I find myself quoted by Jeremy Corbyn

Forbes magazine — which works for the richest and most powerful — challenges the Oxfam report, and its extraordinarily arrogant contributor Tim Worstall makes the point that he would fail a high school essay if it presented evidence in the manner that Oxfam does.
He claims that there have been significant increases in income for the poorest, as a justification for economic policies which are designed to concentrate wealth among the very richest.

101 thoughts on “I find myself quoted by Jeremy Corbyn”

  1. “I don’t want the poor to get richer if it means those rich bastards having more – fuck the poor, let’s eat the rich”

  2. Maybe if he could question his ideology for a nanosecond he might realise that he’s got it backasswards.

    He seems to think that the poor getting richer is just a coincidental side effect of the rich trying to enrich themselves.

    Maybe the rich getting richer is a parallel consequence of an system that works on the principle that *everyone* should be getting richer?

    To quote Maggie, he would rather the poor were poorer, just so long as the rich were less rich.

  3. What tin-pot regime is funding the Morning Star these days anyway?

    Also, the article must be a re-print, as it mentions the upcoming May election.

  4. Unfortunately for the poorest in this country, the attitude of “fuck the poor” defines the policies of the Labour party.

    Any party will try to maximise its voter base – and the voter base of the Labour party is the poorest in the country. It used to be the “working poor” even if now it’s more like the “benefits-claiming poor”. They keep offering the hope that “next time, we’ll finally be able to solve inequality”, and the have-nots keep falling for it. The one-eyed Scotch fuckwit claimed to have moved “hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty”: that may have been true by a strict reading of the definition, but handing those just below the carefully drawn line just enough to move them slightly above it made next to no difference to their daily lives. But the headlines were good, so they got away with hardly anyone noticing and will repeat the cynical exercise every chance they get.

    Blair recognised that he needed to bolster the voter base, so imported another million or so assuming that the majority would vote for him (willingly or otherwise.) Being able to “rub the Right’s noses in diversity” was an added bonus. That it fucked over the lowest-paid workers in this country didn’t matter, so long as they could be persuaded to continue voting for Labour.

  5. Bloke in Wales – Any party will try to maximise its voter base

    Except the Tories, God bless em.

    They’re actively working to maximise the Labour Party’s voter base.

  6. This fuckwit wants to keep the Trident subs but with no nuclear warheads. His priority, in his words, is the jobs of the people who work on it. Not defence of the country, but their jobs.

    He plans on the Government spending £3bn a year to keep these jobs. How many are there? A few hundred? The government could give each of them a million pounds each for them to retire and it would cost a fraction of what this clown proposes.

    This fuckwit wants to be Prime Minister and is supported by about 30% of the electorate.

  7. @Steve,

    The tories still delude themselves that the game is to run the country as they best see fit within the political constraints imposed. They may have made some strides recently towards recognising the game for what it is, but they haven’t really convinced themselves in their hearts.

    Labour, however, and particularly Neue Arbeit, as it was, really *got* it – it’s to do whatever it takes to stay in power as long as possible, and sod the consequences.

  8. Rob – you’re being unkind.

    I believe Jez wants to arm the subs with rolled up copies of the Morning Star.

    If things get really hairy, he’ll threaten our adversaries with the sex tape of himself and Diane Abbott. Co-starring Dian Fossey.

  9. Jezza’s non-nuclear deterrent policy is the high-tech version of paying half the workforce to dig holes and the other half to fill them in again. The low-tech version would be much cheaper to implement and, if directed correctly, could improve the road system somewhat.

  10. ” justification for economic policies which are designed to concentrate wealth among the very richest.”
    Can he prove that is the aim and not just one effect among several?

  11. @Dan – the Morning Star article refers to the forthcoming council elections in May, which are seen (rightly or wrongly) as the first significant leadership test for Corbyn.

    I assume the MS still gets it’s regular stipend from the KGB (or FSB as they’ve rebranded now they have control of the Presidency).

