[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Yes tory times...

This is their remit isn't it?
Nowhere in the article does it mention immigration and yet those fixated on it will use that as a default setting for which to push their agenda as seen here.

Considering the SOURCE of the 'article' and the 'LEFT WING' political BIAS of that source, it is NO BIG SURPRISE that 'Nowhere in the article' does it mention IMMIGRATION' and THEREFORE, such an omission is certainly NO VALID REBUTTAL of anything which any member on here has to say about immigration being a CONTRIBUTORY factor in any homeless 'crisis'.

LT is 1,000% CORRECT - you are basing your 'argument' on a 'Click-Bait' article that does not mean ZILCH as far as any genuine 'Premise' is concerned.

It is also highly presumptuous and WRONG to declare that ANYONE is 'fixated' on 'IMMIGRATION' just because they may mention it as a 'CONTRIBUTORY FACTOR' because LOGICALLY and OBVIOUSLY it is a contributory factor.

In fact, it is those who WILL NOT CONCEDE any type of link between IMMIGRATION and a rise in this country's HOUSING Crisis and HOMELESS problem who have a 'fixation' and are 'Pushing' their 'Agenda' - and that is a 'fixation' on being perpetually in a state of 'Denial' about FACTS which DO NOT support their 'Argument'.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Considering the SOURCE of the 'article' and the 'LEFT WING' political BIAS of that source, it is NO BIG SURPRISE that 'Nowhere in the article' does it mention IMMIGRATION' and THEREFORE, such an omission is certainly NO VALID REBUTTAL of anything which any member on here has to say about immigration being a CONTRIBUTORY factor in any homeless 'crisis'.

LT is 1,000% CORRECT - you are basing your 'argument' on a 'Click-Bait' article that does not mean ZILCH as far as any genuine 'Premise' is concerned.

It is also highly presumptuous and WRONG to declare that ANYONE is 'fixated' on 'IMMIGRATION' just because they may mention it as a 'CONTRIBUTORY FACTOR' because LOGICALLY and OBVIOUSLY it is a contributory factor.

In fact, it is those who WILL NOT CONCEDE any type of link between IMMIGRATION and a rise in this country's HOUSING Crisis and HOMELESS problem who have a 'fixation' and are 'Pushing' their 'Agenda' - and that is a 'fixation' on being perpetually in a state of 'Denial' about FACTS which DO NOT support their 'Argument'.

I really would rather you didn't waffle... I can't get to the crux of what your point is due to your odd posting style.

Immigration has nothing to do with the reduction in council funding, it did not remove the ring fencing at either. The funding streams are distinct, being two very different departments with very different requirements.

Whatever the source the reduction in funding since 2010 remains a fact, wherever it's reported that figure will not change. You can ague with me, or what you deem to be a left wing source, but you can't argue with the figures, they remain constant.

It is a valid and reasonable debate for this section I'm not however forcing anyone to participate, I feel LT s comments were unnecessary and invalid and not worthy of response, whether you do or not is of no consequence to me.

You are the one who is pushing an agenda here, should you wish to discuss immigration be my guest however please don't force the issue on a thread specifically created to question the government and their failings to adequately fund resources for the homeless.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I really would rather you didn't waffle... I can't get to the crux of what your point is due to your odd posting style.

Immigration has nothing to do with the reduction in council funding, it did not remove the ring fencing at either. The funding streams are distinct, being two very different departments with very different requirements.

Whatever the source the reduction in funding since 2010 remains a fact, wherever it's reported that figure will not change. You can ague with me, or what you deem to be a left wing source, but you can't argue with the figures, they remain constant.

It is a valid and reasonable debate for this section I'm not however forcing anyone to participate, I feel LT s comments were unnecessary and invalid and not worthy of response, whether you do or not is of no consequence to me.

You are the one who is pushing an agenda here, should you wish to discuss immigration be my guest however please don't force the issue on a thread specifically created to question the government and their failings to adequately fund resources for the homeless.

And YOU accuse ME of WAFFLING?

[Kizzy]

Four clear sentences Kirk, that's all.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

in some places it would, in some it wouldn't. depends, foreigners are not uniformly located around the country. either way, there would still be a problem, even if smaller.

Who said there wouldn’t be a problem but we don’t want an even bigger one. The presence of those who have no right being here means what there is even less help to go round for those that do.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Who said there wouldn’t be a problem but we don’t want an even bigger one. The presence of those who have no right being here means what there is even less help to go round for those that do.

Yes, but immigration aside, what's your solution to homelessness?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Yes, but immigration aside, what's your solution to homelessness?

I don’t have one but I do know we shouldn’t allow illegal immigrants to add to the problem or assist them in their illegal actions.

[Beso]

2 and 3/4 of a million visas issued last year alone...all probably needing housed.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by parmnion

2 and 3/4 of a million visas issued last year alone...all probably needing housed.

Nonsense Parmy, 80% of those are for short stay visits and another 8% are students (not eligible for housing and will use Uni residence or rent privately).

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Nonsense Parmy, 80% of those are for short stay visits and another 8% are students (not eligible for housing and will use Uni residence or rent privately).

Universities receive far more applications from overseas applicants for postgraduate study than they do for Home students, mainly because many Home students go aboard so they get their Masters for free, Overseas students are far more lucrative for universities as the fees are 3 times that of a Home/EU, short term study visas will only allow students to stay just over the teaching block, usually 2 weeks.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Nonsense Parmy, 80% of those are for short stay visits and another 8% are students (not eligible for housing and will use Uni residence or rent privately).

Ok..

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Ok..

I thought Scotland was underpopulated

[Beso]

Thats still about 270 thousand people to find housing for.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

I thought Scotland was underpopulated

maybe way up north of scotland is still some space left

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

So tell me Kizzy do you expect the taxpayer to provide homes for all those young men jumping on trucks to get here who have no legal entitlement to be here?

Not every homeless person is a foreigner though, or are we suppose to not help out British civilians either? After all I'd rather the Taxpayer pay to help out homeless people get homes than on how much sugar, people intake personally but maybe I'm the crazy one and the Tories are sane.