This is an absolutely superb overview of squatting, landlords and homelessness. So refreshing to see a proper report backed up by statistics and so well researched. Gives me hope! Thank you.
I see both sides, but I hate people thinking other people are responsible for their problems. Squatters need to take responsibility and squire their own property.
Exactly. Squatters refuse to build their own property yet seem very liberal in stealing the property other people have legitimately paid for. In a squatters eyes property rights don't exist but when they are asked to leave a property they immediately assume they have property rights and refuse to leave themselves. You can't make it up. Glad these disgusting people have had their disgusting lifestyles outlawed.
@@mrdojob recuse to build their own property? You are massively misinformed.... if it was legal and viable to buy land and just build your own home many squatters, and other people who've not squatted before, would gladly do so. Nice generalised statements and lack of understanding of the law around property, land and planning.
@@domtekos7761 It's called adverse possession. Anyone can fence off any land they like and after 12 years roughly and after no complaints or opposition, you usually get granted that land in the land registry. This can be any size of land. There is nothing stopping a group of 100 squatters taking 100 acres of land in one massive chunk. I just find squatters massive hypocrites. They demand property from others that they themselves would never part with in the same shoes.
@@mrdojob @mrdojob I know what that is but it wasn't really what you were saying in the first comment. What you're talking about doing is near on an impossibility in the UK, many have tried and failed to do so (including those who already owned land and property and wanted to extend their own land etc). If you think there is nothing stopping 100 squatters just taking 100 acres of land in one go you're living in cloud cuckoo land, mate. Not ever gonna bloody happen.
@@mrdojob also, the majority if squatters utilise property that isn't being used and left sat empty for a long time. I will agree that I don't like the use of business buildings that are fresh or would be used again after the closure shortly after, if it hadn't been squatted. The simple fact is that the buildings that are used are majority those that are being sat and wasted, so it's not really hypocritical in the sense that the attitude is it is better to use the empty buildings for homes than it us to have people homeless and not able to afford housing (of course some also squat for reasons of it being an ideology and I respect their belief too).
Last 15 years London just become this ridicoulsy place full of million pound flats unsold and why annot people squatter if they cannot pay the unreal rent prices
I think these properties are left empty for many years. The government still has not found an efficient way of creating incentives investors to not leave properties empty. As you can see by the last report the owner was happy to let them stay. If owners are unhappy there is a court process by which they can remove the occupants.
If they didn't trash every building I have seen, damage and graffiti in then some people might consider their viewpoints, but even if just a handful of the 30 in a building would ask for financial benefits and pay the building owner that, it would be better than nothing with hundreds of thousands of pounds of damage. Those who pay for things often appreciate and take better care of said things.
Liberals who own property would not leave it empty for decades, like the pub owner who let the squatters stay on the proviso that they leave when he asked, usually when the owner gets permission to rebuild. Would you really like to live in a street with derelict houses that have been left empty by property speculators? I've seen a number of those derelicts and the neighbours were not very happy with the landowners. It affected their property prices.
An informative piece. Thank you. I'm a big advocate of Land Value Taxation, a system that would massively dissincentivise absentee landlords from leaving plots/buildings vacant for years/decades. It would also dissincentivise people dumping as much as they can in as big a mortgage as they can afford into their home assuming the raise in value will make their repayment proportionately less. Consequence: More housing, lower prices, more financial freedom, entrepreneurship & jobs.
There's a fairly serious number of Americans who're essentially squatters, only they live in "tent cities". Searching UA-cam for "tent cities" should turn up plenty of videos. They try to set up these "cities", which're basically camps of various sizes, in forest or woodland. Not all of them are in places where they have treed areas available, so some set up their camps like in grass fields of large dimension next to cities.
Duke of Westminster owns swathes of land in London. Someone who inherited it from an ancestor who stole the land a thousand years ago. He is still allowed to keep his ill gotten gains. Not exactly the so-called Capitalism espoused by the overclass. These people use the Free Market as a way to keep their hold on the world. They own the land, very soon through the likes of Monsanto, the overclass will own the food.
