Is Britain full???
Scroll to see replies
Original post by SCIENCE :D
well, where I live in Manchester there must be thousands by now, that number has increased rapidly in the past few years as well.
Really.
Well the number of the truly homeless has gone up by 5 times since 2002 which was much lower than it was in 1998. The present figures are double what they were in 1998.
There are currently about 3500 across the whole country. There is turnover and during a year it is thought that the number sleeping rough on a single autumn night is around one tenth of those who will sleep rough for at least one night in the year.
Manchester had 43 with Salford another 14
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/rough-sleeping.html
Not quite many thousands in Manchester is it?
Original post by nulli tertius
How many people do you think are really homeless; sleeping in the streets homeless?
Street sleeping is just the tip of the homelessness crisis. People who are homeless are also counted as people living in temporary accommodation. This would include families living in B+B (and I am not talking holiday style B+B) or hostels. And then there are the hidden homeless crashing on people's sofas and getting by one way or another. All pretty rare 10 years ago. Gove wanted a return to traditional education. I didn't realise the Tories were hell bent on sending us back to the days of Dickens.
Original post by nulli tertius
Really.
Well the number of the truly homeless has gone up by 5 times since 2002 which was much lower than it was in 1998. The present figures are double what they were in 1998.
There are currently about 3500 across the whole country. There is turnover and during a year it is thought that the number sleeping rough on a single autumn night is around one tenth of those who will sleep rough for at least one night in the year.
Manchester had 43 with Salford another 14
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/rough-sleeping.html
Not quite many thousands in Manchester is it?
Well the number of the truly homeless has gone up by 5 times since 2002 which was much lower than it was in 1998. The present figures are double what they were in 1998.
There are currently about 3500 across the whole country. There is turnover and during a year it is thought that the number sleeping rough on a single autumn night is around one tenth of those who will sleep rough for at least one night in the year.
Manchester had 43 with Salford another 14
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/rough-sleeping.html
Not quite many thousands in Manchester is it?
Mate I walk through Manchester everyday, you can't walk 50 metres without walking past at least 1 homeless person. It really is getting ridiculous.
Original post by SCIENCE :D
Mate I walk through Manchester everyday, you can't walk 50 metres without walking past at least 1 homeless person. It really is getting ridiculous.
No, you can't walk 50 metres without walking past a beggar, most of whom pick up their sleeping bags and go home at the end of the day. I know people who work with the homeless, not all is as it appears.
Original post by ByEeek
But if you have always lived in London, all your family are nearby, your community is nearby and your kids are settled in school:
a) why should you have to live somewhere else?
b) do you not find it rather a sad reflection on society that people below a certain economic threshold are being cleansed from an area?
Is that really the British way?
a) why should you have to live somewhere else?
b) do you not find it rather a sad reflection on society that people below a certain economic threshold are being cleansed from an area?
Is that really the British way?
I would like a Mercedes but I can't afford one, does Mercedes have an obligation to make cheaper cars?
Original post by nulli tertius
No, you can't walk 50 metres without walking past a beggar, most of whom pick up their sleeping bags and go home at the end of the day. I know people who work with the homeless, not all is as it appears.
why the attitude?I was only stating on observation. By the way I have finished work at half 12 before in the Centre of Manchester, and whilst waiting for the bus I have seen numerous homeless people out at that time, why would they not just go home then?
Original post by ByEeek
Street sleeping is just the tip of the homelessness crisis. People who are homeless are also counted as people living in temporary accommodation. This would include families living in B+B (and I am not talking holiday style B+B) or hostels. And then there are the hidden homeless crashing on people's sofas and getting by one way or another. All pretty rare 10 years ago. Gove wanted a return to traditional education. I didn't realise the Tories were hell bent on sending us back to the days of Dickens.
Statutory homelessness peaked around 2003, fell until 2010 and has been rising since. It is a little under half of what it was 2003. The official figures don't capture all of the homeless by any means but there is no reason to believe the trends are not accurate.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/577870/Statutory_Homelessness_and_Prevention_and_Relief_Statistical_Release_July_to_September_2016_v2.pdf
Original post by nulli tertius
Really.
Well the number of the truly homeless has gone up by 5 times since 2002 which was much lower than it was in 1998. The present figures are double what they were in 1998.
