|
That's good then, I can think of a few people whose homes I could make a good case for demolishing
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:As to the SNP fielding candidates south of the border i'm not convinced ethnic nationalism doesn't play a big enough part to make this impossible. British Isle socialism is only for the chosen of Scotland and Switzerland. English people = Icky pooey. The SNP using their media machine and contacts to assist setting up a centre-left reform focused Federalist Party in the rest of the UK would probably work better
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
I love how in an effort to avoid electoral uncertainty about a man who is around 5-8% behind in the polls, people are urging Labour to enact plans to oust him that would utterly destroy the party for decades. Maybe this is why Labour had so much difficulty after Tony left, everyone's a loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:While you may believe that people will necessarily start being nice to their wives and stop calling people coons as soon as you give them a fairer economic deal (which seems questionable to me as the rich haven't stopped yet), there are ways to achieve tangible forward movement on important social issues while the world revolution isn't happening and it's fairly patronising of you to poo poo on those for not being 'pure' enough, or for not always having an economic dimension to them. Liberal spotted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
I love the fact that they give a poo poo about electoral uncertainty when we're FOUR loving YEARS AWAY FROM THE NEXT ELECTION. Let the man set out his stall and get going, he's had less than six months. It's inevitable that his opinion polls will go down when he hasn't had a chance to actually put across his opinions to the public yet because he's constantly having to defend himself against people who are supposed to be on his side crowing about those polls. I mean seriously, the whole reshuffle thing. I still find it incredibly suspicious that it got picked up by the press three days before anything actually happened, on the same say that Corbyn and the campaign machine were just starting to announce a campaign about the railways. E: on another note, for once Comment Is Free has a vaguely decent contributor who's not attacking Corbyn http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/09/jeremy-corbyn-on-middle-britain-labour-beating-the-tories thespaceinvader fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:
Hmmmmm quote:In an article for the Sunday Times, Cameron wrote: “Within these so-called sink estates, behind front doors, families build warm and welcoming homes. But step outside in the worst estates and you’re confronted by concrete slabs dropped from on high, brutal high-rise towers and dark alleyways that are a gift to criminals and drug dealers. Sounds like we need improved planning rules! quote:The government will inject £140m to rehouse occupants and tear up planning rules to speed up the process. Oh Also I like how they've decided this will cost £140 mil before they've even produced any plans. That also sounds mysteriously cheap
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
Cameron had to sit in a studio as he was challenged on his policies on social housing through the medium of fairly poo poo rock. http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/10/rock-band-squeeze-trolled-david-cameron-on-tv-as-he-sat-watching-5613372/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn4Tb61WA0A Then he applauds, presumably because he thinks they were in support of him destroying the Welfare state. That or the concerns of the poor are unfortunately on a register not audible to Tories.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:Sounds like we need improved planning rules! Goddamnit, short-termism got us into this mess and it's going to drat well get us out of it for the short term, at least
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Gotta go fast Maybe he's expecting more riots in the near future for some reason??
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:Hmmmmm I googled the three named estates. Broadwater has about 5,000 people (so I assume a thousand families as a round number). Lower Falinge had about 1000 "working age adults" with 800+ of them unemployed according to a telegraph article. The local council responsible for Winstanley was already planning to demolish 700 homes and borrow 100m to built new homes (reports vary between 1000-2000) so gently caress knows what's happened to that scheme - or indeed that money! Assuming a total for these three estates of 1000+500+700=2,200/140m, you're looking at £63,000 to rehouse a family of about 4. It'll be interesting to see just how many estates they're planning to make a part of this, and what other costs are going to be involved - because you can guarantee the entire 140m isn't going to be spent on rehousing the poor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
i hope he shoots himself in his fat head like the last wobbly faced fascist who destroyed londoners homes in a blitz
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
XMNN posted:i hope he shoots himself in his fat head like the last wobbly faced fascist who destroyed londoners homes in a blitz I can't believe I didn't notice that particular choice of language!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Oh this is fun - a housebuilding cost calculator. A single storey house of "standard" quality (as opposed to "good" or "excellent") in Greater London, at 72 square meters in area (the minimum for a terraced council house designed for 4 occupants), built by builders and subcontractors comes in at.... £86,000. It can't seem to generate any data for 2 storey but I bet it won't be cheaper! Hmm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Angepain posted:That's good then, I can think of a few people whose homes I could make a good case for demolishing 330, to be exact.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Jedit posted:330, to be exact. lol, they'd just all go live in their second and third ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Fans posted:Cameron had to sit in a studio as he was challenged on his policies on social housing through the medium of fairly poo poo rock. No excuse being that close to Cameron with a Guitar and not KABOOOOOONGing the gently caress out of him. Should have gone the full Honky Tonk Man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:lol, they'd just all go live in their second and third ones. Someone find that list of MP's who all own property they rent out and post it again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Oh this is fun - a housebuilding cost calculator. A single storey house of "standard" quality (as opposed to "good" or "excellent") in Greater London, at 72 square meters in area (the minimum for a terraced council house designed for 4 occupants), built by builders and subcontractors comes in at.... £86,000. 72 m^2 would be very small for a family of four - it's about enough for an OK-sized two bed place or a rather poky three-bed house with not much storage space. You'd want something closer to 110 m^2 or a bit above to be comfortable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Important Jeremy Corbyn news: my dad bumped into him the other day on the way out of the football and said "don't let the bastards in the PLP grind you down". He said "please don't worry, we aren't worried about anything". Take that how you will!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:72 m^2 would be very small for a family of four - it's about enough for an OK-sized two bed place or a rather poky three-bed house with not much storage space. You'd want something closer to 110 m^2 or a bit above to be comfortable. Lol like they want these people to be comfortable. They're dirty dirty crims.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
