Labour is pledging to provide 8,000 homes "immediately" to house people with a history of homelessness...


Other urls found in this thread:


Yes Yes I know, the BBC:




Any other Brits noticed a genuine feeling of optimism with fellow Labour voters?

It feels like things are really getting better, with the tories collapsing and Corbyn getting more popular everyday. It feels like we're on the road to a brighter future.

My only fear is he'll have lost his momentum by 2022, and we'll get 5 more years of May.

Hmm how about we stop letting in 200k vile Pakistanis a year if social services are so overburdened just a thought






read Lenin faggot

try harder nigger




t. nigger meme

getting weaker with your baits amermutt.



I dunno but 7 nation army came on in the club on friday: I think we all know what they were singing.

also Corbyn is pretty anti-eu, is in favour of border controll to some extent and is actually capable of running a country unlike May, but hey, stay in your shitty echochamber of a world, and keep being a miserable fuck who think anuddah shoah is humanitie's biggest problem

The Tories and UKIP are the niggers of the World

It's probably a British UKIP voter furious. Don't have such a high opinion of the British right. They are just as stupid as the American right.

well yeah, ukip lads do seem more inbred than them sometimes.

you got any more deformed PJW pictures?

my body is ready

we are growing stronger everyday

just visit the PJW youtube channel

The point is not to "help" the working class as if they were subject of welfare - believing that seriously is liberal-tier bullshit. The point is to organize them, and absolutely nothing can be done from the bourgeois state to better their condition - in the end the proletarians along with the state itself, are all subject to the almighty rule of the market.

Either read a fucking book or stop shilling, ffs.

The point is that your solution isn't realistically possible right now and requires strategy and planning, not sudden burst of control. The fact is nobody has the numbers for that. If want to ease quality of life for homeless people, you are not giving them a plausible answer soon. Homeless people will die if we sit and wait and not act.

To shrug this off as possible loss, makes you incredibly similar to the Tories.

In fairness the only thing they'd be doing is changing the regulations for the market on a specific good - the vacant property.

It will be interesting to see what happens as this is a growing trend in several countries. The elephant in the room is land buyers who see it as investment property through their own market manipulations. Laws are in place in some countries to target foreign "land investors" but they've used proxies and shit in order to sidestep the spirit of the law.

It will be interesting to see how much the boats gets rocked when the jews and chinese are told to fuck themselves when their shit is confiscated by the municipal governments their overpriced unused properties are in seize them.

We might be looking at another housing price crash as all that old money pulls out of a now uncertain or at least more stringent "investment" branch.

This is where you socialists demonstrate your absolute true colors. You don't actually understand why those people are homeless. For years countries like Canada has had a policy of paying for the startup rent of anyone who is on disability or welfare. There are still homeless people in Canada. I can't speak for the UK but the main issue with homelessness is that these people are junkies or mentally ill. Either way as long as you leave some furniture or just leave them to their own devices they will either sell the furniture for drugs or manage to get themselves in some kind of odd situation that involves emergency services, particularly operation of a stove in most cases. The only ones this would benefit are some mentally ill people and if you required them to be on meds they would choose homelessness anyway to avoid the pharmaceutical companies they are extremely suspicious of.

t. Schizophrenic on disability

And what would you actually do to stop that? See this is where YOU show your true colors. Capitalism has demonstrated absolute failiure on its faulty "War on Drugs" and "War on Homelessness" if it keeps happening. You can't actually believe in this fatalistic bullshit.

It's fatalistic because the system itself produces drug addiction and produces homelessness, especially has the gulf between rich and poor, and the stress of living increase.

You have no solution. You just mark them off as possible loss. Not a systematic fault.

Capitalism itself is more of a drug addiction than any drug, it is more self harm than any mentally ill person. You cannot just write off people who are homeless who are mentally ill as a fault of the individual if it is widespread. It is a fault of systemic inequity and refusal.

And by the way, if you're trying to say Canada is socialist, fucking please


Social programs reduce the rate of profit and hasten the collapse of capitalism. Read Marx.

