General Chat

:-D :-D :-D :-D

I am not and never have been a socialist. Social democrats are a different animal. Behold Corbyn's Labour party trying yet again to sell some kind of marxism under the sheep skin of a social democracy they do not believe in and would prefer to destroy. That is why they cannot get past 40% against the worst govt since the C19.

I like the Robert Dyas stores very handy. Unfortunately they are on the edge of going bust. Lakeside is an awful place. Colchester is thriving , no wonder it has a lot going for it.

If you read the short sentence, I 'accused' you of allegedly being a Socialist - I didn't mention any political party.

...but doesn't the phrase 'Social Democrat' contain the word 'Social'?
I found this description of Social Democracy:

"Modern social democracy is characterized by a commitment to policies aimed at curbing inequality, oppression of underprivileged groups and poverty, including support for universally accessible public services like care for the elderly, child care, education, health care and workers' compensation. The social democratic movement also has strong connections with the labour movement and trade unions and is supportive of collective bargaining rights for workers as well as measures to extend democratic decision-making beyond politics into the economic sphere in the form of co-determination for employees and other economic stakeholders"

It mentions "curbing inequality, oppression of underprivileged groups and poverty", nothing about sitting on your high horse, 'pigeonholing' people you've never met, then being rude about them in some vain effort to appear 'better' than them.

....or maybe you're not a Social Democrat after all.

Well the NSDAP had "Socialist" in their title too. Yet their thinking is probably closer to the Tory right, UKIP and the brexiters than any UK party of the center left. The Home Office is even experimenting with arbitrary arrest, removal of rights of residence and concentration camps which they call detention centres.

Do not confuse social democracy and socialism their roots and philisophy are far apart. Lenin and Stalin sent social democrats to the Gulag. McDonnell has the same idea.

The Tories are a herd of confusion milling around without direction yet willing to trample to death any sign of good sense. Any capable opposition could crush them in short order. This has not happened because Corby/McDonnell are idiots. They are hoping to benefit from the utter Horlicks that brexit is creating. They may well be right.

Yea, Yea. I don't need a lesson in politics.
You assumed, when I called you a Socialist, I was referring to Labour.
You then said 'Social Democrat'.
I quoted the definition of Social Democracy, sorry if it isn't YOUR view.

You then start on about the Nazi Party, and accuse me of confusing Social Democracy and Socialism! :-S
Sorry, I didn't. You brought that up, then you decide I need 'educating' on the subject - that I didn't even mention!!

You've just shown one of your 'best' traits - attempting to 'educate' when you're the one who didn't read, or understand the post.

Superciliousness at it's best :-D

Let me explain my first comment about your being an alleged Socialist.

On the 'It's that time of year again' thread, you say this:

"As landlords we quite often have property in east London temporarily empty and whenever possible we use it for emergency / short term accomodation inc rough sleepers though the legal obstacles are head banging. For instance as a trust the Charity Commissioners demand that we maximise the rents for the benefit of the trust beneficiaries. However the trust was set up to provide affordable housing! If we wind up the trust then most of the property will end up in the ownership of the new renting monsters / foreigners / off shore and even more Londoners will be priced out of their own city some for sure joining the homeless."

Is that you who lets out houses? Or is it yet another copy & paste with no attempt to identify the source?
You write reams on the plight of the homeless - yet attempt to deride someone who you've decided does 'x', 'y' or 'z', and is therefore - to your mind - a pleb, or in my case, a bitter, thrice-married paranoid chav!! . :-D :-D :-D :-D

Would people be 'better' people - more 'worthy' if, instead of watching Eastenders, were homeless?

what on earth are you talking about?

Like any other letting organisation ( except B2L chancers (*) ) lets are carried out by professional letting agents who charge the landlord a fee. They are no longer supposed to charge fees to potential tenants but they do. This is the source of a great deal of fraud. Ditto deposits. Some very large landlords have their own in house letting office.

The agents get their instructions from the trustees' lawyers which follow minuted resolutions and legal advice. Other than my vote from time to time on policy I have no further say in the tenancies. New tenancies are all assured shorthold.

