Metal studs installed in London to deter rough sleepers

[MooseBreath]

Just found it. That's just rough sleepers, not people they've helped into shelters etc. Another link said 28,000 people had applied for housing due to homelessness in a three month period last year alone. If it wasn't for charities like Ken's there would clearly be many more on the streets, as it is there are only 2400, you can't punish the charities for their success.

So you're attributing the success of an expensive tax payer funded welfare state at preventing homelessness to homeless charities? Would also like to see the source of your stats.

[Strokes]

Companies and charities who say they are trying end things that are possible to end such as illness obviously have an interest in that illness continuing. But homelessness isn't curable so you can't make sweeping generalisation that covers all types of charities etc. Homeless charities will never be redundant, because the problem, no matter his hard they work, will never end.

I can still make those sweeping statements, homeless charities still rely on public support and funding. If they had a massive crackdown and the issue wasn't so apparant the funding would dry up. This why they qualify sofa surfers and such as homeless to massage their figures.

[Jimothy]

So you're attributing the success of an expensive tax payer funded welfare state at preventing homelessness to homeless charities? Would also like to see the source of your stats.

So you're attributing the success of getting people off the street solely down to the welfare state (which pays for many other things than house funding) and none to the charities that fund shelters and also point these people in the direction of said welfare state, also putting people up in their own charity funded shelters whilst they wait for decisions on benefits?

[Buce]

So you're attributing the success of an expensive tax payer funded welfare state at preventing homelessness to homeless charities? Would also like to see the source of your stats.

You're having difficulty understanding the meaning of words again, if you think 2,400 sleeping rough can be described as 'success'.

Maybe you should give Wikipedia a miss, and invest in a good dictionary.

[MooseBreath]

So you're attributing the success of getting people off the street solely down to the welfare state (which pays for many other things than house funding) and none to the charities that fund shelters and also point these people in the direction of said welfare state, also putting people up in their own charity funded shelters whilst they wait for decisions on benefits?

You cited applications for housing benefit. What does that have to do with homeless charities? You're just assuming that charities have played a part based on no evidence whatsoever. A bit ironic given your criticisms of myself?

[Jimothy]

You cited applications for housing benefit. What does that have to do with homeless charities? You're just assuming that charities have played a part based on no evidence whatsoever. A bit ironic given your criticisms of myself?

You're assuming they didn't play a part.

[Webbo]

You're having difficulty understanding the meaning of words again, if you think 2,400 sleeping rough can be described as 'success'.

Maybe you should give Wikipedia a miss, and invest in a good dictionary.

Out of a population of 60 million plus, that's a tiny percentage.

 

If my maths is right I make it 0.004%

[MooseBreath]

You're having difficulty understanding the meaning of words again, if you think 2,400 sleeping rough can be described as 'success'.

Maybe you should give Wikipedia a miss, and invest in a good dictionary.

Actually facecloth implied the prevention of further homelessness was evidence of success based on an assumption that everyone who has applied for housing benefit has done so after taking advice from a homeless charity. Try reading the thread bucey baby.

As it happens I do think 2,400 is a very low number given the size of our population.

[Strokes]

You're having difficulty understanding the meaning of words again, if you think 2,400 sleeping rough can be described as 'success'.

Maybe you should give Wikipedia a miss, and invest in a good dictionary.

I think that's pretty good, 2400 is a ridiculously low figure in reality.

Pat on the back guys, your work is done.

[MooseBreath]

You're assuming they didn't play a part.

I am assuming they didn't play a part worthy of their numbers and salaries. Hard to prove of course. It is actually the citizens advice bereau's responsibility to assist regarding benefits. The maximum I'd want a charity to do is to redirect anyone requiring assistance to them. That way we could have proper stats on the issue rather than having to rely on charities who have an active interest in embellishing problems. Why are we even allowing the likes of DNO to give advice when we have a proper organisation already set up? Just seems to open up the market to all sorts of fraudsters.

[Rincewind]

DNO is not a charity. It is a News and Support Agency, soon to be a PIC. To become a PIC you have to apply to Company House and be approved. You also have to fit the criteria of having no financial interest as in being a profit making organisation and also have no polyital bias as in campaigning for one party or another.

Now that is cleared up would you say a charity campaigning for cancer would rather cancer was more abundant so they could carry on campaigning? OrDr Banados deliberate attempt to increase the number of orphans? Or maybe a Demetra charity are secretely putting stuff in our food to give people the condition. Do you think people that have lost loved ones through cancer are happy that they contracted the desease because it allows them to carry on campaigning?

People work for charities mainly because they care or have had experience and can have empathy and relate to the cause. To say these people want these things to carry on is an insult to the effort and time spent that they put in. No doubt you are young, healthy and are in a secure job. I hope nothing happens to change this for you. You will not always be young and in perfect health.

Anyway I have to give the Pope a quick call now.

[Strokes]

DNO is not a charity. It is a News and Support Agency, soon to be a PIC. To become a PIC you have to apply to Company House and be approved. You also have to fit the criteria of having no financial interest as in being a profit making organisation and also have no polyital bias as in campaigning for one party or another.

Now that is cleared up would you say a charity campaigning for cancer would rather cancer was more abundant so they could carry on campaigning? OrDr Banados deliberate attempt to increase the number of orphans? Or maybe a Demetra charity are secretely putting stuff in our food to give people the condition. Do you think people that have lost loved ones through cancer are happy that they contracted the desease because it allows them to carry on campaigning?

People work for charities mainly because they care or have had experience and can have empathy and relate to the cause. To say these people want these things to carry on is an insult to the effort and time spent that they put in. No doubt you are young, healthy and are in a secure job. I hope nothing happens to change this for you. You will not always be young and in perfect health.