  12. @anon,

    Those who wish to run the economy as a conspiracy to benefit their special interests presume that the economy is, in fact, run as a conpiracy to benefit their enemies’ special interests.

    Even though it’s beaulocks.

  13. abacab>

    “To quote Maggie, he would rather the poor were poorer, just so long as the rich were less rich.”

    Sort of. He thinks any sacrifice is worth making if it allows ‘us’ to kill ‘the jooz’. The core of everything Corbyn stands for is the idea that there is a magic money tree of which ‘the jooz’ steal the fruit, and that if we just ‘finally solve’ that problem everything will be rainbows and kittens. That explains everything about Corbynism far more simply than the multiple, mutually contradictory explanations otherwise required, so Occam’s razor says it’s clear he’s just a rancid old crypto-Nazi.

  14. Now there is much more complexity to this than I am giving credit. But isnt it obvious that if the world economy is growing, and you have a person on £100k a year in a high income nation that grows 2%. And lets assume that their increase in pay matches the 2% growth of the economy, thereby at the end of the year resulting in a salary of £102k per year is compared to someone on £2k a year in a low income country but that countries economy is growing at 10% a year, resulting in that person earning £2.4k then inequality is widening as the difference has gone from £98k to £99.6k between the two, despite the low income person being a lot better off and isnt at the expense of the high income nation, nor is the increase of inequality the result of the high income nations screwing the low income nation.

    I know this is a hypothetical, but when wealth isnt equal, growth all round (which is good) tends to lead, at least for a period of time, to greater inequality, and this is a coincidental effect and because it is a sign of growth, especially extraordinary growth for low income nations, it is to be welcomed and not considered a problem.

  15. Rob H>

    It depends on whether you look at the raw numbers or the proportions. The gap in your example has actually decreased from 49x the poorer chap’s income to 41.5x the new, higher figure. If you want to encourage antisemitic attacks, though, you can point to the headline numbers and lie about how the rich are getting richer faster than the poor.

  16. wtf has it got to do with anti-Semitism, Dave? You’re the one calling Jews ‘jooz’ and implying they’re at the apparent centre of all decision making.

    Nuts.

  17. Any party will try to maximise its voter base – and the voter base of the Labour party is the poorest in the country.

    I thought the voter base of Labour was the slightly dim middle classes.

  18. More people are suffering in the UK under the current ideology.

    And that, comrades, is why we must liquidate the kulaks!

  19. Arnald>

    What it has to do with antisemitism is, as explained, that Corbyn’s an antisemitic scumbag saying scummy, antisemitic bollocks.

    I’m not ‘implying’ that Jewish people, or, as he calls them, ‘the jooz, the jooz’ are at the centre of Corbyn’s decision-making, I’m saying so explicitly: the sole political ‘principle’ that vile man holds is that ‘the jooz’ are responsible for all the ills of the world, and that finishing off what Hitler started would fix every problem in the world today.

    The simple fact is that this is old-fashioned antisemitic bollocks with a single word missing:

    “economic policies which are designed to concentrate wealth among the very richest.”

    It’s a tired old antisemitic conspiracy theory being trotted out yet again by Corbyn.

  20. @Arnald, did you ever worry about the “more people” who suffered under New Labour? Or did you not care cos they were largely Tory voters?

  21. I like the way TW is described as arrogant. Yeah is arrogant in the way someone would be explaining to someone who adamantly claims 1+1=5 that they’re wrong. It’s impossible not to come across arrogant to insistent leftists.

  22. abacab

    I didn’t notice any rich folk getting made homeless directly through policy as there are now.

    There’s no point arguing about this one, the same old toss will be copied in every post.

    Prove Corbyn is anti-Semitic, because if it’s about not supporting the Israeli state continuing collective punishment and war crimes against Gaza and the West Bank, then that is not anti-Semitic. And you know it.

  23. I must admit I’m surprised at Old Jez stirring up the Green vote.

    If you’re going to build the subs but not arm them. why not just leave the engines out and float them at the mouth of the Thames.

