To ask you what you think would be bad about a Corbyn government?

[catdoctor]

Please be specific.

I think that's an unnecessarily harsh response @CendrillonSings

I'm not advocating a communist state at all but yes, a socialist and socially responsible one where the poorest and most disadvantaged at least have a roof over their heads is NOT a ridiculous desire or aim surely?

Or do you genuinely think it acceptable to have the levels of street and other homelessness we have in a wealthy country where really there's no need for it? You think that's amusing?

Have you ever worried about losing your home and having nowhere else to go? Have you ever been homeless?

I have - and it is NOT amusing and I would not wish such fear and distress and insecurity on anyone.

I certainly don't think people should be homeless or in insecure housing purely because the wealthy want to hold onto unnecessary second homes or land hoarding.

Very odd to find homelessness amusing.

unnecessary second homes

You don’t get to dictate what possessions are necessary or unnecessary once someone’s legally purchased them with their own hard-earned money. Once that principle is broken, don’t be surprised if other people decide that you have more than is strictly “necessary”.

Socialist policies, he's self serving. What really annoyed me was when May asked for cross party emergency talks and he initially said "no" - wtf! He's been bleating for a general election for months, one comes along and he won't have it.

I come from a huge family of working class, Labour voters - nobody likes him or trusts him. I don't think he will ever be PM of this country, labour would be wise to change leader.

"Let’s wait till you’ve owned that flat for a while and some beardy old dogmatist tries to take it away from you grin Maybe your attitude will change"

Oh will he? Just like the property developers and housing associations are doing now you mean. Like at Balfron Tower and the West Hendon estate. Where social housing tenants have been forced out along with owners by compulsory purchase order so luxury flats can be built?

ITS ALREADY HAPPENING AND IT ISNT AT CORBYNS HAND!!!

@Oliversmumsarmy

I've rented privately from landlords who's mortgage lenders didn't place these restrictions on them, or else I'd have been rejected as a tenant.

A quick google shows that 2/3 of banks do place these restrictions on buy to let mortgages - but that means 1/3 DON'T and if landlords voted with their own wallets in refusing to be restricted in this way I'm sure more banks would end these restrictions.

I believe shelter are currently campaigning to get such restrictions banned?

Discrimination has no place in restricting people's access to housing.

Hopefully in the near future refusing tenancies to the disabled and those on benefits will be viewed as outdated and nonsensical as refusing to rent to anyone with any other protected characteristic.

One can dream

That is a really interesting point @HelenaDove

I didn't know that - so @CendrillonSings and similar opinion holders - is it ok for the tories to do it but not Labour?

And really nobody NEEDS a second home. It's a nice thing to have I get that but no, nobody NEEDS one especially if it means others have NO home.

We are a tiny island so there's limited land available. So having properties occupying land that could be used for housing for those without any is nonsensical surely?

As is land hoarding.

I have no objection to some having more that others generally speaking but ONLY if everyone in that society has their basic living needs met.

And this doesn't just help the poor and disadvantaged but creates a better society for all.

I don't understand why even the most avaricious business owners can't understand that having securely housed, fit and healthy employees ALSO benefits them!

I wonder if anyone has done any research into what insecure housing costs businesses?

"One can dream"

There is a hell of a lot of disabilism in social housing. The housing officer who discriminated against and tried to bully DH. His reward? He is now the housing manager.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/06/depressed-poor-housing-costs-nhs-14bn-year

I find it ironic that people are on here saying there would be no point in working because Corbyn would take it all.

Yet poorer people are told that money isnt everything and work will give them confidence and self esteem. This was the excuse trotted out for workfare.

All so true Helena

people are more important than wealth. I find it quite sad and disheartening that you find it amusing that someone might consider prioritising people having homes rather than housing being profitable.

