Over 11,000,000 homes lie empty across Europe – enough to house all of the continent's homeless twi - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Britishboy;44022363]The prices for housing in the UK are ridiculously high.[/QUOTE] Population density is a wonderful thing :v:

Wait, why would we give houses to homeless people when 36% of the population of the uk does not even own a house, they rent it like the poor bastards they are.. including myself.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44021601]Yeah. People spent money building these homes and expect something in return[/QUOTE] Well, they won't ever get it

[quote=Zenreon117]In other news; Many hundreds of tons of food is wasted monthly, enough to feed the hungry twice over. It is let to rot to keep the prices from going down. [/quote] Actually, they throw it away because they're products that might actually be perished and not safe to eat. Stuff like old bread is still given to the homeless. source: I work at a supermarket and am pretty much in charge of throwing shit away at the end of the day.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44022623]Well, they won't ever get it[/QUOTE] So why should the homeless get it?

I hate people who think we should just give shit away. Most of these homes are vacation homes, secondary homes, investments etc.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44022717]So why should the homeless get it?[/QUOTE] because they need it? the builders aren't getting the money anyway so letting the msit there won't do anything for anyone

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44022774]because they need it? the builders aren't getting the money anyway so letting the msit there won't do anything for anyone[/QUOTE] So why not compensate the builders, who could very well become homeless themselves thanks to lost revenue? You can't simply take someones product and declare that someone else needs it without compensating them in some way.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44022774]because they need it? the builders aren't getting the money anyway so letting the msit there won't do anything for anyone[/QUOTE] The homeless also need all of your money. You're not using it right now, why aren't you giving it all away? This'd affect my family quite a bit, my parents are absolutely broke, seeing as they've built 1 house, and bought 2 more before the market crashed, all of their money is in property, and it hasn't sold yet. So your bright idea is to just have them throw away ALL of the wealth that they have, basically ending up homeless as they wont be able to afford the bills anymore. Ayup, great idea.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44022828]So why not compensate the builders, who could very well become homeless themselves thanks to lost revenue? You can't simply take someones product and declare that someone else needs it without compensating them in some way.[/QUOTE] compensate them with what? [editline]24th February 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Miskav;44022846]The homeless also need all of your money. You're not using it right now, why aren't you giving it all away? This'd affect my family quite a bit, my parents are absolutely broke, seeing as they've built 1 house, and bought 2 more before the market crashed, all of their money is in property, and it hasn't sold yet. So your bright idea is to just have them throw away ALL of the wealth that they have, basically ending up homeless as they wont be able to afford the bills anymore. Ayup, great idea.[/QUOTE] No, it's not my idea. the houses are empty, no one is using them, they won't be bought. No money will be spent on them, so why not let them be of use?

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44022966] No, it's not my idea. the houses are empty, no one is using them, they won't be bought. No money will be spent on them, so why not let them be of use?[/QUOTE] Yeah they'll totally not be sold when the market recovers, better give it all away. Dumbest idea 2014.

Money..? You know, production or upkeep cost and then ten percent of that for a payday? People like Miskav's parents can't be screwed over, and end up on the street because the government lacks decency to pay their citizens for upkeeping good households.

[QUOTE=Miskav;44022994]Yeah they'll totally not be sold when the market recovers, better give it all away. Dumbest idea 2014.[/QUOTE] when is this whole "market recovery" going to happen, and how? [editline]24th February 2014[/editline] TBH I think food and housing should be a right

I believe the same, but the problem is that we can't take what people have made for themselves, and expect to not give them something in return, for upkeep, renovation, and just a payday on top of that.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44023003]when is this whole "market recovery" going to happen, and how?[/QUOTE] It's already happening, give it half a decade more or so and it'll completely recover

Okay, so how about this: Government does not purchase the houses, instead it offers to pay a very small (50-100 dollars/month) amount of money to the homeowner in exchange for the homeless to live in it. These people then have a place to live, and they are required to keep the house in livable conditions. The owner is then able to get money from the property, but not as much as they would get if there were full-time tenants or purchasers living in it, but it gives them a way to make a family sleep indoors without having more shelters or something built.

[QUOTE=wooletang;44023113]Okay, so how about this: Government does not purchase the houses, instead it offers to pay a very small (50-100 dollars/month) amount of money to the homeowner in exchange for the homeless to live in it. These people then have a place to live, and they are required to keep the house in livable conditions. The owner is then able to get money from the property, but not as much as they would get if there were full-time tenants or purchasers living in it, but it gives them a way to make a family sleep indoors without having more shelters or something built.[/QUOTE] So what happens when the person get's an offer to sell the house?