    Give the old birds who have wondered what to do since Greenham Common a hamper of rotten eggs and fruit and give them day trips down the Estuary.

    That would please so many people and bring a tear to the eyes of the old Soviets.

  24. Abacab – The tories still delude themselves that the game is to run the country as they best see fit within the political constraints imposed.

    Yes, I find it helpful to think of the Tories as the Stupid Party and Labour as the Evil Party.

    Mind you, while I ain’t no rocket surgeon or nuffin’, I reckon Jeremy Corbyn was the kind of div kid at school who used to eat sweeties off the ground for 10p.

    Dave thinks Jez is a secret Jew-hater. I respectfully disagree – the simplest explanation is that Jeremy The Radical Gnome is just a bit thick.

    Not thick.racist.prick thick, just that he’s the kind of impressionable guy who thinks the Fortean Times is a newspaper.

    If the documentary Twins is accurate, all the good genes went to his brother.

  25. Steve>

    There’s ample evidence that Corbyn is far from thick. He’s evil, not stupid.

    Arnald>

    You’re the only one who’s brought Israel into it, but it’s kind of you to demonstrate that you associate Jewish people with Zionism despite doing so being a well-known trait of antisemitic cunts. Nice of you to also demonstrate that your views on Zionism are founded in antisemitism, so we can disregard them too.

    You are Roderick Spode and I claim my £5.

  26. I thought the voter base of Labour was the slightly dim middle classes.

    That might be where they dream up their fraudulent policies, but they are still targeting the votes of the have-nots.

    And they themselves are definitely the beneficiaries of their policies, being from whence the quangocrats are drawn.

  27. Dave – don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed that article, it’s funny.

    But it doesn’t tell us anything about Jez.

    All that article tells us is that a boy (not Jez) went to a minor public school, then went full SJW-mangina retard at university.

    That’s right – I’m defending Jeremy Corbyn.

    WHO’S WITH ME?

  28. The article is dated 22nd January 2015. It’s a year old.

    I’m amused by the references to Syriza’s pending upset of the European consensus. What a fatal blow they delivered to the ECB, eh? Mind you the Greeks are busy getting their revenge on Frau Merkel by sending millions of third world immigrants her way.

  29. Jeremy Corbyn has met with members of Hamas and Hezbollah. Now it could be a good idea to meet extremist groups to bring them into the fold.
    If he does that and has also met with members of Pegida etc as well then fine. If it is only groups that hate Jews it looks a bit strange.

  30. sackcloth and ashes

    ‘Prove Corbyn is anti-Semitic’.

    Raed Salah. Paul Eisen, Stephen Sizer. Ibrahim Hewitt. Abu Jaja. The LaRoucheites. Gilad Atzmon.

    Corbyn’s shared platforms with them all.

  31. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    @Dave

    I’m not ‘implying’ that Jewish people, or, as he calls them, ‘the jooz, the jooz’ are at the centre of Corbyn’s decision-making, I’m saying so explicitly: the sole political ‘principle’ that vile man holds is that ‘the jooz’ are responsible for all the ills of the world

    Do you have any evidence at all that Corbyn refers to Jews as ‘the jooz’? Because it seems to me, as Arnald points out, you’re the one who continually makes use of the term. Also do you have any link documenting your claim that Corbyn holds Jews responsible for all the ills of the world?

    You’re the only one who’s brought Israel into it, but it’s kind of you to demonstrate that you associate Jewish people with Zionism despite doing so being a well-known trait of antisemitic cunts.

    Zionism is a Jewish nationalist movement that has always had as its goal the creation and support of a Jewish national state in Palestine. One of Israel’s preconditions for negotiating with Hamas is their demand that Hamas recognise Israel explicitly as a Jewish state. So whilst it might be anti-Semitic to blame all Jews for the crimes of Israel, it’s certainly not anti-Semitic to point out that Jews and Zionism are liniked because Zionism is another word for Jewish nationalism.

