Rant and query regarding neighbours

Mupette

antrobus wrote: »

It's actually the other way around. Various governments, particularly Labour have promoted a clear demarcation between public and private housing. Labour councils (in particular) were infamous for building whopping great big council estates which by happy co-incidence produced ultra-safe Labour constituncies/ wards.

Personally I'm all in favour of mixing up 'social housing' (as we are apparently now supposed to call it) with owner occupied dwellings. It might make the latter appreciate that the former aren't all workshy layabouts, and the former appreciate that the latter aren't all toffee nosed prats who couldn't give a damn about themselves.

He says, writing from a 3 bed semi (actually 4, I had it extended) in a nice cul de sac (well almost) in suburbia, sadly lacking a wendy house stuck on the back (plastic or otherwise) that looks out on a number of council houses where some quite nice people live actually.

No Wendy House, ooooooo that's a crime in itself

brokeinyorkshire

I'm the same Mupette.

I was out of work for a long time with serious back problems which culminated in me having to have major surgery.

I ended up in a council house through bad luck and bad management but I work damn hard and pay my own rent which is quite high at £99.00 per week.

Some people on the estate are on benefits but it doesn't make them bad people or criminals.

Some people are such bigots. Bad luck can hit anyone. I lost my much loved home because my ex was an alcoholic who p*ssed all the money up against a wall.

But I have bounced back.

Judgmental people are all over and are rife on here!!

J

michaelvintner

Mupette wrote: »

My God not only am I on drink and drugs, according to purplelila i probably committing crime.. ;p

I like the odd G & T
been bought up to respect other people and their property, actually i don't have a police record, never been in trouble with the police, and the only drugs i do are my disease modifying ones for my MS.

Damn i must be the odd one out.

When i lived on a council estate, the majority of crime was by the drug dealers and their customers... customers that didn't live on the council estate, you know the kids in Uni, looking for a local dealer.

drunks... student housing on the estate........ students moved in drink involved crime went through the roof...

But i'm not pointing the finger at student, people of all walks of life commit crime.. not just the poor in council estates, you'll find trouble is bought to the estates

That is all well and go but can you please stop going to the toilet in my sink.

michaelvintner

All council tennants are scum and should be shot. I myself shoot at least 3 of them a day when they refuse to buy drugs off of me.

bobwilson

Mupette wrote: »

My God not only am I on drink and drugs, according to purplelila i probably committing crime.. ;p

I don't think purpelita is saying that you're more likely to commit crime, he means that the percentage of people on benefit who commit crimes out of the total on benefit, is higher than the percentage of people in full-time work who commit crimes out of the total in full-time work. So it's no surprise that there are going to be a lot of people on benefit who don't commit crime etc. I too would like to see official stats on this, I suspect there aren't any as it might be construed as discrimination, but at the end of the day it's just a statistic.

The percentage of black people committing crimes out of total numbers in the UK works out significantly higher than the percentage of white people out of total number of white people. The police are aware of this, particularly in London, and there was a big uproar about them searching people purley based on colour of skin. At the end of they day it's a statistic and I think this is what he meant.

dickydonkin

C_Mababejive wrote: »

It has nothing to do with your suitability or you as a person.

Its about how a capitalist society should work and its about how those with vested interests try to pick the best bits that suit them and to socially engineer other bits for their own ends.

For example,we have champagne socialist Mr Prescott,the person who brought us the criminal and iniquitous Pathfinder scheme.

He socially engineered it so that social tenants and private owner occs (OO) could live together and in many cases,the OO flogged their tripes out to pay a mortgage whilst many social tenants are under no pressure or indeed no obligation to do similar but nonetheless,can have the same house and live in the nice area.

The Capitalist idyll would be that you aspire,you work hard,you are successful and therefore you reap rewards.

For example,when i was a snotty kid living on my council estate,when i went to primary school and mummy picked me up at the gate at chucking out time, i turned right towards the council estate whilst others trotted left with mater and pater toward suburbia and the nice semis.

I didnt feel resentment. It was the order of the day,as it always has been and how it always should be until calculating baffoons such as Prescott interfered.

You see the system was that you had some admiration for those who had striven and attained and you wanted to be like them too.

If howver i could also turn left at the gate and mummy had been given a nice 3 bed semi with all mod cons all paid via HB etc..the message i would receive is that there was no real need to strive. Equally, my respect and appreciation of my nice new free home and my neighbours would diminish.