Anyway I have to give the Pope a quick call now.

I never mentioned any of them deliberately inflicting, but why would they solve the issue outright?

[Guest MattP]

Let's be honest people volunteer their time for charity because they haven't got a job or anything else to occupy their time with.

I even did it when I was unemployed a few years ago.

[Guest MattP]

The comparison of DNO (bigger, stronger, harder) to Dr Barnados has given me a morning chuckle though.

 

What did big Nige say abour 'delusions of grandeur'?

[Strokes]

I'm just saying, nothing drives people more than self preservation.

[Jimothy]

The comparison of DNO (bigger, stronger, harder) to Dr Barnados has given me a morning chuckle though.

What did big Nige say abour 'delusions of grandeur'?

Come on he's not comparing them, he's just using an example of an organisation that's not for profit that does good that everyone will have heard of. You're not a retard like Kingfox, you can understand the analogy surely.

[Guest MattP]

Come on he's not comparing them, he's just using an example of an organisation that's not for profit that does good that everyone will have heard of. You're not a retard like Kingfox, you can understand the analogy surely.

 

Course I realise that. Was just saying the two in the same sentence made me chuckle.

[Jimothy]

Course I realise that. Was just saying the two in the same sentence made me chuckle.

Well there's no need for the delusions of grandeur comment then is there if you understand his angle.

[Guest MattP]

Well there's no need for the delusions of grandeur comment then is there if you understand his angle.

 

Having met Ken I'm sure in his own head is thinking that.

[MooseBreath]

For someone so suspicious of the government and big business, Ken is surprisingly phlegmatic about the possibility of charities being in it for themselves. Just look at some of the salaries they pay. The trussel trust, who own the food bank franchise, are paying 'directors' £60k per year plus expenses and bonuses and no doubt several other perks. These directors are also alledgedly engaged in various other activities, they're probably attending a couple of meetings a month for that £60k. Not a bad hourly rate by anyone's standards.

I'm all for charities where there is a genuine need but to have so many people taking a wage for simply pointing out a problem, while doing nothing to provide a solution, sounds quite the racket to me.

[Rincewind]

Actually there are people in other parts of the country now doing what we do. We did not just set up. We were a part of Citizens'  Eye which was the first and a hub for social Media which has actually had people off the streets (not homeless sense) calling CE and reporting on events. It gives a viewpoint from the prospective of the ordinary person. One even called in as the shootings in the Mall was going on in Africa.

They have now changed somewhat in their approach. Look on the web page to see how. They used their mobile to send pictures. A Community News Agency still has to adhere to the same rules as the Nationals but they do it from a different angler They are not being paid so do not have togear their reports to fit the editors viewpoint. As long as they do not libel people they have a free hand. The ones that volunteer have training. They may not have degrees in journalism but they learn the basics of how to write a story a news brief or a press release. There are some that have knowledge in photography and film making of films.. Professionals have given course on various topics relating to the media. They are not paid but give courses free. If they were not doing a decent job they would not be sought after and copied If we were not credible Peter Soulsby would not be afraid of us. We can ask questions that other journalists cannot and he does not like us because of it. If a service is being cut the one asking why is the one affected not someone from the LM that hears about it third hand.

Time for a pint. It will give you time to absorb my post. Not that it will make a scrap of difference. I have even had a quick check for typos so they are not focused on.

[Rincewind]

I never said anything about DNO being 'Bigger, stronger better' One of the reasons for the change is Action Homeless cannot fund us anymore and supporting us outright may cause them problems regarding a conflict of interests. We also report on other issues besides homelessness. We also want to be more of a retraining outfit and give advice. Who knows more about how to live on little money? Somebody who has had to do it or somebody living in a 30 bedroom mansion that dines at Savoys every day?

That is where the expertise comes in. And i am not having a go at the bloke in the mansion just that he would have a little more to live on a week and have different priorities on a week to week basis.

[Webbo]

I never said anything about DNO being 'Bigger, stronger better' One of the reasons for the change is Action Homeless cannot fund us anymore and supporting us outright may cause them problems regarding a conflict of interests. We also report on other issues besides homelessness. We also want to be more of a retraining outfit and give advice. Who knows more about how to live on little money? Somebody who has had to do it or somebody living in a 30 bedroom mansion that dines at Savoys every day?

That is where the expertise comes in. And i am not having a go at the bloke in the mansion just that he would have a little more to live on a week and have different priorities on a week to week basis.

Yeah that's every tory minister whereas the directors of Down and Out all live in council estates.

[Rincewind]

I never mentioned any political party.I was just referring to the fact that someone that has nothing knows what it is like to have nothing. Do you agree?

 

£6 million public money is being spent on a royals flat reburshiment. 6 Mill that could save a children's' ward from closing. For anyone that loses a child because of the closure i would say that was a tad unfair.

But Maggie T taught us to think of number one and I am from an older generation so we will never agree on what is a fair society.

[Merging Cultures]

OrDr Banados deliberate attempt to increase the number of orphans?

Unfortunately, this happens a lot. Some orphanages around the world literally pay parents to take the children. The parents believe the children will get a better education in the city and parents often are struggling to feed their kids anyway.

The orphanages then pimp the kids out, metaphorically to donors and also literally to pedos.

This thread has really taken a turn from the original post about the spikes.

Homelessness is a serious issue, we shouldn't ignore it or mock it. I've criticised Ken on here, only because he hasn't answered direct questions, but I think that's just his way and I need to accept it. But the way some people on here are being deliberately argumentative is really annoying.