    And given that over half of your posts here use the derogatory term ‘Jooz’ it would seem to me that you’re the one with a problem with Jews, and your bile towards Corbyn is some kind of weird projection. Do you write for Harry’s Place? Because your last post linking current racism at a school Corbyn presumably attended FIFTY YEARS AGO is desperately weak smear-by-association crap that is their stock in trade.

  32. Isn’t it funny to see the usual racist bunch round here suddenly supporting Corbyn?

    WP>

    ‘The jooz’ is what mouth-breathing Nazis like Corbyn call Jewish people in their Quasimodal cries of outrage. ‘The jooz, the jooz’ is to be said the way Quasimodo says ‘the bells, the bells’.

    The simple fact is that Corbyn doesn’t attempt to hide his antisemitism, he just relies on his antisemitic allies to keep defending him regardless. He openly subscribes to nakedly antisemitic conspiracy theories like the Magic Money Tree.

    “your last post linking current racism at a school Corbyn presumably attended FIFTY YEARS AGO is desperately weak smear-by-association crap”

    OK, now you’re jumping the shark. Suggesting the UK was less racist 50 years ago is absurd.

  33. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    @Henry Crun

    SJW: “Sir, Sir, Dave says Jeremy doesn’t like Jewish people Sir”
    Do grow up.

    Yeah, because to ask for evidence when some dimwitted cunt like Dave makes a ludicrously outlandish claim is evidence of immaturity isn’t it Henry? Get back in your box you fucking clown.

  34. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    Any evidence AT ALL that I’m a racist Dave?

    And no I’m not suggesting that the UK was less racist 50 years ago, I’m pointing out that whatever goes on now in that school has got less than the square root of fuck all to do with Corbyn because he last attended that school nearly 50 years ago. Is it just reading comprehension you have trouble with or are you just generally a bit thick?

  35. “Arnald

    I didn’t notice any rich folk getting made homeless directly through policy as there are poor folk now…”

    How many people have become homeless in the UK ‘directly through policy’?

    Since 2010.

    Can you let us know, complete with citation?

    The way you’re carrying on I expect it to number in the 10,000s or 100,000s at the very least.

    Which is odd because Homeless Link (a charity in the sector) counts the number sleeping rough in the UK as 1,768 in 2010 and 2,744 in 2015.

    Unfortunate, of course, but hardly a biblical level catastrophe is it?

    Of course, they are a charity involved in the sector whereas you’re a screeching shroud waving lefty so maybe you have a better view of things from Guernsey than they do right here?

  36. Dave – Isn’t it funny to see the usual racist bunch round here suddenly supporting Corbyn?

    I hope you’re including me in that, because I’ve always wanted to be part of a bunch.

    We can build our own den in the rhododendrons, and the secret password will be “BOUNTY BARS ARE SHITE”.

  37. @Rob Harries “And lets assume that their increase in pay matches the 2% growth of the economy, thereby at the end of the year resulting in a salary of £102k per year is compared to someone on £2k a year in a low income country but that countries economy is growing at 10% a year, resulting in that person earning £2.4k then inequality is widening as the difference has gone from £98k to £99.6k between the two, despite the low income person being a lot better off”

    It’s more fundamental that that, even. I’d argue that the extra £400 quid a year in the pocket of the poor person would have a far greater impact on the lifestyle of the poor person that the extra 2k on the income of the rich person.

  38. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    Steve – The first rule of Racist Bunch is don’t give out the secret fucking password mate. You’re out.

  39. Steve:
    That’s right – I’m defending Jeremy Corbyn.

    WHO’S WITH ME?

    I’ll bite.

    Poor ol’ 2-Es
    He’s a late starter, that’s all and after years of barking up the wrong tree he now has to deal with the whole Labour thick-et.

    Quite an arsk.