For real? Where did he say that?

Austerity is the thing that alleviates the tendency of the rate of profit to fall so I guess you're right in that respect.

What you don't understand is that these chronically homeless people are there because of the choices they make or the nature of their disorder. For the severely mentally ill we can always have caretakers, the junkies on the other hand will actually profit from anything we give them to fuel their drug habit.

What Corbyn is proposing isn't any different than what we have now in Canada, it doesn't actually fix anything. Granted some people will use the opportunity well, many others especially among the chronically homeless will piss away anything you give them and that is a waste of resources better spent on prevention.

No I would say however socialism is a spectrum and among capitalist countries it's closer to socialism than most.

That's because they're basically doing the same thing. If he had offered to pay the rent of the chronically homeless instead it would have the same result as Canada because fundamentally those are very similar methods of securing housing. Most of the time the homeless use the money given to them to skip out on rent and throw a once a year (how often you're allowed to get it) party.

The majority of the homeless are homeless by choice. Try leaving your all white suburb and taking a walk through coon town some time. The genuinely mentally ill don't last too long homeless on the streets and end up in jail very quickly, meaning the remainder of the homeless are just basically refuseniks. Half of the homeless in my town are trust fund crustpunks larping anyway.


And you do not remedy this problem. I would also like to see a source you deliberately self harm youself enough to become "homeless by choice".

Even if there was a choice, Capitalism has failed by allowing it. Homelessness and drug use are systemic faults of capitalism.

Individualism is a lie.

That's an observation, not a solution. A crude observation that does not address any point made.

The disorder is capitalism.

Once again, a fault of Capitalism.

Well sure OK. Let's remedy the situation by taking their rights away to make those choices under threat of going to the gulag ☭TANKIE☭.

I mean read Marx in relation to falling profits causing the final crisis. Reducing the rate of profit through raising taxes for social programs is just a logical extension of that logic.

You're not answering anything whatsoever.

What are you offering them? Fucking starvation because they're mentally ill?

I don't know what the empirical evidence is for that but it would explain why social democracy seems to be at its most vigorous and uncontested during economic booms.

Even the times where social democracy has been built during a period of crisis, such as expansion of social programs in Great Britain and the US during the Great Depression, are the exceptions that prove the rule. Those accomplishments took place during a momentous upswing in class struggle.

Where the fuck do you think you live? Which mentally ill people are starving? We have shelters that give out food and if you're too crazy you usually end up in a mental hospital which also serves food.

654,000 currently in America are "documented" as being homeless. But it's an incredibly hard thing to document, and on top of this, it is quite easy to starve when homeless. That leaves the possibility of over 1,000,000 homeless people easily. And yes, a number of those people are starving.

So let me get this straight. The homeless people are privileged drug addicts who eat all the time and exist only by choice because the system is flawless and would never allow the creation of homelessness.

You dumb bastard.

Tory cunt

Watch, next thing he'll say is

Makes sense and is also why following 2008 social democratic reforms were not implemented. But I assumed that socdem policies were either less effective or neutral against the effects of normal market competition causing falling rate of profit. I didn't expect socdem policies to be actively increasing fall of rate of profit.

Socdem policies with high taxation usually reduces inequality somehwat. Where as austerity does the complete opposite and ensures increasing wealth share to the bourgeoisie. Firms paying lower taxes, and larger corporate subsidies have higher rates of profit. So yeah makes sense.

Not in a suburban or city environment. You generally have more facilities per town or city than needed.

I'm not saying anything is flawless. The majority of homeless people are privileged drug addicts though. I have actually lived on the streets. They take everything you give them and turn it into drugs basically. It's like fucking magic. I knew several people who rented a per-furnished apartment and they gave them first and last months rent. They kept the money, sold most of the furniture and partied for about a week straight. By the time the landlord managed to evict (which takes a month or two here) them they had taken every penny and spent it on drugs or food.