People in these homes are poor and have to resort to crime. Hmm, It's obviously the homes fault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Important Jeremy Corbyn news: my dad bumped into him the other day on the way out of the football and said "don't let the bastards in the PLP grind you down". He said "please don't worry, we aren't worried about anything". Take that how you will! Your dad is good people  Regarding the whole Trident thing (since the Guardian is currently on round 89783253453 of "poo poo on Corbyn"). Why is this being tied to Corbyn? If the members of the party vote for this then it's not Corbyn's decision, it's the parties. It seems the harder he tries to push for consensus-lead politics the more the media and the PLP tries to make it Corbyn-based instead. I suppose it's because 1vote out of 21 is a damned sight more than 1 vote in 430'000. I just wonder if there are enough Labour MPs who are both competent and not complete shits to make a cabinet out of. I just don't see why they're hung up on Trident of all issues. Is this what their constituents really care about? Or is this simply "a thing to complain about"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
winegums posted:bI just don't see why they're hung up on Trident of all issues. Is this what their constituents really care about? Or is this simply "a thing to complain about"? I think if you could take a completely honest poll of the PLP a significant chunk would rather the Tories won in 2020 than Corbyn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
What happened to our sister thread in gbs, was it put up against a wall 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
winegums posted:Your dad is good people Yes, it's a thing to complain about. They don't like Corbyn and they want to find that one issue that the public also don't like him on, or can be made not to like him on. They also can't comprehend the idea of an actually democratic, actually member-led political party as opposed to a centralised one which appears to be member-led.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:What happened to our sister thread in gbs, was it put up against a wall its byob, it's worse than australia
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Important Jeremy Corbyn news: my dad bumped into him the other day on the way out of the football and said "don't let the bastards in the PLP grind you down".
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:People in these homes are poor and have to resort to crime. Classical Tories would say it's the people's fault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
winegums posted:Your dad is good people I imagine that they want a repeat of what happened with the Syria bombing, if only because it's easy for the papers just to rinse and repeat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:lol, they'd just all go live in their second and third ones. Angepain did say "homes" plural, you know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
jabby posted:I think if you could take a completely honest poll of the PLP a significant chunk would rather the Tories won in 2020 than Corbyn. About a quarter, I'd guess (going by the numbers who voted against Corbyn on Syria).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Conference voted for Trident last time around, so the angle of attack seems to be that Corbyn's anti-Trident push is going against the democratically-expressed wishes of the party.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Angepain did say "homes" plural, you know. They'd just buy more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I googled the three named estates. Broadwater has about 5,000 people (so I assume a thousand families as a round number). Lower Falinge had about 1000 "working age adults" with 800+ of them unemployed according to a telegraph article. The local council responsible for Winstanley was already planning to demolish 700 homes and borrow 100m to built new homes (reports vary between 1000-2000) so gently caress knows what's happened to that scheme - or indeed that money! Now  that article again!quote:Nearly a hundred of the UK’s worst “sink estates” could be bulldozed to make way for better homes as part of a “blitz” on poverty unveiled by David Cameron. I mean that's 'could be' but let's assume if this is a crusade big enough to write a Sunday Times article about, then crushing only four pauper slums is probably a lowball estimate. That cost-per-house is gonna dwindle fast I wonder how prime the real estate is in these areas........
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Conference voted for Trident last time around, so the angle of attack seems to be that Corbyn's anti-Trident push is going against the democratically-expressed wishes of the party. Well, the issue was kept off the agenda via procedural shenanigans, and then a pro-Trident clause was snuck in on the back of the foreign policy report. That's a long way from an iron-clad democratic mandate on the subject. Corbyn really should be seen to be fighting the base and the PLP at the same time, though. If he really wants to die on this hill he should wait out the three years and make sure the issue gets a robust debate then. Though, are we sure this is coming from Corbyn? Has he actually said that he is/might be whipping against Trident or are the press making poo poo up again?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Well, the issue was kept off the agenda via procedural shenanigans, and then a pro-Trident clause was snuck in on the back of the foreign policy report. That's a long way from an iron-clad democratic mandate on the subject. People know his opinions and are briefing as if he's threatened them about it. He almost certainly hasn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
Autonomous Monster posted:Well, the issue was kept off the agenda via procedural shenanigans, and then a pro-Trident clause was snuck in on the back of the foreign policy report. That's a long way from an iron-clad democratic mandate on the subject. The Thornberry-Eagle switch was generally interpreted as a way to push nuclear disarmament. Since the new deputy Shadow Defence Secretary is basically a non-entity, that means the defence part of the Shadow Cabinet has gone from wholly pro-Trident to wholly anti-Trident.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Yes, it's a thing to complain about. They don't like Corbyn and they want to find that one issue that the public also don't like him on, or can be made not to like him on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
I suppose that one good thing (among several) that Corbyn's election has brought about is the revelation, for anyone who cares to look, of just how un-democratic our entire system of politics is. Of course this would require a) people looking at what's happening and joining a few very obvious dots and b) the belief that democracy is a system worth aspiring to. But it's a start.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:41 |
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:His net approval ratings are in the same ballpark as Nixon's after Watergate. They have already found that issue: it is "being Jeremy Corbyn." Actually that's not what polls suggest. As I mentioned in the last thread: the December ComRes poll has a big gap between agreement to the statement "Jeremy Corbyn is turning out to be a good leader of the Labour Party" (25% Agree, 46% Disagree) and the statement "Jeremy Corbyn offers a positive difference from other politicians" (40% Agree, 37% Disagree). So doesn't seem to be true that people dislike Jeremy Corbyn as a person. Approval ratings quoted tend to relate to the first statement (or a close cousin).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 17:39
|
|