For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or
was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will
be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will
be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour
was in power.
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:48:15 PM UTC+12, Pooh wrote:
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or
was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will
be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour
was in power.
(snipped)
As of June 2016:
"The number of homeless people in New Zealand rose between the last two Census counts, a new study says.
The University of Otago study, which is based on Census data, said one in
100 were homeless in 2013, compared with one in 120 in 2006 and one in 130
in 2001."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11650103
So, there's deterioration regardless of which bunch of bunglers is in the Beehive.
Remember, this is the way "envy of the world" New Zealand runs its housing policy, not that housing policy is by any means the government's sole achilles heel, is it?--
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:48:15 PM UTC+12, Pooh wrote:
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or >> > was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will >> > be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour
was in power.
(snipped)
As of June 2016:
"The number of homeless people in New Zealand rose between the last two Census counts, a new study says.
The University of Otago study, which is based on Census data, said one in 100 were homeless in 2013, compared with one in 120 in 2006 and one in 130 in 2001."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11650103
So, there's deterioration regardless of which bunch of bunglers is in the Beehive.
1 in 100 homeless? That's 40,000 people. I find that difficult to believe. I see it's because they class someone living in a motel or a crowded house as "homeless" which is a stretch of the definition.
The sooner people flee to the regions the better. Aucklands biggest problem is too many Aucklanders.
Remember, this is the way "envy of the world" New Zealand runs its housing policy, not that housing policy is by any means the government's sole achilles heel, is it?--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
On Thursday, 13 April 2017 09:37:39 UTC+12, Allistar wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:48:15 PM UTC+12, Pooh wrote:
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or >> >> > was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will >> >> > be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour >> >> was in power.
(snipped)
As of June 2016:
"The number of homeless people in New Zealand rose between the last two
Census counts, a new study says.
The University of Otago study, which is based on Census data, said one in >> > 100 were homeless in 2013, compared with one in 120 in 2006 and one in 130 >> > in 2001."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11650103
So, there's deterioration regardless of which bunch of bunglers is in the >> > Beehive.
1 in 100 homeless? That's 40,000 people. I find that difficult to believe. I >> see it's because they class someone living in a motel or a crowded house as >> "homeless" which is a stretch of the definition.
Indeed. Most people would be mislead into thinking there are 40,000 people sleeping under bridges.
The disingenuous moaners here would like you to be mislead.
The sooner people flee to the regions the better. Aucklands biggest problem >> is too many Aucklanders.
Remember, this is the way "envy of the world" New Zealand runs its housing >> > policy, not that housing policy is by any means the government's sole--
achilles heel, is it?
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:48:15 PM UTC+12, Pooh wrote:
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or >> > was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will >> > be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour
was in power.
(snipped)
As of June 2016:
"The number of homeless people in New Zealand rose between the last two Census counts, a new study says.
The University of Otago study, which is based on Census data, said one in 100 were homeless in 2013, compared with one in 120 in 2006 and one in 130 in 2001."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11650103
So, there's deterioration regardless of which bunch of bunglers is in the Beehive.
1 in 100 homeless? That's 40,000 people. I find that difficult to believe.
see it's because they class someone living in a motel or a crowded house as "homeless" which is a stretch of the definition.
The sooner people flee to the regions the better. Aucklands biggest problem is too many Aucklanders.
Remember, this is the way "envy of the world" New Zealand runs its housing policy, not that housing policy is by any means the government's sole achilles heel, is it?--
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 12, 2017 at 2:48:15 PM UTC+12, Pooh wrote:
On 12/04/2017 8:29 a.m., george152 wrote:
On 4/11/2017 8:43 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 2017-04-11, Rich80105 <rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:It's a fallback position for the failing political parties.
For a decent, compassonate and effective housing policy we need a
change of government.
Pity there is not one which could do the job.
See how as winter comes the shrieks grow.
Those people might like to tell us what their history of renting is (or >> >> > was) that has them on the street
And they've added Maori rates of criminality with claims that this will >> >> > be cleared up by the courts, the justice dept.
To solve it all they need is for people to stop breaking the law!
I'd like to know just how far homelessness numbers dropped while Labour >> >> was in power.
(snipped)
As of June 2016:
"The number of homeless people in New Zealand rose between the last two
Census counts, a new study says.
The University of Otago study, which is based on Census data, said one in >> > 100 were homeless in 2013, compared with one in 120 in 2006 and one in 130 >> > in 2001."
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11650103
So, there's deterioration regardless of which bunch of bunglers is in the >> > Beehive.
1 in 100 homeless? That's 40,000 people. I find that difficult to believe.
Perhaps so, but many found it no less difficult to believe - and still do - >that our current prime minster had been caught wilfully, knowingly and and >systematically ripping off the taxpayer by officially claiming rental costs on >his own property in which he and his family were living. Even more incredible >for some, this smirkingly sanctimonius piece of work was at that same time not >only, of all people, **finance minister** of New Zealand but, as New Zealand's >shameless arch-hypocrite without peer, also preaching belt-tightening and >personal responsibility to the general populace.
I
see it's because they class someone living in a motel or a crowded house as >> "homeless" which is a stretch of the definition.
The sooner people flee to the regions the better. Aucklands biggest problem >> is too many Aucklanders.
Auckland's problem is New Zealand's problem: institutional lassitude making >for self-excusing incompetence reflected in a mirage economy resulting from 40 >years of stagnant productivity and chronic under-performance.
Hmm - started about the time of the Lange government I believe - no government since has been able to completely correct it. The Auckland copuncil has been culpably negligent but then what would any of us expect?
Remember, this is the way "envy of the world" New Zealand runs its housing >> > policy, not that housing policy is by any means the government's sole--
achilles heel, is it?
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:27:31 |
| Calls: | 2,082 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,669 |