So you became homeless by choice? They all became homeless by choice. There's nothing at all that is causing drug use and homelessness. It's all about free will. Free will overcomes all obstacles in the way to success

You fucking idiot. You absolute fucking idiot.

You were right he did it.


There are probably over 1,000,000 homeless people in America, only over half of which are documented if it's only just around the 1,000,000 mark

And absolutely all of them didn't have to be homeless, arrived there by choice, and are living fine lives of pampered princes. In fact they don't use drugs because being homeless is literally hell, and the belief you've failed everyone you loved gnaws at your brain and you want release among other things; it's just because they're junkies.

Nothing systemic about homelessness. All of it is free will.

I don't believe you were ever homeless.

That's absolutely right. When was the last time a communist or socialist got elected in a western country?

You're going to need to step up your game if you want a seat at the table you fuckwit.

Capitalism provides for all, homeless is choice. Socialism is slavery. The market is freedom. Greed is good. Do not witness the drug addict, for it is his fault. Capitalism is opportunity. Individuality is the answer.

The defenders of capitalism have a nice broken record effect of double speak. It's like an echo. Whenever you point out systemic flaws within capitalism they just bounce back to either an argument about free will (this does not exist in capitalism, at all) or an argument about how it isn't good but it's the best system we have.

They are completely unable to think for themselves.

Free market is a religion

It's absolutely wrong.

Not since Lincoln had correspondence with Karl Marx, but we all know what happened to him. Not after the US Government, motivated by business interests, caused two red scares which reached international levels.

We were close when we were in the Industrial Revolution, and interestingly enough we're close to that point of inequity again.

When was the last time capitalism provided for anyone, when a small portion of people own the entirety of property and wealth? Where is the oppurtunity

Show me the opportunity in capitalism. Show me how over 1,000,000 people decided "Well fuck it, guess I decide to become homeless and shoot up drugs! I love this!"

Show me how a society with this much inequity between the classes has actual opportunity for all. It does not. It will not, opportunity will only shrink and we will be back in square one.

I pray for communism someday if only because human scum end up in work camps being worked to the bone.

Well yes for a number of years I refused to take medication for my multiple mental disorders. They wouldn't allow me to go on disability unless I was being treated. I eventually started taking medication.

Well technically yes. In some cases though they have a disorder that leads them to choose homelessness. It is still however a choice. In my case it was immense paranoia of big pharma.

Generally the reason a large group of people make the same choice is varied. You can't entirely lay blame on any one cause because different people in a large enough group do a thing for every possible reason.

Yes we all have choices to make. I'm not sure what your point is. In my personal case it was living on the streets that eventually convinced me to take medication and get on disability.

Well fuck you too. You can eat shit.

My gott, you sound just like preacher.

1,000,000+ people are scum because they decided to become homeless. Do you notice why people laugh at you? It's because you're the most likely to be ground to the bone in your very ideology. All of you are neets pretending your interests are for the best.

scratch that, I was unable to read past first paragraph.

Your entire argument is based on personal anecdotes that do not address the problem that capitalism has created a vast increasing number of homeless people. You have no solutions. You have no arguments.



It's what


and Cleetus

are basically arguing. I was pointing out that's the extent of their ability to argue.

There are 330 million in the united States. The "one million" figure is a "revolving door" figure anyway. There are one million people in the united States who are in a transitional phase of homelessness at any given time, it is not a permanent population, but the subcomponent of this population that are in a permanent state of homelessness are indeed scum.

If it's a revolving door figure why is it fucking increasing, Cleetus?

Don't ask him that, he'll say "degeneracy" or something. He will gnaw his feet off before he ever admits Capitalism has systemic issues.

Fucking 1984 sounding dumbass

Well I do have several solutions but nothing that would be acceptable in a western democracy. You would have to strip some people of their rights. At least that's the only way I can see of doing it. This would worry the masses though and they would vote against it. You would actually have to make being homeless a sort of "crime" in the sense there would be some penalty to their rights or freedoms for being chronically homeless.