I agree with everything you’ve said Graphista. I honestly find Cendrillion’s views nothing short of evil. WORK DOES NOT PAY for those on low wages under the current government. You’re ok with that? You’re ok with foodbank use, people literally killing themselves over benefit sanctions, rough sleeping, parents having to choose whether to feed their children or heat the house, working multiple jobs to afford substandard rented accommodation, turning to sex work to make up the shortfall in universal credit, people house sharing their entire lives, retirees and pensioners ending up homeless in future because nobody can afford housing, all while 1% of the population profit from it? You’re ok with all of that as long as you keep your second home and investments and screw whether the poor live or die? I’m disgusted, honestly disgusted at anyone who holds that view. Unless you’re a 6-figure earner at the very least, capitalism isn’t benefiting you either and it never will. It’s profiting from your work to line the pockets of the elite who view you as a worthless, disposable cog in the machine the same way you do the poor and disadvantaged. And the Venezuela and N. Korea comparisons are incredibly tedious tropes. Look at Scandinavia, that’s hardly an authoritarian dystopia is it? Shame on greed. Shame on anyone who truly feels greed so deeply they’d step over the dead bodies of the homeless to keep their wealth.

I haven't read the thread but just saw this article

Everything

- the state confiscating 10% of the shares in businesses from pensioners and savers “to distribute to workers” but actually keeping most of the income from those shares for itself

This. It’s a stealth tax, nothing more. The employees won’t even “own” the shares in any true sense of the word. They won’t be able to buy them and they won’t be able to sell them. What will likely happen is that companies will need to issue additional shares, thereby diluting the value to existing share owners (mostly pension schemes). Many companies don’t even pay dividends, so they’d be diluting value for absolutely no benefit to anyone.

If the govt really wants to incentivise workers through share ownership, they should look at expanding tax benefits for employee share schemes.

Graphista I have and I don't blame those who are wealthy.

Lots needs tackling and tweaking eg renting properties to those on benefits, many ll won't, holding ll to account and standards eg no mold.
The unacceptable state of b and b where families are put temporarily, sometimes for months and they are dirty and with scary dangerous people.

Then the terrifying state of children's services and keeping dc safe in care.

I do not trust Labour for one second to tackle these, and it can be tackled without punishing wealthy people.

The homeless people where I am are Eastern European. So we need to ask why we allowed people into the UK who obviously couldn't support themselves and where do our resources are go?

There’s a thread asking about the good thibgs that will come from a Johnson government- maybe some people would like to go and contribute to that?

Well hopefully brexit Bertrand Russel is the main thing thing that will come out of a Johnson government!

Someone who will actually honour the vote?

You have to ask !

With the complete mess that we are in Labour should be massively ahead in the polls but they're not. Because people don't want a Socialist government.

There were Socialist countries when I was in my teens. The whole of the Eastern Bloc. But it was a system that just did not work. Hence with the exception of China, North Korea and Cuba its all gone.

Massive corruption within the elite. Party officials living in luxury eating imported food and being driven in limousines while supermarket shelves were empty.
Friends of my DPs grew up in East Germany and it sounded dreadful. Fine in theory but in practice people are essentially more concerned about their own families than the greater good.

The only proposed policy that might make me consider voting Labour is leasehold reform as I live in a flat with a short lease I can't afford to extend. However I couldn't vote for them when John McDonnell is going to end up in government, the man is an evil hypocrite.

I have absolutely no idea who to vote for so will probably end up choosing an independent

I can understand why you might think McDonnell is evil- but why is he a hypocrite?

But it was a system that just did not work

I have no idea why people think capitalism works, when it clearly doesn't for vast swathes of the population.

Bertrand for owning a second home when the Labour Party doesn't approve of other people doing so

WORK DOES NOT PAY for those on low wages under the current government

I agree with this.

Boris is awful Corbyn is worse. I’m not voting for a socialist government.

The sensible middle ground MPs interested in developing a strong economy while looking after everyone are being chucked out of their party on both sides.

The way to actually make a difference if you don’t like the extremes is to join one of the main parties so you can vote for the next leader.

If enough of us fed up of the choice of Boris or Corbyn did this, we’d have some more decent choices for leader to vote for. Otherwise we’re stuck with a choice between Momentum’s loony picks and the Tory party members’ loony picks.

If you are despairing of the choices, join one of the parties and vote for a better one.

And the Venezuela and N. Korea comparisons are incredibly tedious tropes. Look at Scandinavia, that’s hardly an authoritarian dystopia is it?

As far as I’m aware Scandinavian countries don’t confiscate property the way you and the Labour Party want to! The difference between overall high levels of taxation and outright seizure of assets is crucial, but you don’t seem to understand it.