There are currently about 3500 across the whole country. There is turnover and during a year it is thought that the number sleeping rough on a single autumn night is around one tenth of those who will sleep rough for at least one night in the year.
Manchester had 43 with Salford another 14
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/rough-sleeping.html
Not quite many thousands in Manchester is it?
Well the number of the truly homeless has gone up by 5 times since 2002 which was much lower than it was in 1998. The present figures are double what they were in 1998.
There are currently about 3500 across the whole country. There is turnover and during a year it is thought that the number sleeping rough on a single autumn night is around one tenth of those who will sleep rough for at least one night in the year.
Manchester had 43 with Salford another 14
http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/rough-sleeping.html
Not quite many thousands in Manchester is it?
I'd like to know where you get these figures from? I am fairly sure there are more than that!
Original post by SCIENCE :D
why the attitude?I was only stating on observation. By the way I have finished work at half 12 before in the Centre of Manchester, and whilst waiting for the bus I have seen numerous homeless people out at that time, why would they not just go home then?
Perhaps that was unfair on my part but when acknowledged experts in the field are counting tens, to suggest that there our thousands is I am afraid just plain wrong.
As to your last question because young people out for a good time with their mates are perhaps one of the most likely to give money.
Original post by nulli tertius
Statutory homelessness peaked around 2003, fell until 2010 and has been rising since. It is a little under half of what it was 2003. The official figures don't capture all of the homeless by any means but there is no reason to believe the trends are not accurate.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/577870/Statutory_Homelessness_and_Prevention_and_Relief_Statistical_Release_July_to_September_2016_v2.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/577870/Statutory_Homelessness_and_Prevention_and_Relief_Statistical_Release_July_to_September_2016_v2.pdf
Please note these are only for a households and b who have been accepted by the state as homeless (hence statutory homeless). The great majority of homeless are a individuals and b under the radar, homeless by choice for example (that's what i was, all it means is that something happened which was out of your control to put you on the streets).
These figures are both misleading, and essentially incorrect!
Original post by john2054
I'd like to know where you get these figures from? I am fairly sure there are more than that!
All the data can be accessed from that Crisis report.
I gave the 2014 figure. Rough sleeping has got worse in Manchester and I have found the 2015 figure which is 70 with an extra 16 in Salford
The data is here. This is one night in Autumn.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/503020/Rough_Sleeping_Autumn_2015_Table_1.xls
Original post by john2054
Please note these are only for a households and b who have been accepted by the state as homeless (hence statutory homeless). The great majority of homeless are a individuals and b under the radar, homeless by choice for example (that's what i was, all it means is that something happened which was out of your control to put you on the streets).
These figures are both misleading, and essentially incorrect!
These figures are both misleading, and essentially incorrect!
No.
If you look at the figures you will see it includes people who were not accepted as homeless.
You will also see that I said in my previous post that it did not include all the homeless. What I said was that the trend for those who did seek local authority assistance was likely to be reflective of the entirety of the homeless population; rising and falling at the same time.
If you have any data that suggests that the trend for those who do not seek local authority assistance (perhaps because they do not qualify for any help) differs from the trend for those who do claim local authority assistance, please share it.
Original post by nulli tertius
No.
If you look at the figures you will see it includes people who were not accepted as homeless.
You will also see that I said in my previous post that it did not include all the homeless. What I said was that the trend for those who did seek local authority assistance was likely to be reflective of the entirety of the homeless population; rising and falling at the same time.
If you have any data that suggests that the trend for those who do not seek local authority assistance (perhaps because they do not qualify for any help) differs from the trend for those who do claim local authority assistance, please share it.
If you look at the figures you will see it includes people who were not accepted as homeless.
You will also see that I said in my previous post that it did not include all the homeless. What I said was that the trend for those who did seek local authority assistance was likely to be reflective of the entirety of the homeless population; rising and falling at the same time.
If you have any data that suggests that the trend for those who do not seek local authority assistance (perhaps because they do not qualify for any help) differs from the trend for those who do claim local authority assistance, please share it.
Yes thanks m8 i have data. I have experience, personal experience of one who has struggled on benefits for many years, and also found themselves on the streets for quite a few times. This means i know the people, and i always talk to them. And there are more now then ever.