[QUOTE=wooletang;44023113]Okay, so how about this: Government does not purchase the houses, instead it offers to pay a very small (50-100 dollars/month) amount of money to the homeowner in exchange for the homeless to live in it. These people then have a place to live, and they are required to keep the house in livable conditions. The owner is then able to get money from the property, but not as much as they would get if there were full-time tenants or purchasers living in it, but it gives them a way to make a family sleep indoors without having more shelters or something built.[/QUOTE] I like that Idea [editline]24th February 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44023131]So what happens when the person get's an offer to sell the house?[/QUOTE] probably depends on what the new owner wants

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44023131]So what happens when the person get's an offer to sell the house?[/QUOTE] Give the people who are living in it a week or two to pack up and assist them in finding another place to live, if they need it.

[QUOTE=wooletang;44023149]Give the people who are living in it a week or two to pack up and assist them in finding another place to live, if they need it.[/QUOTE] Sounds good. In the long run such a system could also benefit if the homeless group were to find jobs, and just rent the building at the normal price.

[QUOTE=wooletang;44023113]Okay, so how about this: Government does not purchase the houses, instead it offers to pay a very small (50-100 dollars/month) amount of money to the homeowner in exchange for the homeless to live in it. These people then have a place to live, and they are required to keep the house in livable conditions. The owner is then able to get money from the property, but not as much as they would get if there were full-time tenants or purchasers living in it, but it gives them a way to make a family sleep indoors without having more shelters or something built.[/QUOTE] Yea I'm pretty sure the stench of homeless person would cost more than $100 a month to get rid of. No thanks.

More homeless should break into these places and just squat them.

I know most of you are shouting stuff like Money and Greed and all that jazz but the reason quite alot of these homes are vacant are for three main reasons. The first: The houses aren't Up to the codes of there respective countries The second: Some aren't fully developed and were built by cowboy builders The third: The area there in is fucked up and the houses are more than likely derelict. Sweeping statements like the one in the title can be quite misleading, its like saying "There are enough Animals on Earth to feed its population thrice over" when it doesn't take into effect how many aren't edible and how many are used for other purposes.

[QUOTE=Superkilll307;44023608]I know most of you are shouting stuff like Money and Greed and all that jazz but the reason quite alot of these homes are vacant are for three main reasons. The first: The houses aren't Up to the codes of there respective countries The second: Some aren't fully developed and were built by cowboy builders The third: The area there in is fucked up and the houses are more than likely derelict. Sweeping statements like the one in the title can be quite misleading, its like saying "There are enough Animals on Earth to feed its population thrice over" when it doesn't take into effect how many aren't edible and how many are used for other purposes.[/QUOTE] But you are wrong about the unfinished houses. They weren't factored into the numbers, at least not in Spain. [QUOTE]an [I]additional[/I] 500,000 part-built homes have been abandoned by construction companies across the country. [/QUOTE] And most of the houses in Spain were being lived in until they were repossessed, which means they were up to code and liveable at some point, and probably close to being so again. [QUOTE]Many of the empty Spanish properties were repossessed by banks after owners defaulted on mortgages.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]"Spain is suffering from high numbers of repossessions and evictions,[/QUOTE] And people are asking the banks to give the houses to them so they can use them for the homeless, so they can't be completely shitty. [QUOTE]Some city councils in Catalonia have threatened banks with fines of up to €100,000 if homes they repossess remain empty for more than two years. The city council of Terrassa, to the north of Barcelona, has reportedly written to banks holding more than 5,000 homes demanding they take "all possible actions to find tenants" or hand the homes over to the council to use for social housing.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;44023003]when is this whole "market recovery" going to happen, and how? [editline]24th February 2014[/editline] TBH I think food and housing should be a right[/QUOTE] Being a right doesn't make it instantly free And by free I don't mean that landlords should keep some utility(Which I consider to be a right). You still have to pay for the upkeep

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;44023566]More homeless should break into these places and just squat them.[/QUOTE]And get arrested as soon as the property owner finds out theirs squats in his or her property.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;44023566]More homeless should break into these places and just squat them.[/QUOTE] That's Just Extreme

but giving them housing would be COMMUNISM! and thats terrible. :tinfoil:

[QUOTE=avincent;44023414]Yea I'm pretty sure the stench of homeless person would cost more than $100 a month to get rid of. No thanks.[/QUOTE] what? they're still people, they don't emit some sort of Homeless stench. A shower would fix almost anything short of disease

People have the right to do whatever they want with their property, regardless of how stupid you might think it is.