And if your last name was Monsanto, you would be on their side as inheritors with rights, too. Work hard to create the best life you can and hope for your lottery ticket to pay big, but go back to work every day.
Often these companies scarcely use the buildings and make a lot of money in the process. Whilst some do it to ensure space is not left unused the vast majority of I believe do it for profit and are much less efficient than squatters.
9:37 Wow. Edible food going to landfills and these guys are making use of it. I asked a store guy once and he did say that if people are allowed to pick, some will resell at almost original price to others, or those who were supposed to buy wouldn't buy anymore. I am not defending, just informing. Still, I really thing the food from rubbish bins drives home the point of potentially wasting resources which could have been put to use by others.
In other ways to put that first Tory MP doesn't want 1 of his 10 houses Devalued because squatters are living in it but they won't help homeless people
"As long as the elite provides them enough food and luxuries" == You maybe living in the different place from the world I live. That's not what's happening from what I can see and hear. It's getting only worse to no end.
Notice nothing has changed if someone can't pay rent how do you think they'll pay a fine lol and jail has a roof so threatening them with food and a bed isn't going to work either.
Excellent documentary! Shows vividly that there is definitely another side to the issue.. it's very impressive how the squatters portrayed have organized a community and created a clean, sober, caring, and dynamically progressive environment utilizing human and material resources which could stand as a model for our 'elected leaders'. As stated, not all squatters fit this pattern; but it does show there is a lot more to consider and learn from.
Dirty, lying, drugged, competitive and backward environment. These people do not take jobs because they cannot hold them down for more than a month. These people do not form close relationships with others because they are not capable of it. That is why they live in deceitful communes where relationships are distant and fake. Such a good face for a bad game. Where there are two men and one woman there is a certain tension. Competition, war and then copulation.
Houses should be lived in not left empty. If a building is left empty for over 1 year then the owner no longer deserves to retain ownership in my opinion and it should be transferred to the squatter.
They are simply gathering wealth and not using it. That is a serious problem. If squatters do not occupy those buildings, they will degrade far faster. If this is made illegal, then the British government better have a plan to get abandoned buildings rehabilitated in other ways, or they will become a blight like in the US.
"Liberals and Communists still continue to live in fantasy land." == History tells us people won't be so obedient and quiet when they are hungry. Look up French revolution, Russian revolution. If the riches think they can keep this way forever, they are the ones in the fantasy land. How rich are you, BTW?
We don't need a world that is free for all, just one that measures value. Those here seemed to be making a conscious effort to contribute to there community, something which many people don't do. They work for someone else's dream and then fund someone else's dream by consuming. Real value must be created locally within your community and not by sitting on your ass in front of a computer making flippant remarks.
They work for someone's dream and then finance someone else's dream through consumption. Squatters, on the other hand, steal someone's dream and then consume it. So that these antisocial individuals can build utopian collectives and spend their time getting high and competing for girls or boys and fighting for hierarchy in the group. Because communes are a shitty utopia and these people are usually scumbags. Karl Marx also wrote about beautiful communes, but his successors showed how these beautiful communes work in practice. Squatters are a kind of sect. They look beautiful from the outside, but from the inside this community is deceitful, stoned and mean, also towards each other. There is drug addiction, manipulation, gaslighting and setting up pigs.
Excellent reportage. I was a squatter in Brighton a year before the practice became illegal. In those squats I met a mixed bag of folks; some drug users and dealers, some illegal migrants, and many anarchists. But nearly everyone was kind, respectful and generous to one another. By cutting back social services and criminalizing recourses to circumvent having to turn to the dole, the Coalition really has dug itself into a hole.
Squatting is a communal lifestyle inherently incompatible with antisocial behaviour - I suspect that those who want it criminalized are really just scared that such a nonconformist way of life is available.
Very good, or excellent short documentary! And the UK govt should definitely do everything it can to ensure the non-expulsion of squatters like those interviewed for this TRNN report.