Please listen, but someone who only ever drives around in their saloon, is hardly going to have a good understanding of the numbers on the streets.
They may be very good at devising policies such as 'you cannot sleep with a roof over your head, if you got in to a fight which led to your eviction', which is what happened to me. And they may be good at, inventing numbers, like saying, oh yes there are only "33 people tonight sleeping rough in manchester", but how exactly do they know this? Have they really gone round all of the bins and disused carparks, and counted the number of sleeping bags? I doubt it.
And don't throw caveats at me, such as 'oh yes well i know our figures may be different in reality', because it just won't bite. These are real people who are still suffering under the tories austerity measures, and people like them, and people like you who defend them, are a disgrace to our once great nation, IMHO!
Original post by Maker
That is the wrong approach. If London is popular, more resources should be poured into it to make it more attractive to workers and investors. The transport system needs investment as well as housing
Why should people be encouarged to leave London when it is so successful?
Why should people be encouarged to leave London when it is so successful?
It's the word 'successful' I would query here. Clearly people are drawn from many parts of the world to London in huge numbers. The reason is they think they will obtain well paid (or better paid) jobs and the potential for improvement. They don't come because London is a well functioning 'successful' city. If the jobs were spread out more, London would have fewer problems. It isn't really a sign of success that despite spending staggering amounts of money on transportation (Crossrail alone has cost more than £15bn), huge problems still remain getting around the city. Nor is it a success that people flock here without certainty of either jobs or a place to live.
I get the point that resources should be focused where they are needed, but once the magnetism reaches levels out of kilter with any possible means of meeting the demand, then you must seek to adjust the reality.
The same applies to housing - there simply isn't the space left in London to adequately house all the people arriving in anything like humane conditions. If it's going to continue like this, then severe taxes are going to have to be brought in on wealthy properties (this would have the effect of bringing property prices down to something more reasonable, which would be no bad thing), unused land and empty buildings. Even that won't be enough. At the moment the government are doing none of these things and have made it clear they won't allow the Mayor of London to do them.
The result is absolutely inevitable - London is going to increasingly see Dickensian-style slums re-emerge with tenemented poor, or, who knows, Brazilian favelas going up the slopes of Ealing, Slough, Haringey and Dartford. There will be massive social disorder and huge social problems.
The current UKIP-based simple minded approach to migration means that the government won't address this properly or commit to the levels of spending actually needed.
Original post by john2054
They may be very good at devising policies such as 'you cannot sleep with a roof over your head, if you got in to a fight which led to your eviction', which is what happened to me. And they may be good at, inventing numbers, like saying, oh yes there are only "33 people tonight sleeping rough in manchester", but how exactly do they know this? Have they really gone round all of the bins and disused carparks, and counted the number of sleeping bags? I doubt it.
They may be very good at devising policies such as 'you cannot sleep with a roof over your head, if you got in to a fight which led to your eviction', which is what happened to me. And they may be good at, inventing numbers, like saying, oh yes there are only "33 people tonight sleeping rough in manchester", but how exactly do they know this? Have they really gone round all of the bins and disused carparks, and counted the number of sleeping bags? I doubt it.
I always wonder how the government and media come by the rough sleeper numbers. Do they ring the local authorities? They have an interest in underestimating them.
However, on the other side of the argument, it is also definitely true that in some locations, apparent rough sleeping beggars who are out in the daytime at key spots are in fact simply taking advantage. This is particularly true in 'tourist trap' cities like Oxford, London, etc. A programme for Oxford BBC followed beggars around for a day in the city centre a few years back. Some well known faces had flats in the city and went home by car after a hard day on the streets, via the bank to pay all those coins into their accounts.
Original post by john2054
Have they really gone round all of the bins and disused carparks, and counted the number of sleeping bags? I doubt it.
Yes, that is exactly what they try to do
http://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/local-news/count-taken-establish-number-rough-12282692
Note they think this year's count will be low because it was cold. So when in February some local councillor starts crowing about the reduction in homelessness, just bear in mind, they counted on a cold night.
