COST OF RENT NOW SEX

UII was stunned ... truly stunned to see that need report below.

I also became annoyed with myself because if I could picture myself as a depraved, amoral and sex obsessed individual I could have foreseen this several years ago.

If I had I could possibly have helped bring this story of sick behaviour into the public eye.

The trouble should have been spotted by me as one of the problems that would come from two things. One is homes costing far too much money and rents, still not even close to mortgage payments, being far too high.

So what am I on about?

Well it seems that there has been a case where a landlord has targeted young women asking or even expecting sex for lower or no rent.

This is not just one case either as they actually bloody advertise their properties and ask for this?! According to the report it's not illegal.

It's not just London either with Maidstone and Rochester being mention and not just young women. In Brighton, oh surprise, surprise, they are targeting young men. I say that because Brighton is not only notorious for certain things but I was kind of targeted. Back in 1985.

Of course now I've seen this report I'm now thinking what other atrocities are going on and not just with rent either?

In fact this should be taken as a warning that where things are getting tougher there will be those that will exploit others in all manner of ways.

Me personally? I'd ban landlords don't this from ever being landlords ever again. They would have to either sell their properties or have agents be the only ones to come into contact with tenants.

It's going to be awhile before I get over this particular report.

Probably because I'll bet realising that there must be worst case scenarios out the and everything else that comes close to them.

This has been the case for a lot of things but those that have the cheek to call themselves journalists hardly ever dig very far.

As I've stated countless times on here some things don't get reported on at all. Other things get reported like they oh just took place when in fact they have been going on for fecking years.

Then there are those other times when someone has controlled the news and prevented them from reporting things. So to everyone else out looks like they took money to not report on certain things.

That last paragraph does have an example where certain people or some group has been putting pressure to get hold of some files. Files that are said to contain details on how they have controlled the news media.

The public service in question is the DWP and over how many people they have murdered.

The second thing I've not seen anyone question is whether or not any news groups are mentioned and of so ... do we get a list of TV News groups and tabloids that have been paid off?

Any good journalist who could be reading this should sit down and think up other possibilities of exploitation with the prices of things rising.

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it: Landlord adverts posted online 'target young for sex' - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39568458

AN INTERESTING NAIVETY

The report in the link at the bottom of something of a strange one.

It's about a referendum that just took place in Switzerland. The referendum was to vote on whether everyone should get a monthly minimum income, whether they are working or not.

Sounds mad. Even more strange if the figure is high. You really can't expect something like that to work.

However ...

It also states two reasons for the referendum in the report that had made me think, and kind of links to what I said about people's amoral attitudes. Or it could be it was refused because of a large number of migrants all now expecting a minimum income?

I simply don't know but ..

It says that the cost of living in Switzerland is particularly high so that sounds like a reasonable reason. Especially if their welfare system is badly designed.

More interestingly if the point about more and more work/jobs becoming automated therefore suggesting that jobs are not being created.

Right now within this lies a time bomb.

Something that, when it goes off, will make the last global recession look like a walk in the park!

You have someone, or a small number of people at the top owning each large business or corporation.

Now in the pursuit of greed ... sorry I mean greater profit they will get robots to do more of the jobs prior are doing.

Over time the human workforce gets displaced as each company in turn can afford to automate mire of their businesses.

Except ... these businesses are there to make money.

So what happens when a certain percentage of a countries population find themselves without jobs? And without money?

If very few people in the largest portion of a country's populace suddenly had no money to spend eventually the companies take less and less money.

To me this is a very basic and very obvious rule of economics.

Now I would have thought this was blatantly obvious to everyone ... except ... after things I have discovered prior and during the global financial crisis i seriously doubt they realise where they are heading?

It means they another crunch sleepwalked right into by the same morons that did not foresee it last time, I did 4.6 years prior to it occurring, is on the cards. At some point in the future this was not only bound to happen it was airways bound to happen.

I never had this down as a reason for the upcoming, at the time and now previous, global credit crunch. I did, however, have it down as being another problem further down the road.

Like when they were performing quantitative easing, something the poorest world eventually pay for, and where did they put it? With those that already had to much money and wholely or at least partly responsible for the current mess.

They simply fail to see it when they need to the most that the society they have created and stubbornly hold onto is like a pyramid. I like pyramids.

In the shape of the pyramid you can chip off a section across the bottom and this would contain the most people. Those at the bottom and all the working classes. The middle section is smaller and contains the fewer middle classes. The tiny bit at the top contains the upper classes or the elite.

Except when it's most important they simply fail to see that if this type of society stalls in spending you have to get the bottom spending again.

To encourage spending the poorest and largest section of anyone's society have to first have disposable income, money left after all bills and hopefully your not fucking earning less money than your overpriced rent?

Secondly those with the disposable income need to federal confident enough to spend some of that money.

Both these things take money and secondly and most importantly, time!

Except in the many years since the global recession and austerity started they have failed to do a single thing for those on the bottom rungs of the pyramid.

Now just maybe some in Switzerland realised this, or read on my blog and realised this, and that's what the referendum was mainly about?

Or maybe they didn't realise they could well of been on the right tracks but simply failed to see it?

Of course there will be those that have jobs and good pay that get this attitude that jobs and careers grow on trees and that anyone whose poor is wholely responsible for their predicament.

Or in other words they simply fail to see or realise just how lucky they are?

I am certain there will be many more noises like these ones bubbling to the surface over the next two to five years?

Switzerland's voters rejects basic income plan - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36454060