  40. Apols- posted too soon.

    I was going on to say that’s why I’m sceptical of the whole relative definition of poverty. To add a third person to your example, what if there was another person earning 50k? That person could be classed as in poverty according to some poverty standards (below median wage is a standard I’ve seen used) but in absolute terms you’d be feeling pretty well off. Purchasing power is the only measure I really like, as it is a useful definition- ‘can someone afford the stuff needed to live to a reasonable standard’. If the answer is yes, they ain’t in economic poverty. They may be poor, but that’s a different standard*.

    *and let’s not get into cultural/educational/etc poverty

  41. Dave,

    I disagree. I think Corbyn is stupid. If I wanted to bring about communism in the UK, there is no way I would dress and behave and talk like Jeremy Corbyn. I’d get a good suit, shave off the beard and get driven to parliament in a big Jag.

    The problem with Corbyn and many of his supporters is that they honestly think they’ve got a chance with this stuff. They’re currently at 30% which is pretty much public sector workers, the unemployed, students, hippies and Tory hating northerners and Welsh, the guaranteed non-Tory voters. A dalek with a red rosette could do the same numbers.

  42. WP>

    We’ve all seen your other comments, why are you botherng to pretend otherwise?

    Stig>

    It’s been demonstrated over the years that Corbyn is not stupid. It has never been demonstrated that he wants a Communist state here.

    “The problem with Corbyn and many of his supporters is that they honestly think they’ve got a chance with this stuff”

    No, it’s that they wouldn’t know an honest thought if it smacked them in the face.

  43. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    Since you’ve all seen my comments it shouldn’t be too hard to show me one which was racist. If one existed. Unfortunately for you, the only evidence you have for Corbyn’s anti-Semitism and my racism are the voices in your head. Put up or shut up.

  44. “We can build our own den in the rhododendrons, and the secret password will be “BOUNTY BARS ARE SHITE”.”

    Haha, that’s Ecks!

    Jesus’ second-hand scooter, AndrewC, stop dribbling every time you see me post.

    “I didn’t notice any rich folk getting made homeless directly through policy as there are poor folk now…”

    The way you’re carrying on I expect it to number in the 10,000s or 100,000s at the very least.”

    The way I’m carrying on?

    So here’s what Shelter say for 2013/14

    “‘In England, more than 81,000 households were found to be homeless during 2013/14”

    But I’d say the percentage increase in homeless that you cite is fairly large.

  45. On the “is Corbyn stupid?” question-

    I think the answer is yes and no.

    Yes, he is stupid because he thinks that his current plan to get into power is a workable one.

    No, in he’s not because he seems able to cope quote easily with the intellectual challenge of say policy analysis.

    In short, he’s clever enough to run Labour, but that’s about it.

  46. Oh, and Arnold: shelter operates a different definition of homeless to the common sense one (ie that being ‘not having anywhere to live), namely:

    “Even if you have a roof over your head you can still be homeless, if you don’t have any rights to stay where you live or your home is unsuitable due to severe overcrowding or other reasons.

    You might be entitled to help as a homeless person if you are:

    -temporarily staying with friends or family
    staying in a hostel or nightshelter
    -living in very overcrowded conditions
    at risk of violence or abuse in your home
    living in poor conditions that affect your health
    You may also be considered to be homeless if you are:

    -living somewhere where you have no legal right to stay, such as a squat
    -living somewhere that you can’t afford to pay for without depriving yourself of basic essentials
    -forced to live apart from your family or someone you would normally live with because your accommodation isn’t suitable.”

    Note the wriggle room in some of those definitions.

  47. Witchsmeller – You’re out.

    🙁

    It’s the Tufty Club all over again.

    The Meissen Bison – further evidence that Jezza is not, in fact, some sort of evil antisemitic genius:

    pursuing a degree in Trade Union Studies at North London Polytechnic, which he left after his first year without completing his undergraduate studies.

    People made fun of Prince William for doing art history at St. Andrews (motto: For When Your Parents Are Rich, But You Don’t Have The Brains For Oxbridge), but even our less cerebral royals could’ve finished a degree in Strike Studies at North London Poly.

    I bet he can’t even paint.

