No Fault Evictions

[Chris152]

If they want to. On the other hand they can simply milk the system.

Well, that's just people, that's not socialism. The question is, how best to help and encourage people to live productive, fulfilling lives. I'm not convinced it's simply a matter of refusing to give money to the poorest, there's more to making society work than that.

 

[monster]

Well, that's just people, that's not socialism. The question is, how best to help and encourage people to live productive, fulfilling lives. I'm not convinced it's simply a matter of refusing to give money to the poorest, there's more to making society work than that.

But its socialism that allows and enables people to milk the system.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I'm not convinced it's simply a matter of refusing to give money to the poorest, there's more to making society work than that.

It's not simply a matter of giving it to them either. The system is skewed. As someone pointed out long ago - if you are genetically programmed to do the best you can for your family, and the system gives you more for not working than working is it altogether surprising people take that option?
That woman is taking the p!$$, however - she should have been sterilised long ago.

 

[Yorkieguy]

Spongers who scrounge of others are everywhere. Those at the bottom of the heap will look at those at the top and think 'If they do it, why shouldn't I. It's just different pockets they dip into. No shortage of 'role models' to follow. Smiling, smirking or laughing out loud?:

 

[Chris152]

But its socialism that allows and enables people to milk the system.

Well, I'd say such people are the left-behinds of an advanced/ ageing capitalist economy, in which people are encouraged from birth to accumulate and value according to wealth, possessions and so on - regardless of whether or not they can afford them. A kind of greed is written-in to our culture. A key aim of socialism as I understand it is to change that focus more toward community, dignity for all and so on - clearly, that's a tall order in the face of such a culture. But the problem is not socialist ambition and practice, it's the pre-existing condition that forces of socialism are trying to redress that's the problem.

 

[AJB Temple]

Well, I'd say such people are the left-behinds of an advanced/ ageing capitalist economy, in which people are encouraged from birth to accumulate and value according to wealth, possessions and so on - regardless of whether or not they can afford them. A kind of greed is written-in to our culture. A key aim of socialism as I understand it is to change that focus more toward community, dignity for all and so on - clearly, that's a tall order in the face of such a culture. But the problem is not socialist ambition and practice, it's the pre-existing condition that forces of socialism are trying to redress that's the problem.

I am struggling to think of a culture anywhere that does not have a hierarchy. It's part of the human condition that we vary widely in dominance, physical ability, intellect, attractiveness etc. Utopian socialism was something of a marxist construct. It is not realistic given human variance.

 

[Chris152]

I am struggling to think of a culture anywhere that does not have a hierarchy. It's part of the human condition that we vary widely in dominance, physical ability, intellect, attractiveness etc. Utopian socialism was something of a marxist construct. It is not realistic given human variance.

Very true - the idea of any utopia is for the birds, but there's an ongoing negotiation or struggle between different models of how a society and an economy can work, I'm just making the case for one of those models - and not necessarily to the exclusion of the other.

 

[NorthernSteve]

Sort of back on topic.. our energy chappie Ed Milliband has said that by 2030 he wants all rental properties to conform to certain energy efficiency standards.
I can agree with that sentiment but realistically it will cost many landlords around £10,000 to achieve this so where is that extra money going to come from if not from higher rents?
If the landlords say sod this it's not worth it, I'm going to sell off my buy-to-lets and invest the money elsewhere which is more profitable then let's just hope Labour gets a second term in office as we'll need the extra 1.5 million homes that Labour promises to build each parliamentary period.

This period's promised 1.5 million homes won't even keep pace with today's demands let alone a falling home rental market so if more people are chasing fewer rental properties the rents certainly won't fall that's for sure

On the basis of this policy I will be selling 1 of my BTLs. I have upgraded all to C, but I have one end terrace currently grade D that despite significant investment will not make the grade. This is a stone cottage built c 1880. Immaculate inside and out. My options are (a) clad the external walls with insulation and render (what will that look like on a stone cottage) OR (b) rip out the bathroom and kitchen and apply internal insulation to all external facing walls and then reinstate and decorate throughout and likely new floor coverings throughout AND (c) add solar panels which require planning consent as the property is in a conservation area, knowing that other applications have been turned down. The cost runs to £15k+ the return on investments in terms of fuel saving is 25+ years. Of course Labour's intention is to extend this to domestic homes in time. The EPC scheme is an absolute shambles, their is little inter-rater reliability on surveys completed. What does one expect when pretty much anyone can become an EPC verifier after a very short amount of training. The algorithms underpinning the rating make little sense in many cases. Example - Grade D property requires to be increased 2 points to achieve a C, remove the 2kw electric fire in the lounge and 2 points achieved. Tenant then either heats the whole house using central heating, rather than just the lounge or they plug in a 3kw portable heater.

