More residential moorings....?

[sebrof]

Can not be bothered to do the complete research but I do know that over 50,000 soldiers from The Commonwealth were killed in the second world war.

 

The Commonwealth?

 

You mean the British Commonwealth.

 

It only dropped the British bit quite recently.

 

The soldiers of the British Commonwealth who served gallantly in the two world wars were subjects of the British Empire or the Dominions, and so the word British applies to them, as it does to the people of Great Britain, Ireland (in WW1), Northern Ireland (in WW2), and the British Islands (and I bet you don't know what those are, without Googling).

 

So stop patronising Nina with your ignorant assumptions. Her use of the word British was correct, as it embraced all the peoples you allude to.

 

I was very tempted just to ignore this post and managed for over 1 hour but could not get it out of my mind. So I will answer it from a personal point of view.

1. I like all immigrants pay tax in my case income tax on my pension and everyday VAT on my purchases.

 

So ALL immigrants pay tax, do they?

 

Good grief.

 

And before you jump up and down, I am not suggesting that all indigenous people do.

 

If you want to be taken seriously, it might be wise to avoid such ridiculous statements.

 

A website called "Inside Housing" has torn Grant Shapps' living afloat idea to shreds this morning:

 

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/development/shapps-calls-for-boats-to-ease-housing-crisis/6517491.article

 

For the people using dongles, I apologise for not copying the whole of the Inside Housing article but it is mostly only a re-hash of the BBC News article a couple of days ago.

 

Apparently the "New Homes Bonus" is a scheme whereby the Government gives a Local Authority a cash bung of a sum equivalent to 6 years' worth of Council Tax for the new home. (Presumably this scheme does NOT provide a CT-free holiday for the occupier of the new home, though.) Attempted bribery is a criminal offence but when central Government is the culprit, the idea suddenly becomes an "acceptable incentive."

 

One of the people who has commented on the Inside Housing article made me laugh out loud. S/he says that Grant Shapps does not have a "brain to mouth filter," so he just spouts whatever rubbish he has dreamt up overnight, it would seem.

 

According to Inside Housing, the demand for new homes is that 60,000 new homes are required every quarter. It would take at least a year to secure planning permission for even 600 new residential moorings on the inland waterways so I really do think that Shapps is spouting out of his rear end.

 

Somehow, it seems that Shapps' ideas for "uncoventional housing" seem to be attracting universal derision but zero support. Sad, that.

 

You're right. It is sad.

 

Did Shapps say this was a cure for the national shortage of housing? I think not.

 

It is just one small contribution, and one which will benefit forum members in that it will bring more income both to BW and its successor, and to canalside businesses. And that will be good for all of us.

 

Damn good idea. Take the BCN. I love it but its completely under used and need a new purpose in life. All around it the old works have been torn down to a concrete pan. Solution - dig out a whole bunch of smallish basins for residential use. Put some life back in the system and several £m in BW's coffers. Maybe we could use this to make the books balance. WE have a massive asset and with a bit of imagination it can be made to pay its way. But - please, please - no more linear moorings.

 

Good post. I agree.

[sebrof]

Hi sebrof

 

It wasn't just that comment in isolation, these comments were also made by her one of them clearly racist. Many posters including me took a distasteful view of her comments. I know the thread is long, but you need to read it all to get it into perspective.

 

 

This is such an emotive subject that I don't want to get drawn into it. I would just observe that when there is massive immigration (as there was, under the last government, as a matter of deliberate but covert policy) there is bound to be a reaction. And I think it is a bit facile to dismiss people's concerns as bigotry. There are major issues here, as those of us who live in big cities have been reminded recently. Increasing the population without increasing the availability of jobs is not a recipe for harmony. And letting in unskilled and semi-literate people to a sophisticated economy is not helpful either.

[Smelly]

This is such an emotive subject that I don't want to get drawn into it.

 

Then don't.

 

Easy!

[sebrof]

Then don't.

 

Easy!

 

Thank you for your input, Smelly. It's comforting to have a still, small, voice whispering words of wisdom into the old Britney at times of crisis.

[mayalld]

The Commonwealth?

 

You mean the British Commonwealth.

 

It only dropped the British bit quite recently.

 

The soldiers of the British Commonwealth who served gallantly in the two world wars were subjects of the British Empire or the Dominions, and so the word British applies to them, as it does to the people of Great Britain, Ireland (in WW1), Northern Ireland (in WW2), and the British Islands (and I bet you don't know what those are, without Googling).

 

 

As WWII was after the passage of the Statute of Westminster, which removed any remaining subordination of the Dominion Governments, they were no longer British,

[nina]

When I made my original post it was based on the observation that there are two kinds of benefit recipients. The first kind are the honest people in genuine need of financial assistance for which the welfare state was originally created. I have no problem at all with supporting this kind of person and I am proud to live in a country that looks after it's own in this way.

