So officially there are no homeless people.

That is a silly comment. Those that sleep on the streets, for whatever reason, and are not "registered" as living anywhere will not appear on official censuses. Therefore are classed as "homeless". It is not right in 21C Britain that there are so many of them.

Not so silly. In essence your government says they do not exist, despite what your eyes, ears and nose says. Yes is is a problem.

---

So officially there are no homeless people.

That is a silly comment. Those that sleep on the streets, for whatever reason, and are not "registered" as living anywhere will not appear on official censuses. Therefore are classed as "homeless". It is not right in 21C Britain that there are so many of them.

Everyone has to have a registered address where mail can be delivered, bills posted, and voting arrangements can be listed.

So officially there are no homeless people.

---

so that moving granny out of her 3 bed semi to a one bedroom flat designed for as a dwelling for a 20 year old is not the answer.

Of course it isn't, and that is just quoting one extreme to another.

if we put granddad and grandma into a one bedroom flat on the 22nd floor where does everybody sleep during the visit.

Again, not acceptable. Some elderly couples prefer to have separate bedrooms for all sorts of reasons anyway. An exaggeration.

Plus my niece wants to know if she can get a rebate as she lives in a bedsit, she goes home every w/end and sleeps at her boy friends at least two nights a week. So her arguement is the living room is only a bedroom less than 10% of the time.

Your niece is trying to take the piss! Everyone has to have a registered address where mail can be delivered, bills posted, and voting arrangements can be listed. Her preferred living and sleeping arrangements are nothing to do with whoever the landlord or the local Council is.

While I agree to a certain extent that people in social housing should not have more bedrooms than they use. And therefore should be encouraged to downsize, there was a recent article, which I now cannot find, that showed why single bedroom properties for different generation need to be different, so that moving granny out of her 3 bed semi to a one bedroom flat designed for as a dwelling for a 20 year old is not the answer.

Plus we have to remember that the empty nesters do expect their offspring to visit occasionally and to bring grandchildren along, if we put granddad and grandma into a one bedroom flat on the 22nd floor where does everybody sleep during the visit.

Plus my niece wants to know if she can get a rebate as she lives in a bedsit, she goes home every w/end and sleeps at her boy friends at least two nights a week. So her arguement is the living room is only a bedroom less than 10% of the time.

The other observation, which I guessed was the case because I know our local council is in this position, is that there are not enough one bedroom dwellings available. Therefore people cannot move out of larger properties into smaller ones.

Most local Councils in London will only give planning permission for a housing development or a block of flats, provided that a minimum of 25% are allocated as "affordable homes" run by Housing associations. We all know what that means, which is one parent families with feral kids and unemployed boyfriends all living on benefits. The Councils love it because they can reduce the council house waiting lists, and at the same time get rid of troublesome tenants.

The problem is though that there are lots of people in social housing where the kids have grown up and left home, and they simply do not need 3 bedroom houses. It is right that they should be encouraged, where possible, to downsize to a smaller place more suited to their needs, and where they will pay less rent and council tax. This in turn releases a house for a family with two or three kids living in a cramped two bedroom flat. But notice that I said "where possible" as it would be totally unfair to expect elderly people to move away from friends and family and where they have lived for a large part of their life.

There is clearly an issue here that needs to be dealt with, but the bedroom tax is a clumsy and ill thought out answer and is unpopular and unworkable. Leeds Council may have found a way around it, but if they implement that then I guarantee that they will face cuts in other government subsidies as a result.

Pravda wrote:

Despite the fact that the most dangerous countries in the world represent four continents, they all have one common characteristic - they once were European colonies. A share of the blame for the current unfavorable situation in certain countries can safely be passed onto their former colonial masters. They forced their will on them and showed a bad example to follow.

Pravda is a Russian political newspaper associated with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, its total print run is 100,000. So not a publication to take any real notice of. Also not to be confused with Izvestia which until 1992, expressed the official views of the Soviet government, but now classes itself as an "all-national" newspaper of Russia.

While the British were in charge of many former colonies, our main role was to prevent the indigenous population reverting to type. As soon as we turned our backs, that is exactly what most of them did, to their own detriment. Africa is the best example, closely followed by India. If course we didn't always get it right, and somethings shouldn't have happened. But generally speaking we did good more often than not, and the world was generally a more peaceful place.

I cannot comment sensibly on past Russian or American foreign interests as I don't have enough knowledge about them.

I suspect some of you may take exception to this ...
Pravda wrote:

Despite the fact that the most dangerous countries in the world represent four continents, they all have one common characteristic - they once were European colonies. A share of the blame for the current unfavorable situation in certain countries can safely be passed onto their former colonial masters. They forced their will on them and showed a bad example to follow.

Doesn't seem to acknowledge that in a lot of cases they were the instigator of trouble by heavily supporting communist uprisings etc.

That Afganistan is a leftover of their attempts to pacify the country, and which they failed miserably.

Or that countries that were previously part of the USSR are also very dangerous. Would you say Azerbaijan, Chechnya and other countries in that region were safe.

And don't think the US has clean hands over these places either. Certainly after WW2, and probably earlier, the policy from Washington was for the European countries to pull out from their former colonies and occupied territories asap and let the local govern themselves. Which to me, went against the US's desire to stop the spread of communism.
We stayed in Malaysia long enough to stop the spread there, but when the US encountered a similar problem, left by the French, in Vietnam they decided to not to use a system that was demonstated to work and do it their own way. We all know the reults of that effort.

I'm not making any excuses for the UK's role in this, we are probably as guilty as anyone. But after WW2 we could not afford to stay very long without help.

