The Stench of Tory

foxy said:
So Why should hard working people have to pay in excess of £1,000k per week to live there and those in Social Housing don't....?

So does that imply people on social housing don't work hard? Re phrase your questions...... Why should rich people not get everything they desire and why shouldn't the poor do exactly what they're fookin told! Rents are a 1000 quid plus a week cos tosser politicians of all sides are bent and have no desire to A stand up to the mega rich and B represent all members of society. The present government being the very worst of this attitude. Torys eh..... Just like Marmite..................fookin disgusting!!!
 
brass neck said:
foxy said:
So Why should hard working people have to pay in excess of £1,000k per week to live there and those in Social Housing don't....?

So does that imply people on social housing don't work hard? Re phrase your questions...... Why should rich people not get everything they desire and why shouldn't the poor do exactly what they're fookin told! Rents are a 1000 quid plus a week cos tosser politicians of all sides are bent and have no desire to A stand up to the mega rich and B represent all members of society. The present government being the very worst of this attitude. Torys eh..... Just like Marmite..................fookin disgusting!!!
Exactly, his post was the sole reason i even posted on this thread.
 
People is social housing still work and pay rent you know. Why should they be moved because some posh coke head wants to live in a prestigious area?

It's so someone can earn a fortune fuck everyone else I'm alright Jack.
 
A few facts of life need putting in here to balance things up.

In the real world if YOU want to live in a "Nice" area you pay a premium, thats why similar houses in say Bramhall compared to Moston will have a different price.

Social housing is provided at a subsidy for those not in a position to buy a house, there is NO security as to where that house will be, it will never be YOURS, no matter how long you have lived there unless you buy it, there is no transfer of tenancy to the children, as many people have found out on the death of their parents.

The local council has a duty to manage on a budget, if the land on which houses stand becomes valuable enough to fund building more houses in a cheaper area then thats basic sense, because it provides more houses for people who can not afford to buy an that is its job.

Its not there to ensure aunt Mavis lives around the corner from her bingo hall, but that she has a f*cking roof over her head.
 
Ronnie the Rep said:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I've t hought of a workable compromise: rather than redevelop the site, the affluent residents of Notting Hill could move their domestic staff into these flats, which will drastically cut down on emissions.

Everyone's a winner.



Very good :-)
Downtown Abbey for the twenty first century.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Ronnie the Rep said:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I've t hought of a workable compromise: rather than redevelop the site, the affluent residents of Notting Hill could move their domestic staff into these flats, which will drastically cut down on emissions.

Everyone's a winner.



Very good :-)
Downtown Abbey for the twenty first century.

Downton you silly man! Downtown is for places of entertainment
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.