Maybe he's going to take some of the savings, and get some jobs by building up debtors prisons?
edited 23rd Jan '11 6:58:45 AM by BlueNinja0
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - SilaswYou'd think they'd have learned by now that selling off every single good thing we have doesn't work out so well for us in the long run. :/
I think the homeless thing is just sheer thoughtlessness. Or possibly callousness, which is worse.
Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff^^Ouch. You're right.
edited 23rd Jan '11 11:52:23 AM by GameChainsaw
The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.I thought it meant he was going to try to force homeless people to accept forest land as a place to live in.
But how does the government get to make a decision like that for the london homeless shelters? I though that that, for the public shelters, would be the domain of the Mayoralty. Especially when I can also read on something like this
.
I... hope you mean the forests, not the homeless.
Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The StaffOh, yeah. That was the Mayors decision, or at least part of that organisations domain.
The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.Firstly, I admit to being on the edge of this process, due to some Volunteering work I'm involved with...
Anyway, my view is mostly on the Museums side of things. Well, I've heard of management mergers, and several sites being run by one person (and management staying and lower levels disappearing). Anyway, several have already been closed (even in this area, one in particular that they couldn't sell off), and in some parts of the country, some being shut and collections sold off (and obviously not coming back).
Anyway, Game Chainsaw, it IS that bad, according to the Government. I wouldn't be surprised that even members of the Government don't like some of the cuts taking place.
It's just the way it is these days.
Keep Rolling On

About the forests.
Grr, can't find anything on the homeless front.
Essentially, to summarise, I saw a BBC report that says that the Conservatives are planning to sell off 15% out of the 18% of the forests controlled by the forestry commission charged with keeping these forests well managed and open to the public in order to raise money. Apparently when this was tried in another forest (I can't remember the name) the forest ended up having its visitor centre closed, and was all but shut off to the public.
There is apparently an appeal going around, and 75% of the country are against it, but the Conservatives are probably going to press it through anyway; Cameron seems to have adopted a strategy of getting the really mean cuts done in the first half of his term.
To add to this a far more serious issue, the way the government has reorganised Londons homeless shelter system so that appeals for funding are done at the level of individual boroughs rather than at a city-wide level. Apparently, however this actually works, this is in fact going to cause an 87% cut in real funding for shelters in London. Due to a reorganisation problem. Then again, Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics perhaps. But you see my concern.
Is it just me, or is anyone else picturing Cameron wearing a Sith mask while booting puppies into oncoming traffic?
I was behind the new government until they started actions like this; they'd preserved the health service and I'd interpreted the many service cuts, even cuts to university educations, as being Necessarily Evil because, you know, we'll be broke otherwise. And I figured that two years on, we'll start getting some of those services back. (Though not all of them.)
But the sale of forests, and the health benefits and wildlife preservation that goes with them (do you want more people to take up walking or not?) seems irrevocable or inordinately expensive to take back, and cutting the real-term budget for the homeless by 87% in London... come on, we don't need the money ''that'' badly... do we?
If Cameron keeps that up, he'll alienate a lot of support... and more seriously, inflict serious harm on the most vulnerable citizens of Britain in the process.
The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.