London fire.

[Freighter]

Okay. Replacement proposal: Institute a 100% of market value per year tax on unoccupied or underoccupied (partially, so if it's unoccupied 200 days a year you pay 200/365 * 100% of market value) houses in any city where there is housing demand that exceeds the supply. Use the money for that to buy up houses for council housing or house these people in motels for the time being.

Nope. Build more if you don't have enough homes.

[Magicpot]

Nope. Build more if you don't have enough homes.

Nah. Just tax the hell out of the homes being misused as cold investment property. Society should start cracking down on these anyways. Honestly I'd be okay with 1000% of market value too. Make people either live in the houses they own or rent them out or pay out of their asses to keep them.

[Freighter]

Nah. Just tax the hell out of the homes being misused as cold investment property. Society should start cracking down on these anyways. Honestly I'd be okay with 1000% of market value too. Make people either live in the houses they own or rent them out or pay out of their asses to keep them.

That's a good way to run people off from your country. Why would anyone live in such a country? Let me guess; You're a below average earner and you're pissed that wealthier people have it better than you?

[Magicpot]

That's a good way to run people off from your country. Why would anyone live in such a country? Let me guess; You're a below average earner and you're pissed that wealthier people have it better than you?

If this runs off wealthy foreign investors that do nothing but buy up real estate as an appreciating investment, absolutely, that's the goal.

If you care (you shouldn't, it has no bearing on my argument) I'm in a very high tax bracket paying above 45% of my income in taxes currently. Yet I'm not poor or anything, go figure. It's almost as if people earning or having a lot of money can pay high taxes and still be fine.

[Freighter]

If this runs off wealthy foreign investors that do nothing but buy up real estate as an appreciating investment, absolutely, that's the goal.

No, it will run your citizens off too. Nobody wants to live in a country that shits on its people.

If you care (you shouldn't, it has no bearing on my argument) I'm in a very high tax bracket paying above 45% of my income in taxes currently. Yet I'm not poor or anything, go figure. It's almost as if people earning or having a lot of money can pay high taxes and still be fine.

Doesn't mean shit to me.

[Magicpot]

No, it will run your citizens off too. Nobody wants to live in a country that shits on its people.



Doesn't mean shit to me.

Apparently is does mean shit to you:

That's a good way to run people off from your country. Why would anyone live in such a country? Let me guess; You're a below average earner and you're pissed that wealthier people have it better than you?

[Shadowmelded]

Wrong. It was a subsidized building in a nice area, it had no business being in that area. People pay huge sums to escape those areas and those people, which they have a right to do. I hated it New York City when we had "subsidized" buildings in our nice area. The idea is its a place that teachers and young professions can afford. The reality is thugs and welfare bums get the apartments and scum up the area. We have low value, medium value, and high value areas for a reason. I currently reside in medium. I don't ask for a house plopped into the middle of a rich area so I can feel special.

The edginess aside, you do realize that segregating the population based on wealth is only going to lead to increasing tensions right? And if you price the poor out of London as is being done, good luck keeping the city functioning when teachers, police, ambulance workers, cleaners, retail workers, security guards etc... etc... are no longer around.

[Freighter]

Apparently is does mean shit to you:

You clearly didn't read. You talking about you paying % taxes doesn't mean shit to me. That doesn't really say anything about if you're wealthy or not.

[Cruor]

The people in that housing had jobs, several of them friends of one of my closest friends. The fact those jobs didn't pay enough to move, even within commuting distance, of where they worked locally, as teaching assistants, meant they had little option but to stay put regardless of how badly they did want to move.

For a £10m renovation, it would have cost just £5,000 to use cladding that wouldn't have burned, instead of the cladding that they did use which was illegal in the US because of the fire risk.

So you can bullshit all you want about saving money, health and safety, red tape, bureaucracy. There was no reason whatsoever for this to have happened; whether it was down to saving a few thousand pounds; not having tight enough legislation, or the company continuing to make a product in spite of it being banned for being a fire risk in a developed nation.

We're talking about 150-200 people who died here. That's the actual numbers missing on the ground, not the sanitised cover up numbers they're releasing.

Well, in my world it would never have happened because there would be no subsidized housing by the government. any subsidized housing would be paid for by liberals and charities while the right happily kept their money. Sadly, we don't live in that world. The idea is nice, as I said. A place for teachers and young professionals to live. In reality its a haven for scum. Now, don't twist my words and say all low income people are scum, they are not. Some are just young or in a tough spot. However a lot are bad. It sucks that many people died, burning is a horrific way to go. However, throwing tax payer money at it isn't a fair solution.

[Magicpot]

You clearly didn't read.

Ahh so that was just a salty tangent to undermine your own point, got it

Mud flinging with right wingers aside, something does need to be done about foreign owned empty houses in major cities.

Well, in my world it would never have happened because there would be no subsidized housing by the government. any subsidized housing would be paid for by liberals and charities while the right happily kept their money. Sadly, we don't live in that world. The idea is nice, as I said. A place for teachers and young professionals to live. In reality its a haven for scum. Now, don't twist my words and say all low income people are scum, they are not. Some are just young or in a tough spot. However a lot are bad. It sucks that many people died, burning is a horrific way to go. However, throwing tax payer money at it isn't a fair solution.

In your world the poor would rebel and behead the rich regularly. You know, all the money wealthy people have, all the status, is only because the majority permits it. If you fuck the poor hard enough they'll fuck back, and suddenly you don't have the option of accepting slightly higher taxes anymore, suddenly it's your head on a pike to placate the mob you facilitated with your policies

[Shadowmelded]

Ahh so that was just a salty tangent to undermine your own point, got it

Mud flinging with right wingers aside, something does need to be done about foreign owned empty houses in major cities.