Original post by nulli tertius
Yes, that is exactly what they try to do
http://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/local-news/count-taken-establish-number-rough-12282692
Note they think this year's count will be low because it was cold. So when in February some local councillor starts crowing about the reduction in homelessness, just bear in mind, they counted on a cold night.
http://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/local-news/count-taken-establish-number-rough-12282692
Note they think this year's count will be low because it was cold. So when in February some local councillor starts crowing about the reduction in homelessness, just bear in mind, they counted on a cold night.
Charnwood, remind me where exactly is that again?
And they found one person who refused to be housed. Why do i find this unlikely? Probably not even asked. "The council reported that one person was found during the operation, who declined an offer of accommodation for the night."
But you know wherever it is, there are probably a lot more than one person sleeping rough, they just didn't know where to look. Don't put yourself out too far, i know those council workers certainly wouldn't!
Original post by nulli tertius
So lots of Oxford academics building on work by other academics and the government think that the position is inconclusive and complicated.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-and-housing-in-the-uk-experiences-and-impacts/
If you have insight that is so much better than theirs shouldn't you be applying to become Professor of Housing Policy at least or perhaps Secretary of State.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-and-housing-in-the-uk-experiences-and-impacts/
If you have insight that is so much better than theirs shouldn't you be applying to become Professor of Housing Policy at least or perhaps Secretary of State.
Its not hard, its like everything else when demand increases so does the price its correlation its the same with crude oil in the production of petrol as what it is for housing. In my area in Tipton, West Midlands DY4. The higher number of immigrants dumped on us the higher our population is, this will mean that if the demand outstrips the supply of available housing the price will go up as more people want to buy or rent the house and the highest bidder will win, this is especially unfair when Indian families of 15-20 all dig in and outbid the average person/couple/family. In Tipton the housing price was £40,000 as late as 2001 our population has increased quite a bit and no new houses have been built for years so it has lead to a scenario that the same house £40,000 in 2001 is now worth £107-120,000.
If you add inflation into the equation the £40,000 (2001) would be worth £60,000- Big increase i know but having very high levels of immigrants has resulting in a increase of £47,000-£60,000 on the average house this means that very few working class people have been able to afford housing it is also one of the areas where unemployment is higher than the national average- probably all these Polish working for below the minimum wage in the two sisters chicken factory (and claiming JSA) whilst the council prioritise foreigners over British citizens when letting people rent homes.
Furthermore- there is a website which records the price of housing when houses are sold, it's called land registry (google search it) I believe it goes back to the mid 1990's and if you check the housing prices and open your eyes to the idea the higher the population nationwide the higher the housing prices will be- its common sense really. Academics will not be divisive, they risk being hated by foreigner and causing a divison in society if they was to say immigration makes housing cost more.
Original post by Maker
I would like a Mercedes but I can't afford one, does Mercedes have an obligation to make cheaper cars?
A car is not the same as a place to call home. And I don't want to live in a civilised society that sees families evicted from some the worst housing stock simply because rents are rising faster than the non-existant living wage.
Original post by ByEeek
A car is not the same as a place to call home. And I don't want to live in a civilised society that sees families evicted from some the worst housing stock simply because rents are rising faster than the non-existant living wage.
I don't demand to live in a certain place, I used to live in London but decided I wanted a larger house than I could afford in London so I moved to the midlands where I live in a detached house that cost a quarter of what a similar house would be in most parts of London.
So you need to get a grip and stop whining about unfairness and stop being so entitled. If you want to live in an expensive area, get a well paid job.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- AQA A-Level History 1D and 2O Notes
- OCR AS-Level History Unit 1 (Y136-Y138,Y143) - 17th May [Exam Chat]
- History Edexcel A level Britain Transformed and USA Conformity and Challenge
- Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]
- Does anyone actually like Amanda Holden on TV?
- Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The Guardian
- Moving from a big city to Falmouth
- A level Economics help
- essay question sociology
- A Day Out in London: Tate Britain
- Aiming for grade 9s need help
- What do you think of HS2 only going to Birmingham
- AQA GCSE History Paper 2 (8145/2) - 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Need some clarification regarding my brothers situation please.
- History Coursework Witchcraft
- I need ideas to reword my EPQ title.
- XXX *actual* meaning
- Jeremy Hunt to deliver budget on March 6 as election looms
- Will you feel British without the monarchy?
- Anyone have revision materials for Alevel history?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