 

[AJB Temple]

Response to Chris. OK. I guess the answer, as often the case, is don't start from here. I must admit I am somewhat dismayed that after Kier Starmer preached ethical politics, fairness and transparency prior to the election, he has since been shown (along with others) to be taking tens of thousands of pounds of freebies that are not available to others in society. We used to call that corruption. Unless we find a way of electing people who have integrity, we will not improve society in a wider sense.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Spongers who scrounge of others are everywhere. Those at the bottom of the heap will look at those at the top and think 'If they do it, why shouldn't I. It's just different pockets they dip into. No shortage of 'role models' to follow. Smiling, smirking or laughing out loud?:
View attachment 188930

I bet Microband is peed off at his place in the scheme of things.

 

[selectortone]

people are encouraged from birth to accumulate and value according to wealth, possessions and so on - regardless of whether or not they can afford them

Whether or not they can afford them or need them. You can thank the growth of TV advertising, and now all-pervasive social media for that.

Edit: oh, and our gullible human nature of course.

 

[ey_tony]

Well, that's just people, that's not socialism. The question is, how best to help and encourage people to live productive, fulfilling lives. I'm not convinced it's simply a matter of refusing to give money to the poorest, there's more to making society work than that.

If you want to encourage people to do well, then the first thing is not to punish success and instead favour meritocracy over mediocrity which unfortunately is a trait lacking with socialism. It's like the nonsense taught to children in state schools these days where there are 'no losers' where games/sports etc are concerned.

Of course there are losers in every walk of life and pretending that there aren't in order to spare children's feelings is not going to help them deal with the real world as adults.
You won't find that kind of woke nonsense taught in private schools...there the emphasis is on competition/competitiveness coupled with discipline. They are taught and encouraged to achieve.

I was utterly useless when it came to sports at school, everyone knew that and never chose me when it came to making up a team. It never affected me as I knew myself I wasn't any good at sport so any jibes didn't affect me. I wasn't remotely interested in sport and didn't pretend otherwise.
However I was quite academic and good at such as archery, shooting, game fishing and a host of other things which interested me far more than kicking, throwing or whacking a ball around a field

To this day I have absolutely no interest in sport and find such as the Olympics unbearable to watch. Each to their own of course but stick a science paper or business plan in front of me and I'll digest the contents immediately.

I firmly believe that the UK already offers more than ample opportunities for individuals with drive and determination to achieve success. Just look at the number of businesses owned by migrants...they've come here to take advantage of the opportunities available to everyone. If they can get up and travel half way across the globe to start a new business and life then it shows there's something lacking in the UKs education system than fails to generate/create aspirations in people who have it on their doorstep.

I suppose it's hardly surprising when one can effectively have a reasonable lifestyle if careful with benefit income and not have to go out to work. Socialism and its welfare system kills incentives and aspirations for all but the most ambitious and then they are in turn vilified and punished because they are successful.
Get rid of socialism and you'll have a more driven society.
That doesn't mean do away with all the better socialist policies, on the contrary.. just make people more responsible for their life choices.
If people can't be bothered to put the effort into their lives to make things better for themselves then that's their problem and not the fault of those who can be bothered improve their quality of life.

Socialism effectively handicaps and drags back those who are successful. Replace it with a meritocratic society and you will have a more aspirational society which is more likely to do well rather than dumb down and bring everyone down to the level of those who can't be bothered!

