Liberality10

helena handbasket Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Meld Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Huguenot Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > > It wasn't designed to allow freeloading > > students > > > not pay the same bills everyone else has to. > > > > > > > There is no such thing as ?the same bills as > > everyone else? when it comes to housing in this > > country, though is there? There is no parity, > what > > we actually have is a market that discriminates > > against anyone born after about a certain date > by > > forcing them to pay more and more ridiculously > > inflated sums whether for home ownership or a > > rental property, all the while selling them the > > line that high prices are because of a shortage > of > > housing. > > > > I would hazard a guess that the vast majority > of > > people who are getting so worked up about this > > issue are probably property owners who realise > > that they are part of the giant ponzi scheme > that > > is the British housing market, and that they > > literally cannot afford for younger generations > to > > refuse to play the game. > > > > To have more than 5k empty homes in one borough > > alone is both immoral and insane. > > Nice guess but nope, much smarter with my hard > earned money than that. Way to generalize about > anyone over 25 though. > > The point about the parity of bills is pointless > because I for one am talking about proportion of > income that goes to covering your most basic > living expenses. So....... if a student has "X" > amount of money to live on and living costs "x+1" > then it doesn't really matter what place or time > one is talking about. A poor student is a poor > student. Living in a sh*thole and eating cheap > food because that's all you can afford is a part > of student life for loads of people. Blaming > everyone older than you for the problems of the > world isn't exactly original. > > I don't know what I was supposed to learn by > reading the squatter's posts since they just keep > saying that squatting is legal yada yada yada. > Enlighten me........ I don't think I'm the the > only one confused by what exactly you stand for. > I'm sure it's all very serious and deep. > > I'm on the edge of my seat........ This is what i don't understand. What do you think you are achieving by being rude to the squatters, and putting down their cause. I'll be happy to enlighten you as you seem so ignorant. What you were meant to see from reading the squatters posts over, is that they have not threatened anything or made any rude comments, (which is more than can be said by you and others), which a lot of you have tried to make out. They have quite clearly given you all the information each of you asked and stated that they don't want trouble. Personally I think you need to grow up and find something more important to get so worked up about.

paulino Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @Liberality10 or squatters > > Sorry, the more I read from you guys the more > turned off I become. I consider myself 'liberal' > and open-minded, I am in my 20s so hopefully not > an old reactionary fogey, and I really want to > support you and be 'on your side'. Maybe you're > just not able to articulate yourselves very well, > but there seems to be nothing really compelling or > credible in your defence for what you are doing. > It seems to boil down to 1) we saw an empty house > 2) we want to live in it 3) we aren't displaying > outward signs of antisocial behaviour to our > neighbours and 4) so anyone who thinks we can't > live in this house can piss off. That's nowhere > near enough to convince me, and clearly not enough > to convince many others here. Please don't talk to me as if i am squatting the house, or doing something wrong.. I was merely trying to say my opinion, as are many other people. I saw this thread and didn't think it was fair that people have started insulting the GGS, also there is no need for it, it is childish. And I am sure you all consider yourselves pretty mature? Then go about this like adults, and quit with the petty banter! I didn't say anything about anyone who thinks the GGS can't live there can piss off, again you are putting words into peoples mouths. Obviously I agree, that if the owners inquire about the property and go to lengths to get it back, then of course, the squatters should move on. But, the squatters have said this, and people are pretending that they are being threatening, I think, because they do not have an actual reason why they do not want the squatters in the building. It doesn't fall into their idea of ED!

Meld Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Huguenot Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > It wasn't designed to allow freeloading > students > > not pay the same bills everyone else has to. > > > > There is no such thing as ?the same bills as > everyone else? when it comes to housing in this > country, though is there? There is no parity, what > we actually have is a market that discriminates > against anyone born after about a certain date by > forcing them to pay more and more ridiculously > inflated sums whether for home ownership or a > rental property, all the while selling them the > line that high prices are because of a shortage of > housing. > > I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of > people who are getting so worked up about this > issue are probably property owners who realise > that they are part of the giant ponzi scheme that > is the British housing market, and that they > literally cannot afford for younger generations to > refuse to play the game. > > To have more than 5k empty homes in one borough > alone is both immoral and insane. MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY

ImpetuousVrouw Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How ugly and frightening is the suburban > hysterical lynch-mob? > > Why don't you all take a pill and go back to > wondering if magnolia walls are still passe or > not, instead of ganging up on these guys? >+1 +2!