  48. WP

    “the only evidence you have for Corbyn’s anti-Semitism and my racism are the voices in your head. Put up or shut up.”

    And the list of loonies he is happy to share a platform with. I’m not saying it is evidence of anti-semitism, but it raises serious questions.

    What do you think the reaction would be if Cameron was on record sharing a platform with Nick Griffin, David Irving and a number of other hobgoblins?

  49. Dave

    “‘The jooz’ is what mouth-breathing Nazis like Corbyn call Jewish people in their Quasimodal cries of outrage. ‘The jooz, the jooz’ is to be said the way Quasimodo says ‘the bells, the bells’.”

    Does he?

  50. John square

    Note the fact that those definitions are of homelessness. The clue’s in the word. And the numbers are increasing.

    You could live in a bus shelter and be told, well you have a roof over your head. Stop being stupid.

  51. I’ll be looking for an opportunity to use ‘extraordinarily arrogant.’ Especially, an extraordinarily arrogant pendant.

  52. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    @Rob

    What do you think the reaction would be if Cameron was on record sharing a platform with Nick Griffin, David Irving and a number of other hobgoblins?

    Cameron is on record as having been a member of an organisation (the FCS) that was so far-right deranged that Norman Tebbit (!) saw fit to close it down. The reaction here I imagine would be the same as that of the media; ignore it and pretend it never happened.

    I’m not saying it is evidence of anti-semitism, but it raises serious questions.

    This kind of smear-by-association tactic is both dishonest and McCarthyite. If he’s said anti-Semitic things point them out, if he proposes anti-Semitic policies, ditto. Otherwise it’s just monkeys flinging shit in the hope some of it will stick.

  53. Steve:

    “even our less cerebral royals could’ve finished a degree in Strike Studies at North London Poly.”

    Spart Studies. Private Eye must be having a great time.

  54. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    Steve – It’s the Tufty Club all over again.

    It always about the squirrels with you. You are one.sick.puppy

  55. Aside from the normal rubbish, the fact that Corbyn thinks Davos is a conspiracy shows how it is only the colour of his shellsuit that stops him from being David Icke.

  56. @Arnauld
    “Note the fact that those definitions are of homelessness. The clue’s in the word. And the numbers are increasing.

    You could live in a bus shelter and be told, well you have a roof over your head. Stop being stupid.”

    Er, I’m not being stupid, actually: *all* of those definitions are Shelter’s. They are not the definitions used by Housing Associations or LA’s. Source: It’s what I do for a living. Shelter use those definitions to come out with stats that overstate the actual number of people who have nowhere to live (or to quote shelter “without a roof over their heads”- they said that, not me), which muddies the social housing debate considerably.

  57. As do I John square. Those definitions describe people that need homes. We house people who are in those straits first.

    Anyhow, just because it’s no an HA definition doesn’t make it untrue.

    Would you count yourself in a home if you were in a bedsit.

    It’s widely known that social housing in the UK is barely fit for purpose, hence the need to reduce the homeless stats. I would take Shelter’s opinion rather than an organisation’s wish to create decent kpis.

  58. Given the content of Smelly Witch’s posts, I’d say that the blob of semen containing the IQ portion of his DNA ended up on his mum’s flannelette nightie.

  59. Arnauld- sorry, I normally quite like your view of the world, but you are a billion miles off reality when you talk about Britain’s social housing being “widely known” as barely fit for purpose.

    Virtually every social home in the country is above the decent homes standard (look it up). Most have received (in the last five years) new doors, windows, kitchens, bathrooms, insulation and energy efficient central heating. I helped set up an association that spent 64m in four years on 6k propertirs to ensure all homes were absolutely spot on a decent homes plus standard. Ffs tenants even get to pick the color and finish of the units and tiles. And it’s for free.

    All are managed by bodies that programme cyclical maintenance. You will not find a roof on a social property that is older than 30 years that is in poor condition, ditto for Windows and doors.

