Squatting is the Only Affordable Housing

princeofpounds

Benefits has been cut in real terms a bit also. But not much. I think you are right that the cut for an individual has been made a bit worse by increased take-up, but I haven't dug out that data.

Haven't looked up the definitions though, not sure if that includes housing-related or not.

Pensioners definitely the sacred cow.

chucknorris

JencParker wrote: »

No I don't - it was in response to the original 'scumbags' post
... why isn't there a rolleyes smilie?

You still used the word yourself!

dtsazza

JencParker wrote: »

Let's hope none of you fall on hard times, the well of human kindness didn't just pass you by, it did a massive detour!

Sometimes I despair at the society we live in. If you took those enormous chips of your shoulders and didn't listen to all the propaganda you may see what someone who was blind and deaf did so clearly

It doesn't seem to me like an issue of being unkind.

As evanjonesaber put it, it's simply a belief that other people should not be able to help themselves to your things, just because they didn't earn any of their own.

There's nothing wrong with defending that belief. In fact if it weren't defended, that would de facto mean an end to property rights, with everything belonging to everyone. And so there'd be no incentive to do anything, because it wouldn't make any difference to your standard of living.

I have no shame in maintaining a view that people can have something, if and only if they set themselves to the tasks necessary to earn it legitimately.

Jellybean_Jo

This thread is hilarious. Yes, some of the responses might seem a little harsh on the face of it but it's really hard not to be when faced with such complete nonsense (quite appropriate name you've chosen their OP).

E.L.James wrote: »

This forum is all about squatting and he is a legend in the squatting community.

Wow, is it really...and here's me thinking it was the House Buying, Renting and Selling Board!? Not quite sure how you've deducted that it's therefore "all about squatting".

Jamie_Carter

Manchee wrote: »

Yes you're right, talk is cheap. I have connections with my local homeless shelter. I used to volunteer 3 days a week with them for over a year, working in the shelter and as support staff for the residents and helping them fundraise (I had to stop as I started a new job in which I now work quite long hours). I know what homelessness does, and yes, if I owned property that wasn't in use I would much rather someone vulnerable was off the street than for it to sit empty.

I would rather people are safe, off the street, and trying to make something of their lives than look the other way and not actually do anything or really care about the problem.

Its not a 'high horse' (I hate that phrase, its so dismissive and comes across as very disrespectful), its just I never seem to get used to how little people actually care, thats all.

So are you going to answer the question? Do you give up rooms in your property to the homeless??

Jamie_Carter

JencParker wrote: »

Good grief! Some of the comments on here are appalling....

.........scumbags ..........jail time!

Let's hope none of you fall on hard times, the well of human kindness didn't just pass you by, it did a massive detour!

Sometimes I despair at the society we live in. If you took those enormous chips of your shoulders and didn't listen to all the propaganda you may see what someone who was blind and deaf did so clearly:

“The few own the many because they possess the means of livelihood of all ... The country is governed for the richest, for the corporations, the bankers, the land speculators, and for the exploiters of labor. The majority of mankind are working people. So long as their fair demands - the ownership and control of their livelihoods - are set at naught, we can have neither men's rights nor women's rights. The majority of mankind is ground down by industrial oppression in order that the small remnant may live in ease.”

Do you give up rooms in your home to the homeless then??

E.L.James

This thread is going a little off topic. Back on point, housing costs are too high, the reality is the only way low income families can pay the rent is with help from benefits. This help is unsustainable. So it is going to keep being reduced and cut back every year, either housing costs come down a long way or many will not be able to afford housing costs.

In other places around the world when people can not afford housing costs they are forced to squat or be homeless. If they are forced to squatting it is not the same as being lazy and just not wanting to pay rent even though they could. but I seriously doubt there are that many if any who fit that bill.

Jamie_Carter

E.L.James wrote: »

This thread is going a little off topic. Back on point, housing costs are too high, the reality is the only way low income families can pay the rent is with help from benefits. This help is unsustainable. So it is going to keep being reduced and cut back every year, either housing costs come down a long way or many will not be able to afford housing costs.

In other places around the world when people can not afford housing costs they are forced to squat or be homeless. If they are forced to squatting it is not the same as being lazy and just not wanting to pay rent even though they could. but I seriously doubt there are that many if any who fit that bill.

Are you going to answer my question???

Are you a squatter??

JencParker

E.L.James wrote: »

This thread is going a little off topic. Back on point, housing costs are too high, the reality is the only way low income families can pay the rent is with help from benefits. This help is unsustainable. So it is going to keep being reduced and cut back every year, either housing costs come down a long way or many will not be able to afford housing costs.

In other places around the world when people can not afford housing costs they are forced to squat or be homeless. If they are forced to squatting it is not the same as being lazy and just not wanting to pay rent even though they could. but I seriously doubt there are that many if any who fit that bill.

Well, I guess there's always coffin apartments is for the low paid - still not cheap, but hopefully affordable.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2286069/Living-box-The-tiny-coffin-apartments-Tokyo-cost-400-month-rent.html