The second kind of benefit recipient are the ferral, immoral, unscrupulous, lazy, non contributing claimants who see living on benefits as a permanent lifestyle choice. Some of these are coming to UK from other countries purely to milk the benefit system in which case they are criminals because they are fraudulently obtaining money from the British taxpayer who are fast becoming the underprivileged majority. I don't want the latter as my next door neighbours if I live on a boat. They would not be safe. I'd drown them if I saw that I was continuing to work 24/7 while they made no contribution whatsoever.

 

The canalways of Britain are one of the last vestiges of unspoilt rural heritage which needs preserving at all costs. It should be a privilege to live on a boat, not a cheap housing option.

 

Any increase in residential moorings should be offered to the most deserving members who have made sacrifices and contributions towards forming the backbone of this country, not those who think they have an automatic entitlement through the near bankrupt welfare system. Our injured armed forces, elderly, nurses, teachers, police, firemen, anyone who works on a low income, etc should be made the priority if residential moorings become a viable option to ease the housing shortage.

 

And if anyone thinks my comments are too brutal, go and try living in Australia:-)

[cereal tiller]

steady nina

the truth can disturb folk almost as much as the obvious!

 

well said.

[Steilsteven]

Thought I'd see how the Red Herring thread was doing and I see there's been no improvement.

Also checked out that link and I see it's no better there.

 

Keith

[carlt]

I don't want the latter as my next door neighbours if I live on a boat. They would not be safe. I'd drown them if I saw that I was continuing to work 24/7 while they made no contribution whatsoever.

 

I'd rather live in a shanty town, with 10000 unemployed immigrants, than in a palace, with a nasty, ugly bigot like you.

Edited September 2, 2011 by carlt

[nina]

I'd rather live in a shanty town, with 10000 unemployed immigrants, than a palace with a nasty, ugly bigot like you.

 

 

Good, that's a relief. Off you go then.

 

steady nina

the truth can disturb folk almost as much as the obvious!

 

well said.

 

 

Absolutely! :-)

[carlt]

Good, that's a relief. Off you go then.

 

I already live on a street that is largely comprised of retirees, polish immigrants, Asians (some immigrants, some second and third generation brits) and a couple of young white British families, like mine (well I'm middle aged but the rest of the family is young).

 

One thing that is notable, and remarked on by my elderly neighbours, is that, since the 'foreigners' moved in, there has been a return to the community spirit that disappeared, many years ago.

 

You may not like them, in your ivory tower, but those of us who live with them wouldn't swap them for horrible, vicious racists like you.

Edited September 2, 2011 by carlt

[cereal tiller]

if carlt did move to a shanty town,the quality of accomodation would improve.

after all he is a handy chap with woodworking and such,even if he is intolerant of other peoples views?

[nina]

I already live on a street that is largely comprised of retirees, polish immigrants, Asians (some immigrants, some second and third generation brits) and a couple of young white British families, like mine (well I'm middle aged but the rest of the family is young).

 

One thing that is notable, and remarked on by my elderly neighbours, is that, since the 'foreigners' moved in, there has been a return to the community spirit that disappeared, many years ago.

 

You may not like them, in your ivory tower, but those of us who live with them wouldn't swap them for horrible, vicious racists like you.

 

 

It's a shame that you haven't learned the polite manner of your neighbours.

My suppliers are Asian, my neighbours and friends in Australia were of all nationalities, my lawyer is Polish and my husband is a Kiwi. I live near Leicester and totally agree that the Asian community in particular bring structure and dedication to family life into such a strong, definitive manner that it deserves nothing but credit. They also work hard which I admire.

 

My issue is purely with people who choose not to work and see living on benefits as a lifestyle, permanent choice.

[carlt]

if carlt did move to a shanty town,the quality of accomodation would improve.

after all he is a handy chap with woodworking and such,even if he is intolerant of other peoples views?

I am very tolerant of peoples' views.

 

Nina C has every right to hold racist views just as I have every right to oppose them.

 

If she kept her views to herself then I wouldn't have commented but she chose not to, as is her right, leaving the door open to comments about her attitude.

 

I would add, though, that her threats of violence, towards people because of their race, is almost certainly illegal.

 

Being a racist is one thing. Threatening racially motivated violence is completely different.

 

 

My issue is purely with people who choose not to work and see living on benefits as a lifestyle, permanent choice.

Yet, despite there being more Brits, than foreigners, who chose this lifestyle, you picked Race as the main subject of your rant.

[nina]

if carlt did move to a shanty town,the quality of accomodation would improve.

after all he is a handy chap with woodworking and such,even if he is intolerant of other peoples views?

