Good Old Fergus!

editor1

@dktreesea,

Perhaps it would help to acknowledge the facts, rather than pull a few crass examples from the internet and suggest these are facts - why don't you visit the HK Housing Authority website, instead of make wild assertions - the rooftop dwellings you speak off are either owned by those living in them, or privately rented. Also, it must be a long time since you were in HK because its impossible to see rooftops when landing at HK Airport nowadays due to the fact the Airport was moved in 1997 - still don't let facts get in the way of your assertions.

As for Singapore, its been 8 years since I last lived there and the public housing estate I was living next too was certainly no slum. I can show all appalling public and private dwellings in the UK, the fact remains that in Singapore and Hong Kong the state takes responsibility for housing those on low wages - something to do with maintaining public order!!!!!!

ruggedtoast

mayonnaise wrote: »

Thanks for the head up, brit.
Wise words again from the Wilsons.

Mrs. Wilson : 'People need to get off their backsides and work'

Mr. Wilson : 'People have to take responsibility for their lives. Employment is the passport to get in a house. Gone are the days when you could rely on housing benefits.'




I'm sure all of us MSE'ers can agree with that. :beer:

http://www.channel4.com/news/landlady-people-need-to-get-off-their-backsides-and-work

Which is an odd philosophy for someone who makes an income out of doing eff all herself and only isn't bankrupt because macro economic events saved her from ruin.

Loughton_Monkey

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Which is an odd philosophy for someone who makes an income out of doing eff all herself and only isn't bankrupt because macro economic events saved her from ruin.

Being boomers, they are totally immune from bankruptcy. Wealth just came with the milk. No effort involved. They just exploited the younger generations as we all did. Innit?

BillJones

Running_Horse wrote: »

Ashford in Kent is one big housing construction site. There is no shortage of new houses in Ashford (look on Rightmove). Still does not answer where these displaced families are going to live. Where do you think they should go?

Ashford, perhaps?

Loughton_Monkey

BillJones wrote: »

Ashford, perhaps?

... or Calais.

BillJones

editor1 wrote: »

There are some seriously misinformed and "nasty" people posting on this thread about the idiot Landlord scum who prospers off all our backs one way or another - call it what you want chaps, but these are facts....(lies snipped)...?

No, thse werre not really facts. Singapore is happy for "farang" maids to live in windowless cupboards, and have to "bath" from a bucket on the rear balcony of the flats where they work. They legally mandate that children must support their parents, rather than have the state look after them, and will deport people the day they lose their job. It is a state with rights only for a few. It can't even be said to be a functioning democracy.

editor1

BillJones wrote: »

No, thse werre not really facts. Singapore is happy for "farang" maids to live in windowless cupboards, and have to "bath" from a bucket on the rear balcony of the flats where they work. They legally mandate that children must support their parents, rather than have the state look after them, and will deport people the day they lose their job. It is a state with rights only for a few. It can't even be said to be a functioning democracy.

Funny is it not I happened to marry one of these "maids" you refer too and am most aware of abuse of "domestics" in both Singapore and Hong Kong - so sorry to instruct you that you seem to be barking up the wrong tree.

I've pointed out facts that you and many others seem to ignore; namely, that in Singapore and Hong Kong the government furnishes the working poor and those on welfare in state run housing. Further, in Hong Kong at least, I have more "rights" than here in the UK, and these "rights" are freedom of speech, an independent judiciary, a "vote" in local elections, access to free health care, access to welfare, access to state furnished housing and many other benefits - all this is a "supposed" non-democracy with a "free" economy - well as free as you can get as there are no "free" economies globally, apart from in the rantings of neoliberals and free market fundamentalists.

Still, do keep up trolling, but I do hope others actually investigate how many families in Singapore and HK are housed by the state, many in quarters better than on offer from the supposed "private" sector.

The Wilson's are an abomination, as is anyone who is a part of the rent extracting economy that's actually destroying the fabric of many a nation - if you cannot see this, you are blind, ignorant, or just a greedy F--K - still, at least I have the pleasure of being able to struggle for my own "free" state in Wales, or live in many places across Asia, among them Australia - I prefer the independent Wales option myself, which is why I'm setting up shop in Wales with income earned globally, and not off the backs of the working class or poor in this country.

God help England is all I can say, its really like reading the Daily Heil and Daily Torygraph on these boards!!!!!!

dktreesea

editor1 wrote: »

@dktreesea,

Perhaps it would help to acknowledge the facts, rather than pull a few crass examples from the internet and suggest these are facts - why don't you visit the HK Housing Authority website, instead of make wild assertions - the rooftop dwellings you speak off are either owned by those living in them, or privately rented. Also, it must be a long time since you were in HK because its impossible to see rooftops when landing at HK Airport nowadays due to the fact the Airport was moved in 1997 - still don't let facts get in the way of your assertions.

As for Singapore, its been 8 years since I last lived there and the public housing estate I was living next too was certainly no slum. I can show all appalling public and private dwellings in the UK, the fact remains that in Singapore and Hong Kong the state takes responsibility for housing those on low wages - something to do with maintaining public order!!!!!!

Yes, if only the authorities in both countries would provide public housing for everyone who needs it. But they don't. Have you been an immigrant worker in a factory in Singapore? Their accommodations for their factory workers, i.e. arranged by the companies themselves, are pretty bleak. If we had that level of overcrowding in accommodation here there would be an outcry.

In Hong Kong, the overcrowding seems to be getting worse, not better. The waiting list for public housing in Hong Kong has stretched out to years. There are garment factories in Hong Kong who accommodate their workers on site to this day, in really rudimentary living conditions because there is no other choice. The workers in question have been unable to source their own accommodation.

The problems in Hong Kong and Singapore are similar to here. The government in only committed to housing certain groiups of people. This usually doesn't include some groups of immigrants. So here you get people living in sheds down back gardens, with neither toilet facilities nor running water. Or living rough out in the woods. Or under some flyover.

dktreesea

editor1 wrote: »

The Wilson's are an abomination, as is anyone who is a part of the rent extracting economy that's actually destroying the fabric of many a nation - if you cannot see this, you are blind, ignorant, or just a greedy F--K - still, at least I have the pleasure of being able to struggle for my own "free" state in Wales, or live in many places across Asia, among them Australia - I prefer the independent Wales option myself, which is why I'm setting up shop in Wales with income earned globally, and not off the backs of the working class or poor in this country.

God help England is all I can say, its really like reading the Daily Heil and Daily Torygraph on these boards!!!!!!

Your concerns for the finances of the working class or poor in the UK is misplaced. They are not usually the ones paying for at least part of their housing costs, if not all of them.

Why the antagonism to landlords? They provide a service. We are all free to save up and buy a property somewhere within our means in Britain if we don't want to rent. I've done both. Would I buy the current property I live in? Not a chance when I can live in it for less than a quarter of what it would cost me monthly to buy it. Do I care that some of my rent funds someone else's mortgage? No, because at the end of the day, - and this goes for anyone with a low income as well - I am not prepared to take the risks/work the hours/sacrifice the income/do whatever it takes to earn enough to be able to buy this property.

Graham_Devon

dktreesea wrote: »

Why the antagonism to landlords?

After all they have stated, don't you see why people just don't like them?

I honestly think being disliked is something they actively enjoy, hence go out of their way to make such provocative remakrs when there are other ways to say the same thing.