London fire.

[Freighter]

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

On internet and among celebrities for that sweet social status. I've never met a person irl who thinks inheritance should be done away with or that property should be insanely taxed nor that the government should be able to seize their property for their own use, they seem to be few and far between.

[Deleted]

We don't have unoccupied wildnerness in the UK. If it's not built on, it's being farmed or otherwise managed for some application or other. You can't just 'go and build a house'.

Also, half an hour commute? Have you actually seen an actual city?

Gotta remember, American cities are all pre planned out, ours tend to be a bit more hodge podge because they've been around a few millenia longer than the yanks.

[ramjb]

Lul. The Guardian:

Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished

Symbolism is everything in politics and nothing better signifies the austerity of May-Cameron-Osborne era than North Kensington’s ghastly tomb. That tomb in the sky will be forever Theresa May’s monument. Grenfell marks the spot and her visit marks the moment the last vestiges of her career were finally rubbed out. She made it her own yesterday by that fateful “visit” to a handful of senior fire officers, guarding her from any contaminating contact with the bereaved and newly homeless. Dead to emotion or empathy, she sealed her fate.

[Shadowmelded]

Lul. The Guardian:

Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished

Why would you ever read anything Polly Toynbee writes? While I feel that some of the anger directed at May is a little too personal and perhaps unwarranted, she has reacted poorly to this ordeal. The anger is better directed at the ideology that led to this happening imo though rather than the representative of the party espousing that ideology.

[JohnBrown1917]

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.

Don't bother, tories/republicans made a hobby out of hating on the poor.

[Cruor]

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.

There is a difference between a person who works and earns 30k and a dirtbag. Don't twist my words and lump them into one when I clearly separated them. New teacher earning 30k: Not a dirtbag Mom with 5 kids from 2-3 different men leeching off the welfare system: Dirtbag

- - - Updated - - -

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 - - -



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

My posting frequency? you have 3X more posts in 1/2 the time. You had the time, and got mad enough to look up my post history to see that I was in the army, so yeah, too much free time. I served for 5 years in my 30's. My enlistment ended and I decided not to renew because I can make more money on the outside. Limited vocabulary? I don't see many overly complex words in any of your posts.

Seems to be a pattern with angry liberals: thoroughly useless people projecting their sense of entitlement and "right" to be paid for on others.

[JohnBrown1917]

lol as responding at a my post which was not even directed at you, but hey, its nice of you to admit you hate the poor.

[Shadowmelded]

There is a difference between a person who works and earns 30k and a dirtbag. Don't twist my words and lump them into one when I clearly separated them. New teacher earning 30k: Not a dirtbag Mom with 5 kids from 2-3 different men leeching off the welfare system: Dirtbag

I still have no idea how you've gotten the idea into your head that the area was a haven for dirtbags. You're just projecting your prejudices onto the situation so you can rail against the idea of social housing.

[Dhrizzle]

Didn't have no fires = Did have some fires. Double negatives (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative).

You should read that article you linked, it explains how double negatives either cancel out (like multiplication) or enhance each other (like addition,) the trick is to figure out from context what the person communication means.

From the fact you tried to correct them I guess you know what Zelk meant so you shouldn't need to try to correct them.

[Cruor]

I still have no idea how you've gotten the idea into your head that the area was a haven for dirtbags. You're just projecting your prejudices onto the situation so you can rail against the idea of social housing.

In New York City, subsidized housing is a haven for dirtbags. I lived in NYC for 30 years. New York and London are both large cities with some similar features. If you go back a few pages you can see I asked about the building. I asked because in the news clip I saw, people were complaining the fire happened because the building was not made well enough. Looking at the people in the clip, I guessed they were "subsidized" looking it up, and talking here, I found I was right.

I don't enjoy the fact that people burned to death, horrible way to go. However crying to the taxpayer is not the solution.

[Dhrizzle]

Unless the owners agree to it then that's pretty bad.

Having buildings standing empty and unused when people need shelter is bad.

- - - Updated - - -

How is that not taking it from the owner and using it for their own purposes?

Because the owner isn't using it, if no-one tells them the owner would likely never know, so nothing is taken.

Know what would be common sense? Getting the fuck out of a country that doesn't respect your property rights.

Oh no! Wouldn't it be terrible if those rich people stopped buying up the London real estate so prices fell closer to a level ordinary people could afford.

[Freighter]

Because the owner isn't using it, if no-one tells them the owner would likely never know, so nothing is taken.

What kind of fucked up thinking is this? A woman won't know she was raped while passed out unless someone tells her, so it's nothing bad?

[Shadowmelded]

In New York City, subsidized housing is a haven for dirtbags. I lived in NYC for 30 years. New York and London are both large cities with some similar features. If you go back a few pages you can see I asked about the building. I asked because in the news clip I saw, people were complaining the fire happened because the building was not made well enough. Looking at the people in the clip, I guessed they were "subsidized" looking it up, and talking here, I found I was right.

I don't enjoy the fact that people burned to death, horrible way to go. However crying to the taxpayer is not the solution.

Some similarities doesn't mean interchangeable. Again, if you don't understand British Society (like the importance of the welfare state and Governmental responsibilities) then please refrain from shoehorning your agenda into the discussion.

[Dhrizzle]

What kind of fucked up thinking is this? A woman won't know she was raped while passed out unless someone tells her, so it's nothing bad?

Zero point in having a discussion with someone who thinks housing the homeless can be equated to rape, goodbye!

[Freighter]

Zero point in having a discussion with someone who thinks housing the homeless can be equated to rape, goodbye!

You said it's not bad because property owners wouldn't even know unless they're told. Why do you apply this to one sort of violation but not another?

[Dhrizzle]

You said it's not bad because property owners wouldn't even know unless they're told.

And you equated having people sleep in an unused building to someone having non-consensual sex with a person who is unconscious, and I don't see any point in talking to someone who either can't see how radically different those situations are, or who thinks it's cool and edgy to make that sort of comparison for shock-value.

[Cruor]

Some similarities doesn't mean interchangeable. Again, if you don't understand British Society (like the importance of the welfare state and Governmental responsibilities) then please refrain from shoehorning your agenda into the discussion.

Why don't you explain it then.

[Freighter]

And you equated having people sleep in an unused building to someone having non-consensual sex with a person who is unconscious, and I don't see any point in talking to someone who either can't see how radically different those situations are, or who thinks it's cool and edgy to make that sort of comparison for shock-value.

Both are violations. Why is one ok but not the other? Either it's not ok to violate others without their knowledge or it's okay in all situations.

In fact, I would argue that the government violating peoples rights in that manner is far more damaging to society than rape ever will be.

[Shadowmelded]

Why don't you explain it then.

Explain why New York and London are different? Or explain British Society? Both would require multiple books. I mean if you're really interested, I'd recommend starting at 1750 and working forward from there which was roughly the last time poverty was seen as a result of moral failure and led to the creation of the welfare state. Pay particular attention to poor and workhouses (which seem to resemble the vision you set out in an earlier post).

[Freighter]

I think we may have come to what lies at the very centre of our difference of opinion.

You value property over people whereas I value people over property.

You don't value people if you want to violate people unduly.