Puzzled: ---------------------------------------- >the fact remains that climbing through an upstairs window is a vastly different thing than finding a door open. it is >illegal and it is also morally and ethically wrong to appropriate a house that someone has only recently bought. these >bloody students should be ashamed of themselves and I hope their parents will act. they presumably have student loans and >support from home. failing that they should get off their ares and do something novel... it is called WORK. highly >recommended for enabling you buy things for yourself. these buys are common thieves. I laughed when one of them said he >resented me calling them fascists. sensitive little sausage. would he be irate to my face I wonder, or remain behind his >stolen front door? You are wrong, climbing through an open window of an abandoned house is not an illegal action. I am not questioning the morality of it but please do not argue the legality of it, because you are wrong! Also the GGS never tried to make out they found a door open. Many people are trying to make it seem like the GGS are breaking the law, and threatening this and that, but in fact, from the beginning they have made it clear they form no threat to the community, and have attempted to make it known they are not violent people looking for trouble, but looking for peace. Many of you have twisted what they have said, trying to invent threats from nothing. Many of you have stereotyped them when in fact you have no idea where any of them come from. You say you hope their parents act, how can you be sure of their situations, or even if they have parents? You say you presume they have student loans, and that they spend their money on drink and fags, but how do you know if they are university students or not, or even if they drink and smoke at all. To compare squatters to fascists, i think, is the height of idiocy. You clearly have a very small understanding of what squatters stand for, or to say at the least, what fascists stand for. This is the same as comparing them to Somali pirates, very childish, and it shows how scared and threatened you feel by these squatters, who in fact pose no threat to the community. You have also shown the flaws in your argument by trying to insult the squatter by calling him/her a sensitive little sausage. I don't think that is just, when they are resenting being called fascists, which they are clearly not. If you are going to try and take a cheap dig at people who are unwilling to have an argument with you, at least use a term relevant to them, otherwise people may think you a moron! Also you are attempting to say that GGS appeared irate at your comment, i think many people would agree, that your comments are more irate than any left by GGS, and if you are indeed curious to whether they would hide away from you behind their supposedly stolen door, maybe you should pluck up the courage to go and knock on their door and chat with them? I think perhaps it is you that is hiding behind your computer? I think you should try and be a bit more understanding! From the beginning the squatters have made it clear, they only posted on this thread originally, was to tell people their views, not to have conflict or arguments with anyone. You are all quick to make them seem immature and wrong, but all i can see, is a group of adults, who you would expect to host some good opinions and even advice, targeting the squatters, and even beginning to name call. Anyone would think you were the kids. >What do You know about the predictability of the EDF? You've only just come on, hoping to drum up support for your little >charade, and now you can't believe that everyone in ED isn't a 20 year old anarchist! You didn't do your homework, kids, >because I think most of the fine people in this neighborhood work hard and most have not had a free ride. As far as i can see, the GGS didn't come one and try and drum up support for their little charade. You obviously haven't done your homework either, because if you were to look over their comments you would see that you are wrong and they have clearly been on a peaceful vibe from the start. Also again you are stereotyping and assuming they have come from protected lives and have not experienced much hardship, but from what I'm getting, most people that are opposed to squatting in this thread appear to be those sorts of people. I think if people are going to start name-calling then they should sign off, and only post on this thread if they have something constructive to say, or a question for the squatters. I think that sort of immature, stuck-up attitude wont get us anywhere, don't you agree? I personally agree with squatting as long is there is no damage being done to the property and, they are not hassling the neighbors. If a beautiful, large property is lying empty, whilst so many children and adults alike are homeless on our streets every night, then what difference does it make or harm does it cause if those that are homeless go inside to take shelter, and look after the property until the owner expresses that they want it back? None. Also someone asked GGS how they knew the property was vacant. Well, I have walked past the building in question many times, being fairly local, and i certainly don't know anyone that chooses government issue metal plating to cover the windows of their house, do you?