 

 

The funny thing is, if I said the French were foolish, the Germans were bossy, the Irish were daft and the Scots, dare I say it, were mean fisted morons, no one would suggest I was being racist. They might all come back at me for making such an outlandish comment, after all, the Brits call the French and vice versa all the time, but I doubt anyone would mention racism.

 

The only reason it's being used on this thread is to manipulate the topic.

 

I am very tolerant of peoples' views.

 

Nina C has every right to hold racist views just as I have every right to oppose them.

 

If she kept her views to herself then I wouldn't have commented but she chose not to, as is her right, leaving the door open to comments about her attitude.

 

I would add, though, that her threats of violence, towards people because of their race, is almost certainly illegal.

 

Being a racist is one thing. Threatening racially motivated violence is completely different.

 

 

Yet, despite there being more Brits, than foreigners, who chose this lifestyle, you picked Race as the main subject of your rant.

 

 

No, I think it was you that jumped on that bandwagon. I wasn't that specific.

[cotswoldsman]

 

My issue is purely with people who choose not to work and see living on benefits as a lifestyle, permanent choice.

 

Sorry to ask but I am confused are these the African Criminals you referred to?

[carlt]

The only reason it's being used on this thread is to manipulate the topic.

That was exactly what I suspected you of doing.

 

Thank you for being so honest.

 

Now, if you could stop making the racist comments, we could get back to the subject.

[Leonie]

And if anyone thinks my comments are too brutal, go and try living in Australia:-)

 

I think your comments are too brutal (not to mention factually incorrect). I did try living in Australia; it's where I was born so I guess that makes me another scrounging immigrant milking the tax system and dirtying up the neighbourhood or am I OK because I'm so white I'm practically albino?

 

Also, both my Granfathers fought in Gallipoli and survived. I assure they were very much not British and nor were the ANZACS who died all around them on that field.

Edited September 2, 2011 by Leonie

[carlt]

No, I think it was you that jumped on that bandwagon. I wasn't that specific.

I think, if you read back over my posts, you'll find that I never got off the anti-racist "bandwagon".

Edited September 2, 2011 by carlt

[nina]

I am very tolerant of peoples' views.

 

Nina C has every right to hold racist views just as I have every right to oppose them.

 

If she kept her views to herself then I wouldn't have commented but she chose not to, as is her right, leaving the door open to comments about her attitude.

 

I would add, though, that her threats of violence, towards people because of their race, is almost certainly illegal.

 

Being a racist is one thing. Threatening racially motivated violence is completely different.

 

 

Yet, despite there being more Brits, than foreigners, who chose this lifestyle, you picked Race as the main subject of your rant.

 

 

I am going to report this post because you are deliberately inciting a war by twisting the wording of my post which I said tongue in cheek. At no point did I make any reference to specific individuals. Either get new glasses and read my posts properly or stay quiet. Better to not to say anything and be thought of as a fool rather than to open one's mouth and reveal yourself to be the stirrer you are.

[Leonie]

I am going to report this post because you are deliberately inciting a war by twisting the wording of my post which I said tongue in cheek. At no point did I make any reference to specific individuals. Either get new glasses and read my posts properly or stay quiet. Better to not to say anything and be thought of as a fool rather than to open one's mouth and reveal yourself to be the stirrer you are.

 

Your comments and posts don't read as tongue in cheek. You have no right to tell someone to stay quiet on a public form. You would do well in heeding your own advice regarding foolishness and stirring.

[carlt]

At no point did I make any reference to specific individuals.

No you made poisonous threats towards groups of people.

 

Why is that any better than threatening individuals?

[cotswoldsman]

I am going to report this post because you are deliberately inciting a war by twisting the wording of my post which I said tongue in cheek. At no point did I make any reference to specific individuals. Either get new glasses and read my posts properly or stay quiet. Better to not to say anything and be thought of as a fool rather than to open one's mouth and reveal yourself to be the stirrer you are.

 

Can I suggest you re read your posts, I am not going to re post them again but would be interested to know what posts were said tongue in cheek.

[nina]

No you made poisonous threats towards groups of people.

 

Why is that any better than threatening individuals?

 

Did I really? Goodness me. If I didn't specify anyone in particular, how is that racist exactly?

 

Actually, I must go and prop up the working masses by doing some work. It might be Friday morning but I only get Sunday off and that's a rare event. Running a business in this climate takes all hands on deck so to speak so please excuse me while I go and earn a living.

 

I'm sure all you posters have jobs to go to :-)

[carlt]

Did I really? Goodness me. If I didn't specify anyone in particular, how is that racist exactly?

She doesn't even understand the meaning of the word.