Land Value Tax.

[Deleted]

Well, in my world it would never have happened because there would be no subsidized housing by the government. any subsidized housing would be paid for by liberals and charities while the right happily kept their money. Sadly, we don't live in that world. The idea is nice, as I said. A place for teachers and young professionals to live. In reality its a haven for scum. Now, don't twist my words and say all low income people are scum, they are not. Some are just young or in a tough spot. However a lot are bad. It sucks that many people died, burning is a horrific way to go. However, throwing tax payer money at it isn't a fair solution.

Can you name the people that died or lost thier houses that 'were bad' in this case? If you name them then we know who not to help. Thanks.

- - - Updated - - -

Land Value Tax.

And https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_purchase_order if there is a public need like a crisis.

[Freighter]

Ahh so that was just a salty tangent to undermine your own point, got it

No, it's that you stating that you pay a certain % in taxes has no relevance to whether you have money or not. I pay a low amount of income taxes, I have a lot of money. In fact, my income is not what has created my money, family is.

[Cruor]

The edginess aside, you do realize that segregating the population based on wealth is only going to lead to increasing tensions right? And if you price the poor out of London as is being done, good luck keeping the city functioning when teachers, police, ambulance workers, cleaners, retail workers, security guards etc... etc... are no longer around.

The only way I can possibly see it working is this: Build a decent building near a commercial area or school area. To get into the building you MUST have a job as 1) Teacher 2) Police/fire/sanitation 3) Retail/food service within 2 miles of the building 4) Another job of value that is in the area. No refugees, no layabouts, no welfare bums, no stay at home mmo champion posters who live off the tax payer. As I said, the issue is the building is built with the vision school teachers and ambulance workers live there, but the reality is it becomes a dirtbag haven in a nice area, like a rotting bruise on a once nice shiny apple.

- - - Updated - - -

Can you name the people that died or lost thier houses that 'were bad' in this case? If you name them then we know who not to help. Thanks.

- - - Updated - - -



And https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_purchase_order if there is a public need like a crisis.

We would have to do what I said above, have a strict application process and semi annual checks. Criminal record would also bar entry.

[Magicpot]

No, it's that you stating that you pay a certain % in taxes has no relevance to whether you have money or not. I pay a low amount of income taxes, I have a lot of money. In fact, my income is not what has created my money, family is.

I have a lot of money by comparison to the societal average. I'm not a millionare but probably will be in 30 years or so by virtue of not having much to do with anything exceeding my costs of living (very low at the moment). Does that answer your assumption? I assumed it was implied that pays high taxes = not a low income.

[Freighter]

I have a lot of money by comparison to the societal average. I'm not a millionare but probably will be in 30 years or so by virtue of not having much to do with anything exceeding my costs of living (very low at the moment). Does that answer your assumption? I assumed it was implied that pays high taxes = not a low income.

So you're not wealthy. You likely do not own any valuable property, so I'm not surprised that you're OK with shitting on others who do.

[Shadowmelded]

The only way I can possibly see it working is this: Build a decent building near a commercial area or school area. To get into the building you MUST have a job as 1) Teacher 2) Police/fire/sanitation 3) Retail/food service within 2 miles of the building 4) Another job of value that is in the area. No refugees, no layabouts, no welfare bums, no stay at home mmo champion posters who live off the tax payer. As I said, the issue is the building is built with the vision school teachers and ambulance workers live there, but the reality is it becomes a dirtbag haven in a nice area, like a rotting bruise on a once nice shiny apple.

Your vision sounds pretty dystopian. And what's all this about the people living in that building being dirtbags? They were working class people with jobs or in education. Honestly, you don't sound like you understand the situation, Britain or British society at all and are just shoehorning some uninformed "fuck the poor" pish into the discussion.

[Magicpot]

So you're not wealthy. You likely do not own any valuable property, so I'm not surprised that you're OK with shitting on others who do.

Hey, you referred to the average. The average person doesn't own any property and doesn't make a lot of money either.

And, I probably will in a couple of years, y'know, to live in.

Btw, I also don't think inheritance should even be a legal thing. Imo if you die, your money and assets die with you and get reused by society to their best effect

[Freighter]

Btw, I also don't think inheritance should even be a legal thing. Imo if you die, your money and assets die with you and get reused by society to their best effect

Good luck with that. People might as well wreak havoc if they're going to die in that case.

[Deleted]

The only way I can possibly see it working is this: Build a decent building near a commercial area or school area. To get into the building you MUST have a job as 1) Teacher 2) Police/fire/sanitation 3) Retail/food service within 2 miles of the building 4) Another job of value that is in the area. No refugees, no layabouts, no welfare bums, no stay at home mmo champion posters who live off the tax payer. As I said, the issue is the building is built with the vision school teachers and ambulance workers live there, but the reality is it becomes a dirtbag haven in a nice area, like a rotting bruise on a once nice shiny apple.

- - - Updated - - -



We would have to do what I said above, have a strict application process and semi annual checks. Criminal record would also bar entry.

Based on your posting frequency here, your limited vocabulary and inability to understand complex ideas and/or empathize with other human beings, plus your 5 years in the military going nowhere, you'd almost be certainly shut out of the brave new world you are envisaging.

This does seem to be a pattern with the judgemental: thoroughly useless people projecting their own inadequacies onto others.

- - - Updated - - -

So you're not wealthy. You likely do not own any valuable property, so I'm not surprised that you're OK with shitting on others who do.

Surprisingly common actually. For the same reasons a lot of homophobic politicians subsequently turned out to be gay.