Social Cleansing begins - by one of London's POOREST boroughs
tghe-retford
Posts: 26,449 Forum Member
✭✭✭
What were we told by Government supporters - it'd only affect the benefit claimants in affluent houses in Chelsea and Westminster and how the move on housing benefit caps was the best thing done since sliced bread?
So why is one of the POOREST boroughs of London being forced to send people 150 miles away to Stoke-on-Trent?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17821018
Would those who said that this would only affect those in high rent houses in Chelsea and Westminster and how this move would reduce rents in the private sector like to apologise for being proven wrong?
I don't want to say I told you so, but...
So why is one of the POOREST boroughs of London being forced to send people 150 miles away to Stoke-on-Trent?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17821018
Would those who said that this would only affect those in high rent houses in Chelsea and Westminster and how this move would reduce rents in the private sector like to apologise for being proven wrong?
I don't want to say I told you so, but...
0
Comments
for people that pay for their own housing the concept of only being able to live where you can afford is not something new.
and whoever came up with the phrase social cleansing mocks all the victims of ethnic cleansing.
People should live where they can afford to live. I have had to make that choice myself. I live in Walthamstow, a cheaper area of London, because I cannot afford to live in the areas I would really like to live in.
It is a Labour controlled council but the fact that its one of the poorest in London should state that its not just benefit claimants in Chelsea and Westminster living the life of Riley who will suffer as a result of welfare reform, which I am sure Labour would have done too.
Also have to wonder what this move says about Stoke-on-Trent, and whether it is right to put them alongside other areas considered for the after-effects of 'social cleansing', such as Glasgow, Hull and North Lincolnshire?
Yes and with local elections coming up.
Would that not mean that rising living costs will move outwards to the poorer areas as demand increases there?
The whole business of housing benefit has been a huge mistake that has artificially inflated the market. Unfortunately, any attempt to reverse this policy will be extremely painfull for those involved.
It's the nature of poverty that you can't afford to do expensive things. Welcome to planet earth. Glad to hear that taxpayers' money is being used responsibly for once.
While this specific measure seems destined to create 'sink-towns' rather than just sink-estates, which should cause a little concern, the reasoning behind it is, I believe, supported by most people (well the ones that have to pay for it anyway).
Hopefully the laws of 'supply and demand' will stabilise the situation in London boroughs, especially after the games, but that particular market force has been absent for a while so I wouldn't bank on it.
It says that rents are cheaper there than in London.
They save money and get rid of many problems.
Now more drug activity in Clacton, an increase in murders, and unemployable chavs wandering the streets but living in new Housing Association properties.
Just a quick google shows plenty homes in Newham that are well within the benefit cap with plenty of change left over in many cases.
Shipping loads of "poor" people to areas where unemployment is already high and social services, health and education under pressure is simply stupid, solves nothing and just passes the problem to someone else. No wonder then that they told Newham to piss off.
Perhaps if the tens of thousands of illegal immigrants that Labour just ignored were actually shipped out it might help a litttle?
Have people changed so much? When we were young we were proud to manage things ourselves and we cut our cloth accordingly. As soon as my children were old enough I worked part time and we always paid our own way.
Hardly. Where are 500 families going to get jobs in Stoke-on-Trent?
The Tories left us with millions of long term welfare dependants last time round, we can't afford any more.
What rubbish. We've never had "unrestricted immigration", nor did Labour "ignore" illegal immigrants. Over 16,000 were deported in 2008 alone.
a drop in the ocean i'm affraid.
Hardly, and shows that immigration was neither "unrestricted" nor "ignored".
Government estimates in the same period estimated at least half a million illegal immigrants and up to a million with some estimates at 2 million. It may not be 'unrestricted' but it is very very poorly 'restricted', which in terms of results is very nearly the same thing.
I'm amazed people welcome the idea of ghettoisation of 'sink town's with high unemployment and little prospects, hundreds of miles away from their roots and families. Amazed Tory supporters have stopped at just forcing the poor into ghettos, considering their bloodlust for the poor over the last few years. I'd suggest anyone lusting for ghettos look to Paris and what happened there as well as seeing the consequences for French society that policy bought.
But then, as it doesn't affect them, which Tory supporters are giving to give a damn, eh?
Suggest you check it out
Study by the L.S.E. in 2009 estimated over 600,000 illegal immigrants with 422,000 (estimated) in London alone.
Doesn't sound very controlled does it?
If they can't get jobs in London, they're not going to get them anywhere.
A horror instigated by the corporate Labour & Tory machine. And another thing, Labour are about as Socialist as the Tories are the party of the Working Class. As for using rhetoric to smear opponents I also believe Social Cleansing was a term used by Tory London Mayor Boris Johnson when he attacked the Tories social policy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11643440
But I'll let you single out "immigrants" and "spongers", it's easier for you to attack the vulnerable and needy than the filthy rich and powerful. I can understand that someone like yourself wants to defend the "British way of life" that is if the British way of life is suckling the teat of corporate greed whilst sh*tting on the poor, the needy and the vulnerable. Thankfully thats not the British way of life most of us want.