I just thought of something though. Perhaps we could list chronic homelessness as a mental disorder as well as drug abuse and then make those both evidence of extremely poor decision making and reasoning ability. Then you could strip people of autonomy on the grounds they are not mentally fit to make decisions. They would mostly run the fuck away but it would something.

You're right people would probably call you a complete idiot who jjails the people who slip passed the cracks in Capitalism, and of course, prisons in America allow forced labor. So you've now essentially enslaved the homeless people and not addressed the problem at all.

Well done. You have officially decided slavery is a better alternative to your misunderstood idea of what socialism actually is.

I still can't believe you're arguing 1,000,000+ (and increasing) people chose to have a terrible quality of life. That all of this is a game of choice and if you just have enough magic beans you can sell them for thousands of dollars.

I have a feeling homelessness broke you into thinking all the faults are yours alone and nobody else lead to it. Nothing else lead to it. It's just you. Not anything else. You know what that feeling is? That feeling is being broken, so broken in fact, you are unable to come to grips a society is flawed enough to let you slip past the cracks and end up where you did. It must be anything else but a world gone mad.

about damn time

Well alright then come up with a solution that doesn't involve punishing the poor choices of the homeless people. Keep in mind though you can't reward your way out of this one or they'll buy tons of drugs and possibly OD. Go.

Hard mode : You have to do in a capitalist system because for some reason those socialists aren't getting elected.

lmao its funny because we all know atalin didnt do any of these things


Mitt Romney for US senate.

How about we help people who actually deserve it rather than drug-using lumpenproles?

Pretty sure Engels noted that state-help actually just created a labour aristocracy which perpetuates bourgeois power.

How about instead of fixing flaws within Capitalism we let Capitalism continue creating an increasing number of homeless people.


Yes, once we have a significant homeless problem the system will collapse. Stop trying to save capitalism and let it die. Your bandaids only help it to survive.

About 10% of the population makes choices that lead to jail time. How is it so hard to understand sometimes people make choices that lead to bad situations. Shitty living situation don't matter to some people as long as they have drugs.

What is it with you people? Do you not live in the real world? I can tell you've never actually been on the streets. You have no idea the problem you're dealing with and the crazy shit people do. I'm done arguing. You cannot conceive of a problem not actually created by capitalism. These would be the people the communists threw in the gulags because they were more pragmatic and less retarded.

You cannot conceive of me at all. I am a poor capitalist. I make less ithan minimum wage and I still hate you commie fucks.

I got under your skin because you know I'm right that you were broken.


Exchange "capitalism" with "perpetually increasing number of homeless people" and the consequences of your argument become far more realistic.

Not really, the reason for social democrats like Corbyn is to save capitalism. Corbyn has said it himself, that he wants to save capitalism not destroy it.


So it's their "choice" the same way that children in sweatshops in Bangladesh "choose" to work there

I don't know about the situation in Bangladesh specifically. Do they punish them if they don't work? Is that your point?

He wants to simply replace neoliberal capitalism with social democratic capitalism, because it is more stable. Don't forget that Corbyn himself is from the bourgeoisie, he is a reactionary in disguise.

worst take I've seen so far

Would you blame yourself or me for being shot in the balls if I pointed a gun at you and offered a choice between being shot in the head and the balls?

I would rather save the lives of people than wait. Either way we still have time for actual strategy, I would just rather the option not be a consolidation of capital and increase in its military capability more than it otherwise would have. Not to mention, the climate.

This accelerationist nonsense has to stop

You can grit your teeth rather than bite your tongue off. You can grit your teeth with Corbyn rather than live inside the dry membranes of May's cunt.

What I wrote is exactly the same and true for both David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn.

You can say that if you like. Just don't call yourself a socialist, because you are not one.

And you won't get revolution over fucking night. You have to plan for it. Your take is terrible because you are essentially throwing a fit that revolution is hard and you want it now. Well I'm sorry but we won't have it now.

