Jeremy Corbyn announces Labour will buy every homeless person in the country a house - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The party leader said he would purchase 8,000 homes "immediately" and give them to people sleeping rough around the UK. He also highlighted plans to allow councils to take over properties that have been left "deliberately" empty in order to house people who are on waiting lists around the country. Rough sleeping in England has reached new highs, official figures out last week showed. There are now around 5,000 people living on the streets around the country, a 15 per cent rise on the same period in 2016. Labour also announced plans to hand over vacant Housing Association properties to homeless people, rather than to people on waiting lists. Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr show Mr Corbyn said: "(We would) immediately purchase 8,000 properties across the country to give immediate housing to those people that are currently homeless. "At the same time we would require local authorities to build far more. "The problem is homeless people, rough sleepers, beg to get money for a night shelter, stay in the night shelter or a hostel. "The problem then is move on accommodation, the problem then is not having an address, without which can't get a job or claim benefits."[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/28/jeremy-corbyn-announces-labour-will-buy-every-homeless-person/"]Source[/URL]

Good fucking lord, could you guys clone him and send him to us? I wish we had an unashamedly left wing labor leader like Corbyn in Australia.

I still have no idea why this guy is all for Brexit when that will only exacerbate the whole situation. Buying homes for the homeless while great sounding, won't immediately solve the problem. Really, purpose built centers, where they are in reach of support services and kept well maintained, are what is needed to properly tackle chronic homelessness. Of course our solutions here in freedomland are tainted by drug abuse, lack of medical care, and poor social services in general, so mileage may vary. Seizing vacant homes is a whole can of worms though

The Tories+DUP have a majority right? Do minority parties in Parliament get to make decisions or is like the US where the minority party can't do much until they get a majority?

[QUOTE=TheBorealis;53090452]The Tories+DUP have a majority right? Do minority parties in Parliament get to make decisions or is like the US where the minority party can't do much until they get a majority?[/QUOTE] The latter. Although the Tories are in a very shaky coalition right now.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;53090456]The latter. Although the Tories are in a very shaky coalition right now.[/QUOTE] Then how would they put these plans into practice? Are councils like mini parliaments and Labour have majorities in a lot of them?

8,000 houses or apartments? I feel like they'd get more bang for their buck if they built subsidized/homeless people apartments and used those as transition-to-real-life centers

Not to shit on the parade, but a lot of homeless people are homeless for a reason, such as crippling mental illness. A lot of them have had family members and friends try to get them living in a house but they've either refused or ended up trashing the place. The money would be far better spent on mental health programs.

[QUOTE=download;53090593]Not to shit on the parade, but a lot of homeless people are homeless for a reason, such as crippling mental illness. A lot of them have had family members and friends try to get them living in a house but they've either refused or ended up trashing the place. The money would be far better spent on mental health programs.[/QUOTE] In the USA, in SLC Utah, they basically went from a "treatment first" approach to a "housing first" approach. Basically the logistics of treating the mentally ill is incredibly difficult when they are homeless. Drug addicts were given their apartments and [B]then[/B] told to go to rehab programs, instead of vice-versa. Yes, for in-patient care obviously you would not need the apartment but out patient treatment is basically impossible with the homeless

[QUOTE=proboardslol;53090603]In the USA, in SLC Utah, they basically went from a "treatment first" approach to a "housing first" approach. Basically the logistics of treating the mentally ill is incredibly difficult when they are homeless. Drug addicts were given their apartments and [B]then[/B] told to go to rehab programs, instead of vice-versa. Yes, for in-patient care obviously you would not need the apartment but out patient treatment is basically impossible with the homeless[/QUOTE] Perhaps. I would suspect most of them qualify for in house care though. Either way, housing is only a small part of the solution.

[QUOTE=download;53090614]Perhaps. I would suspect most of them qualify for in house care though. Either way, housing is only a small part of the solution.[/QUOTE] no matter the size, housing is the [B]first step[/B] in the solution. For many homeless people who are mentally competent but addicted to drugs or down on their luck, housing is a godsend

The title is sensationalist as hell, but it's the Telegraph so what would you expect? Would be better to go with the BBC rather than The Telegraph, which sensationalize things to help the Tories. Corbyn pledges 8,000 homes for rough sleepers: [QUOTE]Labour is pledging to provide 8,000 homes "immediately" to house people with a history of rough sleeping, should it win power. Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said they would also help councils "take over" properties kept empty deliberately. He said the scale of homelessness was "disgusting" and "wholly unnecessary". Conservative David Lidington said the reasons for rough sleeping were complex and the government had set ambitious targets to reduce it. Outlining Labour's plans, Mr Corbyn pledged more council properties with lifetime tenancies at secure rent, and more intervention into the private rented sector. Asked what a Labour government could do for people who were already homeless, Mr Corbyn told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show: "Immediately purchase 8,000 properties across the country to give emergency housing to those people who are currently homeless and at the same time require local authorities to build far more." A party spokesman later clarified that the 8,000 properties would not be bought using compulsory purchase powers but would be acquired by "immediately striking a deal" with housing associations to free them up as they fell vacant. They would then be replaced by new properties to be built under Labour's pledged house building programme.[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-42851024[/url] They aren't just giving them free ownership of a house as OPs title suggests.

[QUOTE=download;53090593]Not to shit on the parade, but a lot of homeless people are homeless for a reason, such as crippling mental illness. A lot of them have had family members and friends try to get them living in a house but they've either refused or ended up trashing the place. The money would be far better spent on mental health programs.[/QUOTE] If it was as simple as this you'd have expected homelessness to be more or less stable, but rough sleeping has more than doubled since the Tories took power and general 'family homelessness' is up by almost 40% in that timeframe. Councils are putting them up in B&Bs for gods sake.