If they want to live, they will live, and no law will be any more true than their actions formed by causes beyond them. If you are hungry, you will act upon that in anyway that your mind have learned as a solution. Same with any essential need.
Because someone 'owns' it. And if someone 'owns' it that means noone can use it... Even if it ISNT BEING USED. Ownership is a bit silly when taking it to extremes. Ultimately, ownership denies use of something to others. But you think this is insulting? Imagine the parts of Africa where folks are going hungry, and the farmlands are sitting empty due to its being owned by foreign land speculators!!!
Mike Weatherley is his name, happy to help those gaming the property market for financial gain, to the detriment of those without homes, and frame his deeds in positive delusional terms. People like this need exposing for what they really are.
The right to housing is the economic, social and cultural right to adequate housing and shelter. It is recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Nobody in the history of mankind has a right to a house. You either have to build one yourself or pay someone else to build one for you. If you don't want to do either then you should be homeless.
Just because it's a right doesn't make it immune to basic economic principles. Someone has to plug in thousands of man hours and tons of materials to make a house and therefore it isn't a right.
This is an absolutely superb overview of squatting, landlords and homelessness. So refreshing to see a proper report backed up by statistics and so well researched. Gives me hope! Thank you.
They stealing property and power and water
Look everywhere especially in London. It's a bit hit and miss when you start, but once you have found a good bin its the gift that keeps on giving.
I see both sides, but I hate people thinking other people are responsible for their problems. Squatters need to take responsibility and squire their own property.
Exactly. Squatters refuse to build their own property yet seem very liberal in stealing the property other people have legitimately paid for.
In a squatters eyes property rights don't exist but when they are asked to leave a property they immediately assume they have property rights and refuse to leave themselves.
You can't make it up. Glad these disgusting people have had their disgusting lifestyles outlawed.
@@mrdojob recuse to build their own property? You are massively misinformed.... if it was legal and viable to buy land and just build your own home many squatters, and other people who've not squatted before, would gladly do so.
Nice generalised statements and lack of understanding of the law around property, land and planning.
@@domtekos7761 It's called adverse possession. Anyone can fence off any land they like and after 12 years roughly and after no complaints or opposition, you usually get granted that land in the land registry. This can be any size of land.
There is nothing stopping a group of 100 squatters taking 100 acres of land in one massive chunk.
I just find squatters massive hypocrites. They demand property from others that they themselves would never part with in the same shoes.
@@mrdojob @mrdojob I know what that is but it wasn't really what you were saying in the first comment. What you're talking about doing is near on an impossibility in the UK, many have tried and failed to do so (including those who already owned land and property and wanted to extend their own land etc).
If you think there is nothing stopping 100 squatters just taking 100 acres of land in one go you're living in cloud cuckoo land, mate. Not ever gonna bloody happen.
@@mrdojob also, the majority if squatters utilise property that isn't being used and left sat empty for a long time. I will agree that I don't like the use of business buildings that are fresh or would be used again after the closure shortly after, if it hadn't been squatted. The simple fact is that the buildings that are used are majority those that are being sat and wasted, so it's not really hypocritical in the sense that the attitude is it is better to use the empty buildings for homes than it us to have people homeless and not able to afford housing (of course some also squat for reasons of it being an ideology and I respect their belief too).
Last 15 years London just become this ridicoulsy place full of million pound flats unsold and why annot people squatter if they cannot pay the unreal rent prices
I think these properties are left empty for many years. The government still has not found an efficient way of creating incentives investors to not leave properties empty. As you can see by the last report the owner was happy to let them stay. If owners are unhappy there is a court process by which they can remove the occupants.
Funny, because ive always been able to find a job and find somewhere to live
Excellent work, thank you.
If they didn't trash every building I have seen, damage and graffiti in then some people might consider their viewpoints, but even if just a handful of the 30 in a building would ask for financial benefits and pay the building owner that, it would be better than nothing with hundreds of thousands of pounds of damage. Those who pay for things often appreciate and take better care of said things.
