- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:5000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 685 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
242 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 59246
>A homeless man who stole a purse and a phone from victims of the Manchester Arena attack has admitted theft.
>Chris Parker, 33, was initially dubbed a hero after claiming he comforted a seriously injured girl. CCTV footage played to Manchester Crown Court showed him wandering between stricken victims. He kept returning to injured Pauline Healey, whose granddaughter lay dying nearby, before leaning over her and taking her handbag to steal her purse.
I don't get why bleeding heart do-gooders bleat on about the homeless. They're all scratters who are on the streets through choice, usually because they choose not to stay in a hostel as they know they wouldn't be allowed to do drugs there.
|>>|| No. 62857
A very real hazard of not being able to just Airbnb the place for five times the long-term rate
|>>|| No. 62859
A significant proportion of homeless people - particularly long-term homeless people - have significant social care needs. They might have issues with drug or alcohol dependency, they might have chronic mental health issues, they might have behavioural issues, often they have all of the above. Some homeless people just need somewhere to live, but some are difficult to house. If you really set your mind to it, you can make a newly-refurbished flat into a completely uninhabitable shithole in a matter of days. That's the reason for the risk premium - there are a lot of tenants that landlords are simply unwilling to accommodate at market rents.
|>>|| No. 62864
We need to glass that entire damned continent and I mean the Covenant kind not to pint kind.
|>>|| No. 65371
For curiosities sake I thought I'd look up what happened to the tramp in the OP. He was sent back to prison in January for breaching his bail conditions.
The last I can find of Stephen Jones/Draper (>>59257) is that they were unable to give him the six figure sums raised on the likes of GoFundMe because they were unable to trace him.
|>>|| No. 65377
Coming from someone who works withe homeless, most of those mental health problems stem from drug use and while not perfect their are routes out of homelessness but they involve stop taking the drugs that pit them on the street in the first place, which for most is a non starter
|>>|| No. 66682
The government promised in March that nobody who had lost income because of the pandemic would be forced out of their home, but at the end of this week the ban on evictions for renters (which was extended by four weeks in one of the government’s many summer U-turns) comes to an end just as coronavirus numbers start to rise again.
Thousands of people are at risk of becoming homeless. According to the housing charity Shelter 322,000 private renters, who were not in arrears before the pandemic, have since fallen behind on their rent. Many are in danger of automatic eviction if their case goes to court. Ministers have softened the blow by extending the notice period for evictions from up to three months to six months but this does not apply to those who were served notice to leave before August 29. And, of course, the “rule of six” will make it harder for those who do lose their home to stay with family and friends, raising the prospect that more will be forced on to the streets.
Labour has called for the ban on evictions to be extended until more financial support is offered to renters who have fallen into arrears. Tory MPs are also privately urging the government to announce a further extension. “This a disaster waiting to happen,” says one former cabinet minister. “They’re either going to have do another U-turn or there will be a shocking rise in homelessness. My worry is that we’ve shown it’s possible to get everyone off the streets during the Covid crisis so if homelessness goes up now people will know it’s as a consequence of the government’s actions.”
There we have it in black and white - the government could prevent homelessness if they really wanted to.
|>>|| No. 66683
>the government could prevent homelessness if they really wanted to.
This has always been the case.
|>>|| No. 66685
Tories clearly thinking it doesn't matter because homeless people can't register to vote.
|>>|| No. 66688
Homeless people can register to vote, there's no need to tell porkies. Granted, the long-term homeless usually have the kind of issues that make voting less of a priority to them.
|>>|| No. 66689
>MY WORRY IS THAT WE’VE SHOWN IT’S POSSIBLE TO GET EVERYONE OFF THE STREETS
This line is just amazing.
|>>|| No. 66691
Oh? I thought you needed an address. How do you register if you're sleeping rough? Who is your MP when you have no fixed abode?