    Every home has a free 24 hours a day emergency repairs service, and a full repairs service for anything else (not fitted by the tenant) that guarantees a repair within 28 working days. Try buying that service as a private owner. The average rent on a social property is 160 per week for a three bed house. All social properties are built to greater floor plan sizes and higher quality than a private developer.

    I could also talk about sheltered schemes, as the last one I walked around (on Friday) had a gym, a hairdressers and a restaurant, as well as gardens and relaxation spaces for residents when theyvarent in the lounge watching a film on the 90″ telly.

    I really doubt anyone with a passing knowledge of the actual stock and business of social housing would agree they are not fit for purpose. Not unless they were either mendacious or actually retarded.

  60. And on allocations policy: if I was in a bedsit: yes. That would be my home, and at £45 a week, it’d be both better and cheaper than my first pad in London (150 pw).

    It may interest you to know that shelter count a family as homeless if they have (in short) a family of four living in a two up, two down. Having been there and done that’s, I can tell you, it’s not homelessness: in fact I had a lovely time for three years, it was a lovely house.

  61. Dave,

    “It’s been demonstrated over the years that Corbyn is not stupid”

    When? I’d have respect for him if he was even a canny operator like Nicola Sturgeon is. I don’t think Ken Livingstone is stupid (but he is bad). But Corbyn is.

  62. Dave,

    By the way, I think it’s hilarious how Labour people are complaining about the BBC are giving Corbyn a hard time, when from what I can see, the attitude from much of the press is like watching a kid at the Special Olympics, where the occasional moment when Corbyn manages to do what a major party leader should do as a matter of course is treated with congratulations.

    “Jeremy Corbyn managed to get a few hits on the Prime Minister”. That’s what you’re supposed to do, motherfucker!

  63. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    Henry – your first contribution is to tell someone else to grow up, your second is to deliver the most infantile insult of the whole thread. I can see I’ll have to be at the top of my game to deal with an intellectual titan such as yourself.

  64. Makes you wonder how 13 years of labour did not eradicate homelessness as per arnauld’s definition.

    Maybe that’s what brown’s charidee is all about?!

    Or, like every other cvntish socialists, they’re just evil incompetent fucktards, of which corbyn is the latest excretion?

  65. Any article that lists Adams Grammar as being in Telford should be disregarded. And it’s not a private school.

    My brother went there in the late 90s and he disagrees entirely – it’s not the school, there really are a lot more dickheads there than elsewhere, they were dickheads before they got there and they mostly still are.

  66. John square

    I agree with you on the quality. What I was meaning was that there isn’t enough of it, and that the temporary provision is bad and not temporary enough. That should count as homelessness. Knowing that you are only in one place for a short period of time, and moving between short term solutions, is terrible for mental health and for children.

    We build better homes than the equivalent in the private sector, and for less.

    We have exactly the same policies (not surprising as we had to mirror HAs in the SW).

    monoi

    Labour was hardly left wing, any wing is going to find it hard to fix the housing problem.

  67. sackcloth and ashes

    ‘[Serious] questions from serious people trying to stop wars’.

    Really?

    I’m looking forward to that speech Steptoe is planning to deliver condemning Vladimir Putin for attacking Georgia, Ukraine and Syria. I hear it’s going to be a belter.

  68. @Arnauld
    Thanks for the civil response. In turn:

    “I agree with you on the quality. What I was meaning was that there isn’t enough of it, and that the temporary provision is bad and not temporary enough. That should count as homelessness. Knowing that you are only in one place for a short period of time, and moving between short term solutions, is terrible for mental health and for children.”

    I agree on the broad point about hostels- overnight accommodation can be pretty poor. The point there is that it’s better than sleeping rough/in a car, or having a large standing stock of fully furnished homes left empty just in case an urgent homelessness case comes up. Your point about mental illness and the impact on children’s life is fair, but again of secondary concern: being in a tenuous position as regards housing is bad, but often avoidable (60% of evictions are as a result of non-payment of rent, 30% ASB- both within the gift of tenants to resolve before court action is taken). Hostels are genuinely the last resort in terms of housing and are supposed to be for emergencies: and frankly it’s the best way of doing things- better hostels increase failing tenancies, oddly.