Our best option right now is Corbyn, so when his agenda is met, and subsequently taken away after his term, there can be real motivation by the British people that were helped by it to anger and class awareness.

Right now you have no way to bargain to the people. And we need that the most.

Then what exactly are you proposing? What should we do with people who make bad choices? Should we even have laws according to you? Should every act be free of consequence? Should we just have a lawless state where choices aren't directly punished by the state but people around you? In which case there are still laws anyway they're just not set in stone.

Are you fucking kidding me Corbyn doesn't even have a degree if he went to Oxford you might have a point. Who gives a fuck if he went to a private HIGH SCHOOL. That's not what gives an advantage. It's going to a private UNIVERSITY that does. Also it doesn't make you bourgeois you moron.

I am a socialist. I just don't see a realistic way socialism can happen over fucking night. Actually PLAN for something. Don't just sit and wait until you get your way. Work with labor, work with people, help organize.

If Corbyn wins and his agenda is met it will simply entrench capitalism.

You're no more a socialist than Bismarck. You are seeking to entrench capitalism through throwing a few pennies to the people.

Me, do you think working class people can just waltz into private education?

Him being too stupid to get in doesn't reduce his class status.

He is bourgeois because of his social class.

You didn't address my point.

Sometimes, yes.

You can't strategize for shit

Your point is you want to help people. Yet you ignore that your help is just extending capitalism's lifetime. So in fact you are hurting people in the long run.

Fucking kek you didn't even read the HEADLINE. That is fucking something else.

No he won a scholarship to a grammar school: pretty common for the 1950s and '60s (before Wilson ditched them).

Nop, he went to uni (the Bevin college) and dropped out, then did humanitarian work in some scheme thingy for like 4-5 years in Jamaica. This was all on the One Show. And his parents, while a middle-income family, were proletarian: his father was an electrical engineer.

He was an elected councillor then an MP, yes, doesn't make him bourgeois. Being bourgeois means controlling the MoP, when did he do that?

Yes, if they are very intelligent and someone is willing to pay for you. Which you already showed, that was not the case for Corbyn.

I read it, you should read the details of what he is actually doing rather than a reactionary clickbait headline.

He is a bourgeois politician, defending the interests of the bourgeoisie. To think otherwise ignores the very nature of bourgeois parliamentarianism.

How am I increasing its lifespan by selectively voting and telling people to organize and strike and demand leverage from a Corbyn government

What is your plan? Vote for fucking May?

Get the fuck out of here

And? What are you? Fucking Saint Jesus Christ Muhamad bin al Moses? What the fuck are you actually doing to plan for what you want? Suddenly winning everyone's hearts by arguing on the internet and encouraging people to fuck themselves over for the purposes of acceleration by bloody voting for Boris Johnson or Theresa May?

Shut the fuck up or put something on the table!

Establishing an actual socialist party would be a good start rather than simply throwing yourself under the boot of the left side of the bourgeoisie.

How do you overcome the issues past socialist parties have had?

Just an individual, pointing out the flaws in your method. That by placing your hope in a social democrat, all you do is fail the proletariat in the long run. Only socialists can establish socialism.

I am not an accelerationist.

Having class-vetting for membership as well as ideological screening would be a good start. Half of the time socialist parties fail when they get infiltrated by people serving a bourgeois agenda who then liberalise them to serve their interests, normally on the backs of "we must win elections at all costs."

I'm not placing my hope, stop misrepresenting my argument. I'm saying that simply allowing May or Boris, or anyone similar to them to win, is not an option.

We need better infrastructure if we ever want a fucking socialist society, and right now Corbyn is laying the groundwork for that. Also, by taking away his plans, later governments will have a hard time not influencing people into class awareness and strikes and unification.

Most important of all is infrastructure. Post Revolutionary society needs fucking infrastructure badly, you cannot underestimate this.

It's selective and strategic voting. I wouldn't otherwise justify it, I agree with you, but if the alternative is Boris Johnson Prime Minister like a fucking Adam Sandler movie I'm sorry but I'm throwing my support behind the guy promising better infrastructure for the future.

