Black Lives Matter Demands White People Give Up Their Homes

Black Lives Matter Demands White People Give Up Their Homes

Debates

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

j

Joined
18 Jan 05
Moves
11601
17 Aug 20

@wolfgang59 said
What harm?
Public housing has rarely supplied enough for those in need, esp Australia and NZ. In NZ Jacinda promised vast amounts of new public housing, seems like she needs another 100yrs to deliver. Without investors the housing shortage would increase, esp over the long term. Also, much of peoples wealth and financial security is held in there own house, destroying the value of investors houses, if thats your aim, would destroy the value of all houses. That would create financial hardship for many people and if the drop was big enough, many mortgages could be called in or more liquidity required.
I am sure there are a lot more reasons than this but as I said, this is not as easy as you are making it seem.
In Aussie and NZ at least, maintaining house values is critical, or at least minimizing value loses.
What harm?? its the sort of question that if you have to ask!

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
17 Aug 20

@jimmac said
Public housing has rarely supplied enough for those in need, esp Australia and NZ. In NZ Jacinda promised vast amounts of new public housing, seems like she needs another 100yrs to deliver. Without investors the housing shortage would increase, esp over the long term. Also, much of peoples wealth and financial security is held in there own house, destroying the value of invest ...[text shortened]... or at least minimizing value loses.
What harm?? its the sort of question that if you have to ask!
So the housing currently in the hands of private landlords would
disappear if sold off to local government or, better still, the residents?

I don't know of any landlords who have built to rent. Would not make sense.
Landlords mainly buy sub-standard housing cheaply.

A slight devaluation of property would be welcomed in UK and NZ, but
there is no reason to think it would be dramatic if selling was over
10 years as I suggested.

k

Joined
15 Dec 03
Moves
313682
17 Aug 20

@sonhouse said
@Earl-of-Trumps
Sure, it could happen.......I think eventually there will be a huge reparations bill passed giving blacks billions, maybe hundreds of billions, but would never happen if Trump wins again in November.
you people gonna like it when they cut your pay?. i never owned a slave, why do i have to pay

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
17 Aug 20

@kquinn909 said
you people gonna like it when they cut your pay?. i never owned a slave, why do i have to pay
Inheritance.

j

Joined
18 Jan 05
Moves
11601
17 Aug 20

@wolfgang59 said
So the housing currently in the hands of private landlords would
disappear if sold off to local government or, better still, the residents?

I don't know of any landlords who have built to rent. Would not make sense.
Landlords mainly buy sub-standard housing cheaply.

A slight devaluation of property would be welcomed in UK and NZ, but
there is no reason to think it would be dramatic if selling was over
10 years as I suggested.
1st- local government are not interested in buying houses to the extent that they are needed, if they wanted houses, they would build them, and as for residents, refer my post page 4 post 7. Many, as in numbers, not percentages, especially the underclass, have zero interest in home ownership. They have no interest in the responsibilities that go with it.
The natural progression of not being allowed to own an investment property, because it is greedy, will be that you will no longer be able to own your own home. What about renting a room out to help offset cost, gonna ban that, and so it goes on ad infinitum until you reach the lowest common denominator.

I think not alot

On my arse

Joined
08 Jan 17
Moves
56587
17 Aug 20

American Indians lives matter. Next thanksgiving forget your family and go hug a native American.

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
17 Aug 20

@jimmac said
1st- local government are not interested in buying houses to the extent that they are needed, if they wanted houses, they would build them, and as for residents, refer my post page 4 post 7. Many, as in numbers, not percentages, especially the underclass, have zero interest in home ownership. They have no interest in the responsibilities that go with it.
The natural progres ...[text shortened]... cost, gonna ban that, and so it goes on ad infinitum until you reach the lowest common denominator.
1. You make it attractive for local government to buy housing stock or setup a national agency to do so. It would be short term because the goal should be Universal Home Ownership.

2. Here in NZ local government/government have trouble building because of strict building regulations.

3. Part of the cause of an "underclass" is social inequality, most people
would love the responsibility of home ownership. For all of Thatcher's
faults selling government housing to the tenants was perhaps her best
idea. (Pity she wasted the money).

4. Home ownership in US is roughly 65%, same as UK & NZ. Do you think
35% of the population do not want to own their own homes? Do you think
US citizens have less interest in home ownership than Romanians or Chinese?

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36841
17 Aug 20

@jimmac said
Sorry, I forgot, Suzianne can help as well. Of course we, ok most, of us realize that "those" people expect "others" to do it. Others being, damned if I know.
Man, you do not know how much you're barking up the wrong tree here.

j

Joined
18 Jan 05
Moves
11601
17 Aug 20

@suzianne said
Man, you do not know how much you're barking up the wrong tree here.
Yeah, you mean waste a time. got it, some people never learn.

Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48793
17 Aug 20

@jimmac said
Yeah, you mean waste a time. got it, some people never learn.
You mean "waste of time" ... will you ever learn?

Lake Como

Joined
27 Jul 10
Moves
52492
17 Aug 20

@jimmac said
1st- local government are not interested in buying houses to the extent that they are needed, if they wanted houses, they would build them, and as for residents, refer my post page 4 post 7. Many, as in numbers, not percentages, especially the underclass, have zero interest in home ownership. They have no interest in the responsibilities that go with it.
The natural progres ...[text shortened]... cost, gonna ban that, and so it goes on ad infinitum until you reach the lowest common denominator.
Natural Progression is indeed natural. Supply and demand comes to mind. The constitution does not get into the business of government being involved in housing, where people live, etc. A person sets out to establish his or her living conditions, in this land of opportunity. (Residences) are available in many forms and fashions, to pick from. A $100 room to let, or a $2000 apartment . All of this, of course, presumes a person who has made proper choices, waiting to marry until he can afford it, and not having children until he can afford it.
Why is the government in this discussion.

Pawn Whisperer

My Kingdom fora Pawn

Joined
09 Jan 19
Moves
19059
17 Aug 20
1 edit

Getting back more to the thread theme,

Black Chicago Residents Interrupt BLM Rally To Support Looters, Demand BLM Leave Neighborhood

A group of black residents from Chicago’s Englewood neighborhood – the location of an officer-involved shooting that triggered a night of riots and looting on Sunday – demanded that members of Chicago’s Black Lives Matter group, who were holding a protest to support those arrested for looting, leave the neighborhood and return only when they were ready to really help the community.
--------

African Americans Kicked them out of their neighborhood! Good for them.

And then there is this:
Chicago BLM organized a series of protests, beginning Monday, in support of the 100 individuals arrested during Sunday night’s shocking events, claiming that looting is “reparations” and that the alleged criminals were simply “protesting” and taking what is rightfully theirs from “corporations.”

Looting is reparations. Holy geeeezus.

I thought this was all about George Floyd????



https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-black-chicago-residents-interrupt-blm-rally-to-support-looters-demand-blm-leavea

P

Joined
23 Nov 11
Moves
44304
17 Aug 20

@sonhouse there is a strong case for reparations. After the Civil War, Congress granted freed slaves 40 acres and a mule but that never happened. Plus for decades after, Jim Crow laws and murderous whites made it near impossible for black people to own property and pass that wealth on to their heirs. If we are the wealthiest country on the planet, surely we can afford to make reparations. As for Trump, if he wins in November, I doubt democracy in the U.S. can survive. He loves distractions. The ultimate distraction would be for him to toss a small tactical nuclear weapon somewhere and start WWIII. It's crazy that one individual can make that decision. Congress needs to amend this presidential power. If Trump doesn't win, I am guessing he and his immediate family will instantly take off for Russia in a private plane to avoid being arrested for all sorts of serious financial fraud. In exchange for secret information, Putin would refuse to allow them to be extradited.

k
Flexible

The wrong side of 60

Joined
22 Dec 11
Moves
37175
17 Aug 20

@earl-of-trumps said
Getting back more to the thread theme,

Black Chicago Residents Interrupt BLM Rally To Support Looters, Demand BLM Leave Neighborhood

[i]A group of black residents from Chicago’s Englewood neighborhood – the location of an officer-involved shooting that triggered a night of riots and looting on Sunday – demanded that members of Chicago’s Black Lives Matter ...[text shortened]... wire.com/news/watch-black-chicago-residents-interrupt-blm-rally-to-support-looters-demand-blm-leavea
“And then there is this:
Chicago BLM organized a series of protests, beginning Monday, in support of the 100 individuals arrested during Sunday night’s shocking events, claiming that looting is “reparations” and that the alleged criminals were simply “protesting” and taking what is rightfully theirs from “corporations.”

Looting is reparations. Holy geeeezus. “

You’d think a media outlet would quote an individual rather than just print something and attribute it to an organisation, it’s not good journalism and not very convincing either.

Pawn Whisperer

My Kingdom fora Pawn

Joined
09 Jan 19
Moves
19059
17 Aug 20

@kevcvs57 said
“And then there is this:
Chicago BLM organized a series of protests, beginning Monday, in support of the 100 individuals arrested during Sunday night’s shocking events, claiming that looting is “reparations” and that the alleged criminals were simply “protesting” and taking what is rightfully theirs from “corporations.”

Looting is reparations. Holy geeeezus. “

You’d ...[text shortened]... ething and attribute it to an organisation, it’s not good journalism and not very convincing either.
Lori Lightfoot, Mayor of Chicago, is African American. At the onset, she very
much supported BLM protesters.

Then, she had that ::BOINK:: moment when she realized that the looting was
planned, not just random events by p!ssed off protesters. And she admitted
that in the media.

BLM is not what people think they are. Even the African Americans in Chicago know that