|>>|| No. 66692
You need an address, but you can perfectly legally use the address of a homeless hostel, a day centre, or even something like "The Bins Behind Currys, High Street". As long as a postman can find you, it's a valid address. Most homeless people aren't registered to vote, but most are claiming benefits and often have to give an unconventional address in order to do so.
|>>|| No. 66693
Bring to bear the full weight of a sharpened blade descending along wooden runners, having been suspended and released from a rope. Comrades.
|>>|| No. 66980
I don't get how there's a housing crisis when everywhere I look there's new build developments. There'll be no green spaces left soon round here.
|>>|| No. 66982
I don't see the point in building affordable homes. It just lowers the tone for the rest of the neighbourhood; you'd end up living near the type of person who has a hot tub in their back garden.
Surely it's better to raise standards and build better houses across the board. Then the houses at the bottom of the chain become the 'affordable' houses when everyone else moves up. Raise standards rather than lowering them to the lowest common denominator.
|>>|| No. 66983
>Surely it's better to raise standards and build better houses across the board.
You'd think so. A lot of these are shoddy finishes, know a few people who've moved into them last year and ended up with a long list of problems. The amount of new builds going up in the south west alone too is staggering, and it's all just a cash grab.
|>>|| No. 66984
>build better houses across the board. Then the houses at the bottom of the chain become the 'affordable' houses when everyone else moves up
I don't know where to begin with this. Are you by any chance one of the lads who was posting in /b/ that people who don't like their job just aren't putting in enough effort to get a better one?
|>>|| No. 66985
The new build council house my Mum moved into is better quality than the new build Barratt home my Dad lives in. It's not as big, but it's built to some lofty EU housing standards and has a ground source heat pump central heating system as opposed to the dual fuel gas/electric one.
They're both 2 bedrooms and they both have driveways, only difference is that my Mum lives in a 4 in block flat and has a slightly smaller garden.
My own anecdotal experience with them is that her house holds heat better as well and the Kitchen being bigger, although the units and worktops are lower quality in her council house than in my Dad's.
If the ones Councils are building are of the same relative quality as the ones everyone else are building, then it's the market that's fucked. Which we all know it is.
|>>|| No. 66986
Oh, lad. Think it through.
I build one house. That means there is one extra house in the housing supply. It doesn't matter if it's a nice house or an affordable house; the housing stock increases by one either way.
If you build a nice house it may be out of the reach of a first time buyer but, guess what, another house will be sold to fund the purchase of the nice house and that may be affordable to the first time buyers.
You have increased the housing stock by one but instead of building a shitty house you've built a nice house that someone can aspire to trade up to. Put a shitty house on a nice new estate and you're lowering the tone for everyone else plus you'd be treated with disdain as the token poor people. let these people buy the house that's put on the market to fund others further up the ladder moving into the nice house; each neighbourhood should better reflect the social status of the respective buyers.
Aspiration is so much better than envy. Demand better. Build better. Be better. Raise standards for everyone.
|>>|| No. 66989
Have you seen the state of the new-builds they charge £400,000 for these days? They're made of paper mache and half finished. Anyone sensible about property is buying an old house, not one of those piss poor pokey little copy/paste suburb cubes.
What you fail to account for is that like in every aspect of business, there's no need to improve quality if it's a seller's market. you can just rinse people with impunity regardless. someone needs to sell good quality AND affordable houses to bring genuine competition back to the market.
|>>|| No. 66990
>ANOTHER HOUSE WILL BE SOLD TO FUND THE PURCHASE OF THE NICE HOUSE AND THAT MAY BE AFFORDABLE TO THE FIRST TIME BUYERS.
That's a huge fucking "may", lad.
|>>|| No. 67768
I saw the link and thought it'd be sufficiently batshit to post here. A lass I know who is a complete fruitloop posted it on social media - she works in Young adult mental health services. Then again, at least half the people I know who who work in mental health are absolute mentalists.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]