, as populists the world over attempt to make very complex things sound very simple. My point was that after the depression, unemployment in America went from about 5% to around 25%, and it didn't get to the current level of ~4% until the middle of WW2. So we can argue back and forth all we like, but I think history will say we managed a recession of this magnitude pretty well, with a peak of just 10% and a rapid decline thereafter.

"I know you believe in corporate liberty at the expense of human liberty, but surely the elephant in the room is parliament and lobbying."

Regarding that btw, that's not true at all, and if I've given that impression, I apologise for the misconception.

 

[orchard]

I haven't really got time to debate mate, but I have to echo what was stated earlier-there's more infrastructure in place now, invested in as a consequence of the earlier depression, but it is rapidly eroding.

No need to apologise

Conspiracy is kinda how it seems to me at the moment, as populists the world over attempt to make very complex things sound very simple. My point was that after the depression, unemployment in America went from about 5% to around 25%, and it didn't get to the current level of ~4% until the middle of WW2. So we can argue back and forth all we like, but I think history will say we managed a recession of this magnitude pretty well, with a peak of just 10% and a rapid decline thereafter.

"I know you believe in corporate liberty at the expense of human liberty, but surely the elephant in the room is parliament and lobbying."

Regarding that btw, that's not true at all, and if I've given that impression, I apologise for the misconception.

 

[zzr45]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42851024

Corbyn's solution for homelessness is to give the homeless houses. To do this he'd take them out of housing association stock to be replaced by Labour built houses at a later date. Sure that wouldn't end up a mess.

He's also going to give local authorities the right to come in and take away private individuals properties.

So, homelessness isn't a rich myriad of various issues. It's the fault of the rich. As per.

 

[neil999]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42851024

Corbyn's solution for homelessness is to give the homeless houses. To do this he'd take them out of housing association stock to be replaced by Labour built houses at a later date. Sure that wouldn't end up a mess.

He's also going to give local authorities the right to come in and take away private individuals properties.

So, homelessness isn't a rich myriad of various issues. It's the fault of the rich. As per.

The reasons for homelessness are complicated but the reason for the recent massive increase is directly related to service cuts and benefit changes

 

[orchard]

You obviously don't want a grow-up discussion by omitting the 'deliberately kept empty properties' part and choosing the sophist path.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42851024

Corbyn's solution for homelessness is to give the homeless houses. To do this he'd take them out of housing association stock to be replaced by Labour built houses at a later date. Sure that wouldn't end up a mess.

He's also going to give local authorities the right to come in and take away private individuals properties.

So, homelessness isn't a rich myriad of various issues. It's the fault of the rich. As per.

 

[Seanjd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42851024

Corbyn's solution for homelessness is to give the homeless houses. To do this he'd take them out of housing association stock to be replaced by Labour built houses at a later date. Sure that wouldn't end up a mess.

He's also going to give local authorities the right to come in and take away private individuals properties.

So, homelessness isn't a rich myriad of various issues. It's the fault of the rich. As per.

I think there definitely needs to be more buildings available as short/mid term solutions for homeless people. How to do that, I don't know. Not sure if this idea would work or not, but at least it's being discussed.

Properties bought and deliberately left empty should be used productively or freed up.

 

[chuffy]

I voted labour in my late teens, early 20's (Blair period) because they seemed to sing the right tune. Didn't really know I'd inadvertently send my school mates to a war or two by doing so.

Just my onions here, but I really dislike the current crop of Labour politicians. They really aren't very tactful about their manipulation of the voting public. They would get more respect from me if they spent more time admitting their part in the problems their last government cause, and providing sensible ideas on how to fix things, rather than trying to distract people from that and constantly trying to blame the current government for everything, regardless of fact. I think that's got to be general consensus amongst the voters, as you've got to be in a mess if you can't beat the current shambles in an election.

What is kind of annoy is that all the Labour supporters I know (not meant as a generalisation, as I don't know more than a dozen) are suddenly acting like they're experts in politics, yet they're unable to see the hypocrisy in it all (e.g. complaining about a lack of housing and house prices, whilst welcoming increased immigration....championing a near 50% increase in NMW, but complaining when food at ASDA goes up 5p). The worst combination I have to put up with on a Facebook feed is a Remain-voting Labour supporter - it's all hate, hate, hate filled post-sharing.


I really can't see anything changing in the political landscape any time soon, though, unless someone who looks like they know what they're doing (without polarising their own party) gets leadership of one of the big two.

 

[ToffeeTim]

Labour are as crap as the tory party. Neither has done any good for this country since probably Clement Atlee. And both have an inherent dislike of anywhere north of Watford.

I find the current labour movement quite aggressive and distasteful. But on the other hand Teresa May is diabolical. I can't quite fathom why anyone would want to identify with either.

 

[COYBL25]

The reasons for homelessness are complicated but the reason for the recent massive increase is directly related to service cuts and benefit changes

You`ve only got to walk through Liverpool City centre to see this Neil.

It`s tragic.

 

[roydo]

You`ve only got to walk through Liverpool City centre to see this Neil.

It`s tragic.

It is indeed. And not just cos folk havnt got a place to stay. Generally means they have no support network, be it a mate, a brother, an agency, nowt. Lob in a decent number of homeless folk being off grid, having mental illness, just lost to society, and its a tough story for a developed wealthy country to accept.

And its a catch 22. No fixed address? No job, no matter what. I know what I would do, but any politician thinking there are any votes in it, well, they wouldnt bother. Which tells its own story.

 

[zzr45]

The reasons for homelessness are complicated but the reason for the recent massive increase is directly related to service cuts and benefit changes

Agree with that, but it seems that the response is very over simplistic, give a house, but don't build any network them. There needs to be more to it than that.

I think there definitely needs to be more buildings available as short/mid term solutions for homeless people. How to do that, I don't know. Not sure if this idea would work or not, but at least it's being discussed.

One of the things I've seen being discussed is how the Finn's have tackled it. Essentially building complexes for the homeless to stay in with a sliding scale of rent. It also means those that have issues that need resolving can be helped within a central location. https://www.theguardian.com/housing...d-solved-homelessness-eu-crisis-housing-first

You obviously don't want a grow-up discussion by omitting the 'deliberately kept empty properties' part and choosing the sophist path.

Ah I see, you have your ideological blinkers on as per usual. It doesn't matter if it's deliberately kept empty or whatever, it's still someone's property that they've paid for. For Corbyn to turn round and say that he'd give the ability for these to be seized smacks of London based populism and sets a disturbing precedent.

 

[roydo]

Ah I see, you have your ideological blinkers on as per usual. It doesn't matter if it's deliberately kept empty or whatever, it's still someone's property that they've paid for. For Corbyn to turn round and say that he'd give the ability for these to be seized smacks of London based populism and sets a disturbing precedent.

Yep. Its dead easy to say "lets solve the homeless problem by nicking others houses". How about a proper, joined up solution that isnt dripping in political envy/populism.

 

[orchard]

Agree with that, but it seems that the response is very over simplistic, give a house, but don't build any network them. There needs to be more to it than that.


Ah I see, you have your ideological blinkers on as per usual. It doesn't matter if it's deliberately kept empty or whatever, it's still someone's property that they've paid for. For Corbyn to turn round and say that he'd give the ability for these to be
seized smacks of London based populism and sets a disturbing precedent.

Obviously you're the one with 'blinkers'. I didn't comment on the proposal, simply stated that you ought to be less of a drama queen and not omit the details if you wanted an actual discussion.
Nice try.