A city council that shows some common sense, about the bedroom tax!

Leeds council tackles bedroom tax with semantic solution

The other observation, which I guessed was the case because I know our local council is in this position, is that there are not enough one bedroom dwellings available. Therefore people cannot move out of larger properties into smaller ones.

Last week, the Guardian gathered data from 107 local authorities which revealed that as a result of the bedroom tax, 86,000 households had been forced to look for one-bedroom homes, of which only 33,000 have become available in the past year.

I suspect some of you may take exception to this ...
Pravda wrote:

Despite the fact that the most dangerous countries in the world represent four continents, they all have one common characteristic - they once were European colonies. A share of the blame for the current unfavorable situation in certain countries can safely be passed onto their former colonial masters. They forced their will on them and showed a bad example to follow.

---

Lord Shanklin....this one sounds good to me, will need to endow this upon
someone in time.

We could also have a Viscount Sandown. Both of them would probably get you a ticket to the Mayors Charity Ball.

Hail the Mighty "Creeper" Caesar! Censorship at its best! So these & the rest of the Internet needs to be shut down then as what was named was a Public Retail Park!

Certainly agree that these threads should be shut down yes.!!

No need! Don't read or post to them. Simple! But then again, if it was that simple........

..we wouldn't need politicians or old fogeys running political branches!

---

Actually I rather fancy more of an aristocratic role. I'll go for creating a Baronetcy I think, and title myself, Chris S 1st Bt, the Earl of Ventnor. A lot easier to have your way with the serving wenches, and unlike royalty, you don't have to go about opening buildings every 5 minutes.

Lord Shanklin....this one sounds good to me, will need to endow this upon
someone in time.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Hail the Mighty "Creeper" Caesar! Censorship at its best! So these & the rest of the Internet needs to be shut down then as what was named was a Public Retail Park!

Certainly agree that these threads should be shut down yes.!!

---

I spent 22 years working for BT. For the last 12 years I worked as an engineer, I also own the flat I live in and I would also be horrified to be called "working class" as I do not believe in class, so it's a matter of perspective. Means nothing unless you care about a totally worthless system.

SPOT ON! Shame you didn't criticise the one that brought up the "classes"

I just know I am gonna love the reply, oh by the way I have red x these posts as you should not really mention places on a public forum.

Hail the Mighty "Creeper" Caesar! Censorship at its best! So these & the rest of the Internet needs to be shut down then as what was named was a Public Retail Park!

Apple Store - Central London
Lea Valley Business Park

---

At times they do have their uses so long as you put them in the right job.

They needed people that had exceptional brains, plus like soldiers, the ability to work in teams, strength of character in adversity, discretion, and unquestionable loyalty. It was a case of the right people at the right time that would "fit in" with the highly secret and pressured work. They probably wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes with a rifle on the front lone. Horses for courses is always a truism.

I am a Royalist and think our Queen is really GREAT!!...What say you, Chris??.

As a lifelong Monarchist myself, I am delighted that you have the same opinion as I do, and HM the Queen is universally admired and respected around the world, especially by the Americans. Sadly these days there are growing numbers that think the Monarchy doesn't give value for money, and that we should cut the Civil list funding. In fact it has always been estimated that the value from overseas tourism more than outweighs what it costs. Cuts have been regularly made and continue to be, they scrapped the Royal Yacht, the Royal Train is hardly used any more. Head of State expenditure has reduced from £87M in 1991-92, to £38M in 2009-10. In the year 2009-10 The Queen cost the taxpayer just 62 pence per person.

Well, we have taken control of the Isle of Wight so that must have moved us a few rungs up the social classes ladder.

Actually I rather fancy more of an aristocratic role. I'll go for creating a Baronetcy I think, and title myself, Chris S 1st Bt, the Earl of Ventnor. A lot easier to have your way with the serving wenches, and unlike royalty, you don't have to go about opening buildings every 5 minutes.

Royalty - Kings, Queens, Princes
Aristocracy - Lords, Ladies, Viscounts
Upper class - Judges, Chairman, MD's, Directors
Middle class - Bank managers, Senior managers
Lower Middle class - white collar workers, junior management
Working class - blue collar & manual workers

but cast your mind back to Bletchley Park in WWII where most of the cleverest minds were almost exclusively recruited from the Cambridge University circuit. Not only did they have fine minds, but they were judged as having the "right" family background and being the "right sort of chap"

At times they do have their uses so long as you put them in the right job.
Thank goodness WW2 did not involve all-out trench war, goodness knows what
carnage this lot would have reaped again.

I baggsie being of Royalty class since I am a Royalist and think our Queen is
really GREAT!!...What say you, Chris??..Well, we have taken control of the
Isle of Wight so that must have moved us a few rungs up the social classes
ladder.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Well there you go look, us Brits have always brought a touch of class to this place :-) See you at Tiffin, TTFN

That link you gave, classifies me as Established Middle Class, UUUUH, didn't see that one coming.

oh by the way I have red x these posts as you should not really mention places on a public forum.

Bernie, I have this morning already informed the Mods that in my view, the details given are so sketchy as to be of no beneficial use. But I have also confirmed that if they want to remove another post of mine, then I would have no objection to them doing so. In addition, I am also quite happy that Jim_S removed the posts that he previously did. I will make no apologies to anyone for posting them, they were deserved, but I also have no problem in accepting the judgement. If that marks my card then so be it, it will be considered worth it, and a badge of honour.

OK, lets move on, nothing more to see here folks.