MycroftZee

MycroftZee

29p

30 comments posted · 4 followers · following 0

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Ending rough sleeping ... · 2 replies · +1 points

600 million for buildings is the start of it. Also, not all homeless want this. Also, a large number of rough sleepers are illegal immigrants, the British people will be angry at yet more of their hard earned income being taxed to pay for illegals.

Also, its not the answer, although it may be part of it.

From the BBC news site about the Finish scheme.
"While the scheme is regarded as successful in Finland, it does have drawbacks. Homes are not always available immediately and figures show roughly one in five people return to homelessness at some stage.

Housing people in this way does not come cheap. Finland has spent about £262m (300m euros) over the past decade, providing 3,500 new homes for the homeless and more than 300 new support workers."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46891392

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Ending rough sleeping ... · 1 reply · +1 points

When I worked in London a couple of years ago, all the rough sleepers were eastern European and many were in organised beggar gangs. Some years back we had the Big Issue that helped many. For the lest few years I have found one British big issue seller and numerous eastern Europeans.

Some years back in Norwich locals told me a homeless person being rehomed by the council. he stayed a while then left. They did the same. The same thing happened. quite a few years ago in London it was a hard winter (1980s). I came across an old lady sleeping in an alcove. There was a police station not far away so I went there and reported it. They said they knew of her and had tried to help but she didn't want it. They said they looked in on her and they would check that night.

I have had threats from beggars and abuse when would not give them money.

This is a very comp[lex problem to resolve and definitely not a one size fits all problem. I don't believe it's solvable, even of the government makes a genuine effort. It's also been with us forever.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil Parish: Ministers... · 1 reply · +1 points

Long on waffle short on facts. Also, this is typically London, middle class, metropolitan thinking. The middle-classes can afford it, the average worker cannot.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Neil Parish: Ministers... · 0 replies · +1 points

WFH did that. There should be an active policy to encourage as much home ad local working as possible;

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Paul Maynard: Maintain... · 0 replies · +1 points

+1

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Paul Maynard: Maintain... · 2 replies · +1 points

The person with the house has no cash. Are they supposed to sell their house? And the millionaire householder claiming benefits will be extremely rare. It's going to be people with smaller, lower value houses probably with mortgages who can't make ends meet and you want to toss them on the streets.

I would reverse this and say that why should people who have scrimped and saved and paid taxes then be forced to lose their homes where the feckless and lazy live on benefits for as long as they choose.

The whole system of benefits risks creating poor behaviour and encouraging fecklessness, tat also needs to be addressed.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - There is more at stake... · 0 replies · +1 points

How many countries are actually in dire need of aid from us? Globalisation has benefitted the 3rd world enormously. Mostly they need better governance (only they can do this) and better trade options.

Some countries need help sometimes and we should gladly help. But help when needed or to prevent a need arising, and spend what it takes. Not a fixed % each year most of which gets squandered on corruption or high paid consultants.

Rich metropolitans made those fixed targets let them pay for them.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nus Ghani: The Governm... · 0 replies · +1 points

It may be corruption but it is more likely panic.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nus Ghani: The Governm... · 0 replies · +1 points

They are more dangerous now than the old soviet union and have to be dealt with on that basis.

2 years ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Nus Ghani: The Governm... · 0 replies · +1 points

I agree, it is in effect a form of genocide. It may not involve the actual slaughter of the Uighur but it is the annihilation of them as a culture. It (with the behaviour in Hong Kong) shows what a threat China now is. World dominance is its goal and we will all pay.