    “We build better homes than the equivalent in the private sector, and for less.”

    Actually, we ain’t cheaper. Better also depends. The same builders build private and public housing actually. Either via a joint venture, or thru direct contract or off plan s106 sales (which are a condition of planning in most cases). The principal differences between your average private build and an off plan s106 property will be the boiler. That’s it. If a spec is determined by an HA, long-term value (ie floor plan and size) is often revised, but shared ownership will be identical, save for the heating and hot water systems. This is usually to ensure that all an HA’s stock has the same make of boiler to make the LGSR obligations easier to manage.

    The big issue with Social Housing is whether it distorts the overall market.

    On numbers of properties, it depends how you arrive at a figure for demand. Oftentimes people use the Council waiting list as an estimator of demand, but that ain’t right: lots of people apply just in case they get a place. It’s like a free lottery ticket for a cheap home. Revision of the allocations policies of HA’s by the coalition in 2012 started sorting this out, but the only way to establish true demand is via a household census, coupled with a survey of every home. There’s obvious underprovision in(say) London, but outside the capital, that’s not so clear. Everyone wants their own house, but everyone also wants a Ferrari, so, I suppose house prices are the best proxy. Again affordability varies by area, but we aren’t as badly off as the politicians and media make out.

    Either way, I suspect that the market is possibly the best mechanism to resolve housing issues, either through a release of housing stock onto the market, or through planning deregulation. More social housing isn’t the answer, though, I can promise you that now.

  69. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    @Sackcloth

    How is Putin ‘attacking’ Syria? The Russians are there at the behest of the de jure , internationally recognised regime. We are part of the coalition attacking Syria i.e. Dropping bombs on the country when the Syrian government has asked us not to.

  70. @ Arnald
    Firstly it is by no means always the case that Local Authorities build houses cheaper than private housebuilders and secondly there is a good reason when it is the case, to wit planning permission. Planning permission takes a lot of time and money if one is a private housebuilder and the time adds to the cost as the developer has a lot of money, on which it is paying interest, tied up in land it has bought and the bribes exacted in the form of “affordable housing” and or community facilities and/or new roads and/or school buildings and/or playing fields and/or … also cost quite a lot. Then, of course, there are schemes that thje local authority just turns down and all the money spent to that date is down the drain.

  71. @ Arnald
    According to Shelter’s definition I was homeless for the three years I was living in digs as a young Actuarial Student/Actuary.
    *That’s* how bent it is.

  72. @ Arnald
    Try reading “Even if you have a roof over your head you can still be homeless, if you don’t have any rights to stay where you live”

  73. sackcloth and ashes

    ‘How is Putin ‘attacking’ Syria?’

    The Russian air force is dropping bombs indiscriminately on civilians on behalf of a barbaric regime which has been responsible for the vast majority of the 200,000+ deaths of the current civil war, not to mention the refugee crisis Europe is currently facing.

    That is an attack on Syria and its people. Except for fuckwits like you.

  74. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Entity whose existence is predicated on bigging up the homelessness problem claims homelessness is bigger than everyone else says.

    Dunno about the rest of you, but I had to have a lie down at the sheer unexpectedness of it all.

  75. Witchsmeller Pursuivant

    That is an attack on Syria and its people. Except for fuckwits like you.

    And the United Nations and the rest of the international community. And anyone who doesn’t view international relations as a game of cowboys and Indians. Tosser.

  76. 100 comments and yet I still had to search for the original Forbes article Corbyn quoted.

    May I suggest a section that lists, with links when possible, of everything written. I know I don’t get to read all the Worstall articles out thee simply because I don’t take the time to search the entire web every day. Having some way to tell which sites are free to read, paywalled, or require registering would be nice as well.

    With this being buried at the bottom of a long list I understand if it gets missed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *