Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 242
sr4470 said:By what measure? Till we've made every other person a cop?
Well we are a police state .....
Wealth gap 'widest in 40 years'
- Thread starter anarchist
- Start date
Well we are a police state .....
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 242
sr4470 said:
PCSOs can make you turn out your pockets?
Judge Mortis said:
Yes, they're allowed to search you, someone even posted a scan of the paperwork for it on here once.
http://www.policecommunitysupportofficer.com/phpBB2/powers.php
1. Issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) for offences of disorder
2. Detain for up to 30 minutes suspects who fail to give details
3. Use reasonable force to detain as at 2
4. Impose requirements and dispose of alcohol consumed in designated public places
5. Enter any premises to save life and limb or prevent serious damage to property
6. Carry out PACE road checks and stop vehicles to do so
7. Stop and search vehicles & belongings in areas authorised under the Terrorism Act 2000.
8. Seize vehicles used to cause alarm etc.
9. Issue Fixed Penalty Notices for offences of cycling on footways, dog fouling, litter
10. Require name and address from suspects
11. Require name and address from person acting in anti-social manner
12. Confiscate and dispose of alcohol from young persons
13. Seize and dispose of tobacco from young persons
14. Authorise removal of abandoned vehicles
15. Stop vehicles for testing
16. Make traffic directions for abnormal vehicles.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 242
That must differ force to force and at the discretion of the Chief Constable or Commissioner. They have neither powers of detention or search where I work and that is the way it should be.
The Terrorism Act must confer such powers perhaps as as far as I am aware, PCSOs have no search powers for persons under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act.
The Terrorism Act must confer such powers perhaps as as far as I am aware, PCSOs have no search powers for persons under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act.
Judge Mortis said:
Where is that, out of interest? I notice we're a long way off topic now
Edit, there is a bit of a disclaimer:
The powers of PCSOs are set out in Part 1 of Schedule 4 to the PRA.
PCSOs must be on duty and wearing the correct uniform to exercise their powers. With the exception of the power of directing traffic to escort abnormal loads, PCSO powers can only be exercised in the force area of the designating Chief Officer.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 242
Won't say specifically but in the north of England.
As for off topic, I hold my hands up .. I started it.
As for off topic, I hold my hands up .. I started it.
Soldato
daz said:
Problem is that you must choose to work in the north or in the South East if you choose the north you are basically stuck there as even if you sell your house you wouldn't be able to afford the same standard of living in the south east. You also have the knock on effect where people in the south living in 1m+ homes that they inherited if they don't pay any inheritance tax they ca then get cheap remortgage of say 250K only pay the interest and use the cash to buy to let another property somewhere which the rent of will pay the interest and give them something in their pocket as well. Thus they aren't really working so they then live somewhere else and rent the property they inherited out as well and go buy a huge house up north somewhere. This is why we need inheritance tax to avoid this happening.
Associate
Another angle to look at this debate and issue is property prices.
I am on a very low paid job, by the time I have paid my rent, bills etc I have very little money left. I have at times had no money to live, and begged my parents to lend me money to be able to drive my car to work as I have no fuel (and before other people suggest there is other ways of me getting to work, there are little public transport, none that goes to my old place of work, I dont own a bike and its was a tiny village so no way to car share).
Myself and my partner have no way of buying anything any time soon. We are considering in 2/3 years to buy a shared ownership but until then we are paying rent to someone who can afford to own a second property and line their pockets, rather than putting our money into bricks and mortar.
In 30 years time, instead of us owning out own property outright unless we move we will still continue paying someone else, have little / no savings, and the person who owns the property will have their mortgage paid off and that money is just extra money for them for doing nothing,
It isnt mine and my partners fault that we cant afford anything. We both work very hard, have this year set up our own business, but as we dont own anything found it VERY hard to get financial support, we are trying to create jobs for a potentially very sucessful business but are being stopped before we get going. The only way we financed this is by borrowing money off family.
So looking at it from my position, people owning more than one property and able to afford more expensive properties pushing the prices up and taking any chance of the lower than average income household being able to buy anything, and yes making the richer richer and the poorer poorer
I am on a very low paid job, by the time I have paid my rent, bills etc I have very little money left. I have at times had no money to live, and begged my parents to lend me money to be able to drive my car to work as I have no fuel (and before other people suggest there is other ways of me getting to work, there are little public transport, none that goes to my old place of work, I dont own a bike and its was a tiny village so no way to car share).
Myself and my partner have no way of buying anything any time soon. We are considering in 2/3 years to buy a shared ownership but until then we are paying rent to someone who can afford to own a second property and line their pockets, rather than putting our money into bricks and mortar.
In 30 years time, instead of us owning out own property outright unless we move we will still continue paying someone else, have little / no savings, and the person who owns the property will have their mortgage paid off and that money is just extra money for them for doing nothing,
It isnt mine and my partners fault that we cant afford anything. We both work very hard, have this year set up our own business, but as we dont own anything found it VERY hard to get financial support, we are trying to create jobs for a potentially very sucessful business but are being stopped before we get going. The only way we financed this is by borrowing money off family.
So looking at it from my position, people owning more than one property and able to afford more expensive properties pushing the prices up and taking any chance of the lower than average income household being able to buy anything, and yes making the richer richer and the poorer poorer
Soldato
But why are you pointing the finger at others who just want to get ahead in life? I'm guessing that if your business is successful you might do exactly the same. I know many people including myself who have no pension fund to rely on come retirement. Instead we choose to manage our own pension portfolios and for most (that I personally know) that includes property.Mrs_Stormster said:
Associate
Well it isnt just you it is the government as well that needs to do something about it. As I said The richer are making money us from because they brought a property we could have potentially owned ourselves.
THe government are building more 'affordable' homes but not at a big enough rate, and until then this is one reason why there is a gap between rich and poor.
Living in Cornwall isnt cheap!
If you lived in Cornwall you'd know most of the second homes are only lived in for 6 weeks of the year for when the owners come down for a holiday.
How is this getting by? It's reducing the amount of houses that first time buyers can buy in Cornwall and is well known that the amount of the second homes has raised the prices of houses in Cornwall.
If our company becomes successful enough we'd not buy a second home somewhere just to live in for 6 weeks of the year.
It's different to people buying houses and renting them out to students etc.
It's the second homes that aren't used! and there's loads of them
THe government are building more 'affordable' homes but not at a big enough rate, and until then this is one reason why there is a gap between rich and poor.
Living in Cornwall isnt cheap!
If you lived in Cornwall you'd know most of the second homes are only lived in for 6 weeks of the year for when the owners come down for a holiday.
How is this getting by? It's reducing the amount of houses that first time buyers can buy in Cornwall and is well known that the amount of the second homes has raised the prices of houses in Cornwall.
If our company becomes successful enough we'd not buy a second home somewhere just to live in for 6 weeks of the year.
It's different to people buying houses and renting them out to students etc.
It's the second homes that aren't used! and there's loads of them
Last edited:
You live with your partner? If so then you should be significantly better off than if you lived on your own. If you really can't afford to save anything and are having to beg from parents then you are doing something wrong clearly. Even if you and your partner both earn minimum wage you should be reasonably comfortably off.Mrs_Stormster said:
Associate
dirtydog said:
Have you ever lived in Cornwall? If so you'd know the cost of living is higher than most of the country. Also the you'd know the wages is a lot less lower in comparison. Hence why cost of living is higher than most of the country.
Yes I live with my partner. But by the time we pay our rent and bills and cost of living to work (petrol) as public transport is pants is doesn't leave enough. we budget for everything like most people do. So we still end up struggling most months.
This doesn't mean we're doing anything wrong. Cost of living isn't the best
I doubt Cornwall is more expensive than the Home Counties which is where I live.Mrs_Stormster said:
I live alone, earn low wages and manage to run a car and still have a decent standard of living and can afford to save money each month. If your household with two incomes can't do likewise then you are doing something wrong. I imagine there are significant cost savings you could be making but you are unwilling to make certain sacrifices to achieve them.
Caporegime
Mrs_Stormster said:
Yes, this is the big drawback of the market. When a commodity is scarce, the price goes up so only the rich can afford it, which is fine if the commodity is non-essential, but for essential commodities like food and housing its not so good.
If food was scarce, instead of allowing ourselves to fall into the situation where the rich have plenty while the poor starve, the government should introduce rationing. I don't know why they haven't done the same for housing.
I have relatives who live in Cornwall - not second home owners, they actually live and work there you'll be pleased to know
, they tell me of the specific problems faces in England's poorest county, and tbh its only going to end in violence imo unless the government do the right thing and stop this madness.
Caporegime
dirtydog said:
Home ownership is one of the fundamental cornerstones of the capitalist system and our society. While we don't need a "right" to be able to own a home, home ownership should be encouraged by the government.
What we don't want is a situation where an elite develops who own a massive percentage of the housing available in the UK, which is the natural conclusion of this marketeering of the housing market.
Soldato
scorza said:
Yes you do need a right to be able to own your own home, that right is being able to afford to purchase one. If you cant afford to buy one then you have no right to own one and that pretty much applies to anything.
That isnt how its happening at all, in fact its supposed to be better than it ever has been. Considering the aristorcracy owns less of the land than they used to according to a programme a while back (Who owns Britain or something like that). I would say its far from the elite that are goiing own all the housing but people that are normal everyday folk that have done well for themselves trying to increase their wealth by planning for their future.
If single people can buy their own property then it isnt too much of a leap in imagination that a couple could potentially purchase two properties. If lots of couples are doing it, it isnt too hard to see it isnt necessarily the elite owning everything.
Last edited:
Soldato
Well first off I would say that I could not afford for the properties I own to be empty for too long. It's an investment, I need to earn an income from it. It's not like people like myself are buying a holiday home for weekend retreats. But, having said that, I don't have a problem with people buying a second home for weekend retreats etc.Mrs_Stormster said:
Secondly I see no reason why the government should be building so called "affordable housing", I see it as a scam. I was recently back in the UK and I attended a meeting hosted by our Parish Council in the village hall. A landowner who lives in the village wanted to develop 12 acres pretty much smack bang in the middle and the plan was to build 40 houses there. Then came the sales pitch from the Parish Council which went along the lines of "the village is slowly dying and this plan will allow local people to buy houses at an affordable price, it will encourage younger people with young families, blah blah blah". The developer and the local county council representatives assured people that 40% of the housing would be "low cost" housing and sold to the council. The council in turn would rent it to people who ultimately would have the right to buy it. They then asked people to vote on it, everybody stuck their hand up. It was an overwhelming "yes" in favour of the plan.
I asked the council representative and the rest of them what guarantees and what framework they had in place that would ensure that only village people were offerred the "low cost" housing. They couldn't answer me. I then asked them if other people on the council house list from nearby towns would get priority and what was the councils policy on this. The councillor sheepishly said that they would get priority and there was no guarantee at all that people from the village would even be offered a house. I asked for another vote to be taken on the grounds that the initial vote was misleading. This time it was an overwhelming "no" and I'm told the plan has since been scrapped.
So don't look to the government to solve your problem, I believe they would create more of a problem if they get their way. There's no planning here as far as I am concerned, it's crisis management by Labour. I also agree with DD that there is no god given right for someone to own property. I couldn't afford to buy a property until I was in my early thirties, I had to rent for many years myself, as like you, I was running (and still am) my own business.
Have you considered moving? Would your business plans allow for that?