 

[monster]

Well, I'd say such people are the left-behinds of an advanced/ ageing capitalist economy, in which people are encouraged from birth to accumulate and value according to wealth, possessions and so on - regardless of whether or not they can afford them. A kind of greed is written-in to our culture. A key aim of socialism as I understand it is to change that focus more toward community, dignity for all and so on - clearly, that's a tall order in the face of such a culture. But the problem is not socialist ambition and practice, it's the pre-existing condition that forces of socialism are trying to redress that's the problem

Left behind.... - there is work available for everyone, but rather than start at the bottom, many choose instead to take the handouts that a socialist system offers them. I agree there will be a small number that are incapable of working, but its nothing like the amount that are taking!

 

[Chris152]

I agree there will be a small number that are incapable of working, but its nothing like the amount that are taking!

How do we know what the numbers and reasons are?

 

[Jacob]

On the basis of this policy I will be selling 1 of my BTLs.

Glad to hear it.
BTL simultaneously encouraged more buyers into the market, forced up prices, forced up rents, forced up capital gains, forced up housing benefits.
Landlords making a fortune on the back of the housing bubble, lax regulations and state subsidies.
It's been an easy ride so far - it wouldn't last forever and I expect you'll make a bomb when you cash in. Maybe slip a donation to Shelter or similar?

I have upgraded all to C, but I have one end terrace currently grade D that despite significant investment will not make the grade. This is a stone cottage built c 1880. Immaculate inside and out. My options are (a) clad the external walls with insulation and render (what will that look like on a stone cottage) OR (b) rip out the bathroom and kitchen and apply internal insulation to all external facing walls and then reinstate and decorate throughout and likely new floor coverings throughout AND (c) add solar panels which require planning consent as the property is in a conservation area, knowing that other applications have been turned down. The cost runs to £15k+ the return on investments in terms of fuel saving is 25+ years.

Some of the cheapest options are the most cost effective - loft insulation, draught proofing, thicker curtains/blind over windows and doors, add-on glazed porch/conservatory etc.

Of course Labour's intention is to extend this to domestic homes in time. The EPC scheme is an absolute shambles, their is little inter-rater reliability on surveys completed. What does one expect when pretty much anyone can become an EPC verifier after a very short amount of training. The algorithms underpinning the rating make little sense in many cases. Example - Grade D property requires to be increased 2 points to achieve a C, remove the 2kw electric fire in the lounge and 2 points achieved. Tenant then either heats the whole house using central heating, rather than just the lounge or they plug in a 3kw portable heater.

The EPC system is a good start and I hope it will be refined, extended and more detailed - like MOT test for vehicles - making it conditional on landlords to have them. A licensing system - think "Grenfell Tower".

 

[Fergie 307]

Re Starmer and co freebies, I don't know about used to call it corruption, I still would.

 

[AJB Temple]

Re Starmer and co freebies, I don't know about used to call it corruption, I still would.

I was just being polite

 

[Jacob]

Response to Chris. OK. I guess the answer, as often the case, is don't start from here. I must admit I am somewhat dismayed that after Kier Starmer preached ethical politics, fairness and transparency prior to the election, he has since been shown (along with others) to be taking tens of thousands of pounds of freebies that are not available to others in society. We used to call that corruption. Unless we find a way of electing people who have integrity, we will not improve society in a wider sense.

Corbyn was a pretty straight guy by all accounts. Popular too - he picked up more votes, in two elections, than any other labour leader since 2001 (Blair), in one election (2017) since 1997!
And honest and consistent about his agenda - he scared the establishment shitless!
They are not so bothered about poor old Keith, he's one of theirs, whether or not he knows it himself, and the electorate clearly had a low opinion of him.

 

[HOJ]

This did catch my eye:

The EPC system is a good start and I hope it will be refined, extended and more detailed - like MOT test for vehicles - making it conditional on landlords to have them. A licensing system - think "Grenfell Tower"

In its current state it is completely incompetent, run by incompetents and done by incompetents.

To quantify my statement, pal of mine, a car salesman by trade if that is a trade, went on a 1 week course to "qualify" to do them:



And ironically when the Home information packs were introduced, years ago, cut and paste the last part of the above sentence.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The EPC system is a good start and I hope it will be refined, extended and more detailed - like MOT test for vehicles - making it conditional on landlords to have them.

What about a similar system for tenants? No? Thought not.