In London fake tenants who plan to illegally sublet are a major problem for social landlords and trusts charging a fair rather than maximum rent being the usual victims. A good chunk of the tenants at Grenfell were subletters. There are ways and means to stop this.

I don't think you have the first idea how the letting market works and still less how a housing trust is structured. If you want to find out about property law nip round to your nearest central library and tell them you want to access Woodfalls.

Other than the ident, which I like, I rarely watch East Enders can't stand it. Never could. fwiw it is set in Walthamstow which is not the East End. The only "soaps" I ever liked were "Last Of the Summer Wine" and "Morse" though some would say they belong to other genres.

Thank heavens there are other viewing sources than BBC/ITV. It is quite funny that Sky, Virgin will have to pay ITV while TalkTalk/BT (who take their BBC/ITV feed from YouView) will not.

ps: I haven't copy 'n pasted anything.

(*) the d-i-y small scale get rich as a landlord scheme has fallen aprt due to tax changes. These including charging rental income as PAYE and not allowing mortgage interest to be set against tax. As these changes come in indeoendents are taking their profits and selling up. Squeezing out the independents may be a good or bad thing depending on point of view.

One thing is for sure those wanting to rent with no guarantor have been mostly likely to succeed with independents. As they disappear the already stressed London housing market will become impossible for those with slender means. I doubt they will find much succour in the upcoming budget.

Don't bother asking me what I'm talking about - THEN go through the process of copying & pasting - I don't care about the letting process, or your view on it - I'm just asking if the excerpt is you quoting, or what you personally do?
You don't give a source for the quote: 'As letting agents, we' etc etc, and it's quite ambiguous- who are the 'WE' - you - or someone else?

It's not too difficult a question - but a straight answer seems to be beyond you.

I was born in Thorpe Coombe, Walthamstow :-D which is East 17 BTW

So, you were in a boy band, Sue!! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Crikey, I didn't read as far as the synopsis on soaps - I only asked one simple question.

ROFL that's was me ;-)

Houses which were valued at £7,000 in E.17 in the 1960's now are over £1m totally out of the reach of the majority of 'locals'.

The 'gentrified' area of Walthamstow Village had a knock on effect which spread rapidly through the adjacent streets. Cars are discouraged and trying to park when visiting is a nightmare.

I can remember the pre-fabs and they were fantastic, we used to peer at them (as kids) and really wanted to live in one...lolol

The Warner houses which were in fact two self contained flats were, other than the council properties, affordable and jolly nice. My Grandpa lived in one in Brettenham Rd.

North Walthamstow was filled with roads full of Victorian and Edwardian houses, this was the area that people around the less salubrious streets aspired to move to.

There has been a quote in recent years which states "please keep some areas of Walthamstow s**tty so it remains affordable" lolol

Hoe Street and the streets off it were renowned for packing families into houses like sardines in order to maximise investments. This continued for years until the crackdown when the Council were dealing with hundreds of homeless families who could no longer inhabit under par accommodation.

The solution was to simply encourage private lettings once again, without ongoing checks and balances. People made absolute fortunes! That money was invested in old properties which were improved and increased value out of all proportion.

Of course the transport links into Central London where higher salaries were being offered simply meant professionals moved out to E17 E18, South Woodford etc., and their spending power pushed traditional shops out of business and encouraged the cafe culture. Local jobs cannot pay wages which cover private rents let alone mortgage payments.

I'd like to see hundreds of thousands of prefabs built, not a great solution but one which would serve well enough for the next 30 years.

Apologies this is disjointed, that's what medication does to my brain

:-|

My gran was moved into a prefab after the war - and live there very happily for 50 years - when they moved her into a bungalow - which she didn't like.
I lived in a prefab for a couple of years too - even thought it was (by then) over 60 years old, it was still dry and habitable - we won't mention the asbestos though :-|

I agree, Sue, more prefabs!!
Modern prefabs would be so much more insulated - and built of safer materials - there's no reason why they shouldn't stand for 50+ years - unlike some of the overpriced jerry-built houses that are being offered!