What about the people who work their asses off to barely be able to afford a small appartment?

[QUOTE=V12US;53090903]What about the people who work their asses off to barely be able to afford a small appartment?[/QUOTE] If you read the article you'd see it's talking about leasing delibreately vacant homes back to the councils for emergency housing and fast tracking HA homes, which are effectively a private stand in for social housing after the Tories abandoned funding for it. These people working to pay for their small apartment are free to jump on a HA waiting list if they like.

corbyn the absolute mad lad

[QUOTE=V12US;53090903]What about the people who work their asses off to barely be able to afford a small appartment?[/QUOTE] I suppose it would be some comfort to know they wont end up sleeping rough for the rest of their lives if something goes wrong.

Homelessness is on the rise in Denmark as well - honestly I don't get how it isn't more of a political talking point.

[QUOTE=download;53090593]Not to shit on the parade, but a lot of homeless people are homeless for a reason, such as crippling mental illness. A lot of them have had family members and friends try to get them living in a house but they've either refused or ended up trashing the place. The money would be far better spent on mental health programs.[/QUOTE] but homelessness has been spiking so consistently year after year, it can't just be down to mental illness and addiction

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;53091456]Homelessness is on the rise in Denmark as well - honestly I don't get how it isn't more of a political talking point.[/QUOTE] homeless people have no power, most of them can't even vote for lack of fixed adress- there's no use catering to them if they can't get you elected, and most people would prefer to pretend they don't exist, or deserve whatever suffering they endure. The way the local council treats the homeless in my area is disgusting, a homeless dude started sleeping in one of those old fashioned seaside shelters near the beach- they sent people to stand construction site barriers in front of the entrances. The dude could still get in, so they sent people round again and they screwed the barriers down with planks on the outside and screws going trough the bars into the shelter. Doesn't matter to them if there's now a man sleeping in the pouring rain, at least we don't have to look at him. We have a worrying shortage of police right now, every time ive called them since the start of last year they have had nobody available to send out. Still managed to send 3 officers to drag a homeless bloke out of the doorway of a disused shop as I walked past the other night. The general feeling about the homeless from anyone in power tends to be "go be poor somewhere else". Corbyn has a habit of not being the complete bastard we expect politicians to be.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;53091505]homeless people have no power, most of them can't even vote for lack of fixed adress- there's no use catering to them if they can't get you elected, and most people would prefer to pretend they don't exist, or deserve whatever suffering they endure.[/QUOTE] I think (at least, this is how I see it personally) that most people see the homeless as a nuisance, and something that lowers their property values, increases crime, makes an area more sketchy, etc. and so they'd vote to have something done about homelessness. Of course, HOW you handle it is what makes you a liberal or a conservative; a liberal will find them housing and a conservative might buy them a one way ticket from NY to LA [editline]29th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Cone;53091477]but homelessness has been spiking so consistently year after year, it can't just be down to mental illness and addiction[/QUOTE] At least in the United States, there's an opioid epidemic and so I can see mental illness/addiction playing the biggest part in homelessness in the USA. The other being reduced job opportunities for young people without a degree, and stagnating wages meaning that even employed people end up having to live in their cars if they work at McDonalds. It used to be that many Americans' dream was to get a nice big house with a picket fence, 3 kids and a dog etc. etc. but I think today most young people are just hoping for a living wage and to make ends meet. Any aspiration above that, to me, feels like a luxury (which is sad)

Homelessness has increased in the UK because of Tory policy, who would of thought that taking away benefits for the most needy would mean they can't afford a place to stay? [editline]29th January 2018[/editline] It's gotten really bad where I live, literally almost every underpass has a tent in it.

[QUOTE=HazzaHardie;53091612]Homelessness has increased in the UK because of Tory policy, who would of thought that taking away benefits for the most needy would mean they can't afford a place to stay? [editline]29th January 2018[/editline] It's gotten really bad where I live, literally almost every underpass has a tent in it.[/QUOTE] I live in a fairly rural area, lot of the homeless people around here literally go off and live in makeshift shelters in the woods. Every now and then there will be a post in a local facebook group about how one of the shelters got discovered and burned by complete twats. A group of homeless people used to stick together in my town, but chavs figured out where they would be each night and in the end they got assaulted by drunks so often, and reporting it to the police would just get them "moved on" that this particular group all just kinda fled the town. It's fucking surreal that we literally have "undesirables" being run out of town in modern times.

[QUOTE=The Aussie;53090449]Good fucking lord, could you guys clone him and send him to us? I wish we had an unashamedly left wing labor leader like Corbyn in Australia.[/QUOTE] Shorten is a fucking joke, but don't go saying that young Labor circles they fucking hate it. Treat him like he's the next Jesus or some shit when he's nothing special. I want albo or someone else

[QUOTE=Sableye;53090450]I still have no idea why this guy is all for Brexit when that will only exacerbate the whole situation. Buying homes for the homeless while great sounding, won't immediately solve the problem. Really, purpose built centers, where they are in reach of support services and kept well maintained, are what is needed to properly tackle chronic homelessness. Of course our solutions here in freedomland are tainted by drug abuse, lack of medical care, and poor social services in general, so mileage may vary. Seizing vacant homes is a whole can of worms though[/QUOTE] WHO WOULD WIN? [img]https://facepunch.com/image.php?u=244936&dateline=1469509211[/img] [B]Brony with 23,191 posts and one opinion.[/B] [t]https://i.gyazo.com/db22a14b6f24b97773ba27d90a811d6a.png[/t] [B]One 126 page red boi[/B]