Beautiful, poignant, in-depth: The Real News is by far my favorite internet news source.
Liberals who own property would not leave it empty for decades, like the pub owner who let the squatters stay on the proviso that they leave when he asked, usually when the owner gets permission to rebuild.
Would you really like to live in a street with derelict houses that have been left empty by property speculators? I've seen a number of those derelicts and the neighbours were not very happy with the landowners. It affected their property prices.
Agreed, came across some articles that we only need Corporation tax and Land Value Tax to run society.
Income Tax can be abolished in time.
Excellent piece of journalism, thanks.
Superb reporting here.
Land Value Tax - the remedy to this problem - research it
I think if we add use into the equation we might be getting closer to where we need to go.
I actually thought this was a powerlifting video. Sob.
An informative piece. Thank you. I'm a big advocate of Land Value Taxation, a system that would massively dissincentivise absentee landlords from leaving plots/buildings vacant for years/decades. It would also dissincentivise people dumping as much as they can in as big a mortgage as they can afford into their home assuming the raise in value will make their repayment proportionately less. Consequence: More housing, lower prices, more financial freedom, entrepreneurship & jobs.
I think he is referring to what the main stream media have labeled it and the fact that it has been three financial years.
I was thinking of people squating weights in the UK.
"Trouble to who?"
To those who BENEFIT from the status quo, of course. ^_^
There's a fairly serious number of Americans who're essentially squatters, only they live in "tent cities". Searching UA-cam for "tent cities" should turn up plenty of videos. They try to set up these "cities", which're basically camps of various sizes, in forest or woodland. Not all of them are in places where they have treed areas available, so some set up their camps like in grass fields of large dimension next to cities.
This is massive financial inequality in action.
Duke of Westminster owns swathes of land in London. Someone who inherited it from an ancestor who stole the land a thousand years ago. He is still allowed to keep his ill gotten gains. Not exactly the so-called Capitalism espoused by the overclass.
These people use the Free Market as a way to keep their hold on the world. They own the land, very soon through the likes of Monsanto, the overclass will own the food.
And if your last name was Monsanto, you would be on their side as inheritors with rights, too. Work hard to create the best life you can and hope for your lottery ticket to pay big, but go back to work every day.
Often these companies scarcely use the buildings and make a lot of money in the process. Whilst some do it to ensure space is not left unused the vast majority of I believe do it for profit and are much less efficient than squatters.
bedroom tax?
9:37 Wow. Edible food going to landfills and these guys are making use of it. I asked a store guy once and he did say that if people are allowed to pick, some will resell at almost original price to others, or those who were supposed to buy wouldn't buy anymore. I am not defending, just informing.
Still, I really thing the food from rubbish bins drives home the point of potentially wasting resources which could have been put to use by others.
Good work!
In other ways to put that first Tory MP doesn't want 1 of his 10 houses Devalued because squatters are living in it but they won't help homeless people
"As long as the elite provides them enough food and luxuries"
==
You maybe living in the different place from the world I live.
That's not what's happening from what I can see and hear. It's getting only worse to no end.
Fruit and Veg markets are brilliant.
Notice nothing has changed if someone can't pay rent how do you think they'll pay a fine lol and jail has a roof so threatening them with food and a bed isn't going to work either.
Excellent documentary! Shows vividly that there is definitely another side to the issue.. it's very impressive how the squatters portrayed have organized a community and created a clean, sober, caring, and dynamically progressive environment utilizing human and material resources which could stand as a model for our 'elected leaders'. As stated, not all squatters fit this pattern; but it does show there is a lot more to consider and learn from.
Dirty, lying, drugged, competitive and backward environment. These people do not take jobs because they cannot hold them down for more than a month. These people do not form close relationships with others because they are not capable of it. That is why they live in deceitful communes where relationships are distant and fake. Such a good face for a bad game. Where there are two men and one woman there is a certain tension. Competition, war and then copulation.