Fair enough, but how do you overcome the current stigma and lack of class awareness?

Wait for the next crash, in capitalism a crash is inevitable. That is when you can make the next actual move for socialism. The time now must be spent preparing the grounds for that move. In most of the last crashes, no socialist groups were pre-emptively prepared for it to take advantage of the chaos.

Class consciousness rises in times of crisis.

Also reminder Luxemburg stood in elections

Oi, what's all this accelerationist vs reformist shitflinging?

Why should the homeless be homed when there are refugee families who still need our help.

Holla Forums, get out

Except I am not an acceleration. I do not advocate for more-rightist policies in order to speed up revolution.

I think putting any effort into supporting Corbyn is a wasted effort, that is the reason I do not see any reason to back him. I believe that the actual efforts of socialists should be put into a socialist movement, rather than a soc dem one.

I am not against standing in elections. Most Trot organisations in the UK are Marxists in name only, they are Soc Dems who simply want to be seen as fringe.

You should be arguing for a para-military wing of Labour under John McDonnell, then.

I don't think capitalism needs Corbyn to save it tbqh fam. Capitalism seems pretty hegemonic without Social Democrats at the present, when there's a total lack of any mass Workers Party.

I just asked you a question to show you how people can't be responsible for every situation they are in since nobody is that omnipotent.
By the way, I think we should continue to have laws, laws which punish not only the person who committed the crime but also the person who persuaded the other one into doing it.
Even though technically homeless people could have avoided homelessness, they would have had a lot less chance making a choice like this if they were born into a well off family (be the cause of this social democracy/socialism or just being a capitalist) which had time to care for them and was able provide a better environment to develop themselves.

Where is this 'socialist movement'?

There's been innumerable attempts over the years to set up a 'left-of-Labour' party, by Anti-Capitalists, Trotskyists, Leninists, etc. and they all fail every single time. There's simply no viable electoral force on the British Left outside the Labour Party.

Meanwhile, Corbyn's inches away from state power, and his inner circle is populated by people who learnt the lessons of the British Left's defeat, from the 1970s to the present day. It might work, it probably won't, but it's the first time in decades where a Labour Left government is a possibility, which widens the horizons for a resuscitation of the British Communist movement.

Basically, you can't have Bolshevism without first having the RSDLP first.


Corbynites are Mensheviks.

If they'd let in all the migrants in from Calais, they could have worked and boosted the economy to cure the plummeting population. Then these homeless people could have been taken care of better.

Corbynites are neither, they are more like Trudoviks.

Even so, the Bolsheviks supported the February Revolution, no? They didn't sit it out on the basis of the fact it wasn't what their end goal was.

If only the Bolsheviks had instituted class screening they could have prevented Lenin from infiltrating their party and implementing his insidious liberal, reformist agenda.

Holla Forums bait is getting worse & worse


I will take back everything I said about Anglos.


How about removing bad choices instead of people who pick bad choices? You would be a shitty gamedev if you responded to every bug report with "It's your fault for bugging the game".

I'd agree.

Lenin is the reason the Soviet Union developed into a bureaucratic state.

Nah I have an even better one: Corbyn gets elected, military tries to stop it, Queen Liz as her last act as monarch orders them to stands down and then abdicates, handing the crown over to Corbyn to dissolve and proclaim a new commonwealth.

This is a myth born of mind poison that is Liberalism. It's pure ideology, a mindset that begins and ends with the belief that addicts are morally defective individuals and therefore deserve to suffer. And it's completely disconnected from reality. Study after study shows that giving Junkies stable lives and stable incomes cures them of their addictions. Hell, there was a study where they literally just gave addicts free heroin and it *reduced* their usage, because the security of knowing that there was a place they could get a free, safe fix any time they needed it meant they didn't need it as often.

lmao, amazing butthurt. Profits in Britain aren't high enough to be redistributed. Social Democracy doesn't work in 2018 it only worked in the post-war boom