Did you know that under Prescotts Pathfinder scheme which sought to socially engineer the situations of which we speak,that OOs who had worked hard and bought their homes,had them compulsorily purchased,were thrown out on the street with meagre compensation for their home and the land sold to private developers to build mix and match private/SH developments?

How does that sound?

Fair comments CM.

Why should someone work and save and have aspirations when the lazy will have the same (if not better) lifestyle than those who don't or won't?

My brother in law who is quite capable of working, but has not done so for over 25 years - yes - 25 years and he is only 48 lives alone in a 3 bedroom council house, has a girlfriend and sprog who does not live with him, manages to run a car and can find spare cash to get to the pub most nights of the week - oh, and a couple of foreign trips per year to boot.

His next door neighbour has worked all of his life and is no better off than the lazy sod he lives next door to.

Before I get flamed - I have no issues with those who genuinely cannot work.

The system is to blame as well, but while such a flawed system exists, it will always be exploited.

CM is right - there is no need to aspire to anything nowadays as the government will provide it if you won't.

Awaiting incoming flak - but I don't care.

When i lived on a council estate, the majority of crime was by the drug dealers and their customers... customers that didn't live on the council estate, you know the kids in Uni, looking for a local dealer.

drunks... student housing on the estate........ students moved in drink involved crime went through the roof...

But i'm not pointing the finger at student, people of all walks of life commit crime.. not just the poor in council estates, you'll find trouble is bought to the estates

Mupette - Regarding the 'customers' coming into or 'bought to the estates' (sic) do you not realise that you have confirmed what most people believe anyway. The drug dealers/scum are already there attracting the people you describe!

As for 'not pointing the finger at student' (sic) - re-read your post.

eeeeeee

get a grip guys have you not read my previous posts ? the op posted this thread too get a reaction ...then dissapeared and never joined in ....

Mupette

dickydonkin wrote: »

Mupette - Regarding the 'customers' coming into or 'bought to the estates' (sic) do you not realise that you have confirmed what most people believe anyway. The drug dealers/scum are already there attracting the people you describe!

As for 'not pointing the finger at student' (sic) - re-read your post.

But i'm not pointing the finger at student, people of all walks of life commit crime.. not just the poor in council estates, you'll find trouble is bought to the estates

you missed out the other part of the comments, wouldn't want you to seem like you were cherry picking my quotes...;)

DD1966

I live in an area where there are a mix of HA properties and owner occupier and I have to say you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
I myself am a HA tenant and my OH works and has worked for 30 years, unfortuante circumstances led us to loosing our home and this is the first time we have had to rely on social housing.
I had a run in with a woman from down the road a few years ago, she is an owner occupier, she is the most unsocial person you could wish to meet, she drinks, is loud and her kids are unruly...so you tell me, are they better than me because she has a mortgage and i pay rent? I think not!

TEDDYRUKSPIN

:mad:

eeeeeee wrote: »

get a grip guys have you not read my previous posts ? the op posted this thread too get a reaction ...then dissapeared and never joined in ....

Can I please tell people to stop expanding on this thread. The original question was answered.

The housing association bought out the next door property, and voila! Devalued the whole streets property market value. It will also make it hard for me to sell but not impossible.

The noise and lack of upkeeping issue is a different matter. But I need to draw to people attention, that this WAS the initial thing that got me to find out that something was wrong.

To even stop people thinking it was an original debate. I can tell you now that you get all walks of life no matter where you live!

More and more drug dealers are buying into private estates. More and more people who earn a living have lost their houses and now living in housing association etc etc.

So... if people can read the thread. I only wanted one answer. If my property would be devalued. Even if I added the so called extra sentences, it is my opinion. Like other opinions on this thread.

I wish I was some prude who was rich. But I am not and no where near that stage.

All I need to say, if you saved for a lot of years and bought a specific asset i.e. a house and to be told that your property was reduced in value due to an event. How would you feel? Same like me?

I still think that private properties should remain as private properties. Why should my hard earned money be robbed blindly in this way.

If you lived in chelsea and a so-called housing association bought out a chelsea flat worth more than £500k, and devalued the area? Who would be the angry person? These people probably would have money to sue.

Anyway, end of the story. If people want to further debate about this issue, could they just open another thread.