To find a social enterprise that does legal squating google dot dot dot property
Houses should be lived in not left empty. If a building is left empty for over 1 year then the owner no longer deserves to retain ownership in my opinion and it should be transferred to the squatter.
What the fuck.... So a person has no right to maintain property as investment to be cashed in on a rainy day...
badguy blah lazy and pathetic people trying to claim others hard work
They are simply gathering wealth and not using it. That is a serious problem. If squatters do not occupy those buildings, they will degrade far faster. If this is made illegal, then the British government better have a plan to get abandoned buildings rehabilitated in other ways, or they will become a blight like in the US.
You'd need more than a job to have an influence.
"Liberals and Communists still continue to live in fantasy land."
==
History tells us people won't be so obedient and quiet when they are hungry.
Look up French revolution, Russian revolution.
If the riches think they can keep this way forever, they are the ones in the fantasy land.
How rich are you, BTW?
We don't need a world that is free for all, just one that measures value. Those here seemed to be making a conscious effort to contribute to there community, something which many people don't do. They work for someone else's dream and then fund someone else's dream by consuming. Real value must be created locally within your community and not by sitting on your ass in front of a computer making flippant remarks.
They work for someone's dream and then finance someone else's dream through consumption.
Squatters, on the other hand, steal someone's dream and then consume it. So that these antisocial individuals can build utopian collectives and spend their time getting high and competing for girls or boys and fighting for hierarchy in the group. Because communes are a shitty utopia and these people are usually scumbags. Karl Marx also wrote about beautiful communes, but his successors showed how these beautiful communes work in practice. Squatters are a kind of sect. They look beautiful from the outside, but from the inside this community is deceitful, stoned and mean, also towards each other. There is drug addiction, manipulation, gaslighting and setting up pigs.
Excellent reportage. I was a squatter in Brighton a year before the practice became illegal. In those squats I met a mixed bag of folks; some drug users and dealers, some illegal migrants, and many anarchists. But nearly everyone was kind, respectful and generous to one another. By cutting back social services and criminalizing recourses to circumvent having to turn to the dole, the Coalition really has dug itself into a hole.
Squatting is a communal lifestyle inherently incompatible with antisocial behaviour - I suspect that those who want it criminalized are really just scared that such a nonconformist way of life is available.
Very good, or excellent short documentary! And the UK govt should definitely do everything it can to ensure the non-expulsion of squatters like those interviewed for this TRNN report.
You must have misunderstood my comment... lol
If they want to live, they will live, and no law will be any more true than their actions formed by causes beyond them.
If you are hungry, you will act upon that in anyway that your mind have learned as a solution. Same with any essential need.
Scavenge for the win...
Because someone 'owns' it. And if someone 'owns' it that means noone can use it... Even if it ISNT BEING USED.
Ownership is a bit silly when taking it to extremes. Ultimately, ownership denies use of something to others.
But you think this is insulting? Imagine the parts of Africa where folks are going hungry, and the farmlands are sitting empty due to its being owned by foreign land speculators!!!
... and then the vulnerable people will become far more vulnerable.
And you expect something for nothing mad dusa?
Mike Weatherley is his name, happy to help those gaming the property market for financial gain, to the detriment of those without homes, and frame his deeds in positive delusional terms. People like this need exposing for what they really are.
In truth, I was alluding to what you said in a roundabout way, LOL
The right to housing is the economic, social and cultural right to adequate housing and shelter. It is recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Nobody in the history of mankind has a right to a house. You either have to build one yourself or pay someone else to build one for you. If you don't want to do either then you should be homeless.
Just because it's a right doesn't make it immune to basic economic principles. Someone has to plug in thousands of man hours and tons of materials to make a house and therefore it isn't a right.
The bottom line is it is not the squatters property. End of.
I have had homeless or vulnerably housed people stay in my house for free on many occasions. Perhaps I am naive, but I don't really see how...
+1
Liberal Good, Conservative Bad.
Very interesting. Leave them alone if they doing good.
:-)
Get a job then!
1:00 bankster shill
:-)