Do you want to discuss boring politics? (42 Viewers)

[Sky Blue Pete]

Just in London
Soho
Clapham
It’s wonderful
So much space
Great atmosphere
Very friendly
Think Farage and fox and tice just talk shit about londonistan and stuff
Love our country

 

---

[clint van damme]

And that is what the loony lefties always resort to. Very childish for a teacher.

I'm just waiting on woke for a full house

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Damn those foreigners taking another country's housing stock...

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Damn those foreigners taking another country's housing stock...

Russians

 

[MalcSB]

Why though? Because we’re just congenitally shit? I don’t believe that. Look at how other places have managed it and replicate if that is the case. But 3/4 of those pictures are in the UK.

You limit building to say five or six storeys and you won’t get high rise blocks, you can legislate for street fronts and greenery and floor space if that’s what you want (and i do). I just don’t buy the idea that we’ve hit peak Britain and the aim from here on out is to protect what we’ve got.

And I would imagine all those pictures will be of housing built many years ago and unaffordable today for the average working person

 

[David O'Day]

Many of these transport issues could be alleviated by not taking another 600,000 people every year. Someone mentioned, we’ve not reached our ‘peak’ but what is our peak ? 80 million, 100 million ? We are becoming a nation of housing estates without any accompanying services.

Stick to having a hissy fit because the club wants you to pay a few quid more per game.

 

[SBAndy]

It’s interesting how the true patriots (TM) among us want:


- No more people
- No more houses
- No more anything
- Economic stagnation
- The health of our aging demographic covered by lower tax receipts
- Britain to naturally regress to an ‘also-ran’ nation

 

[PVA]

It’s interesting how the true patriots (TM) among us want:


- No more people
- No more houses
- No more anything
- Economic stagnation
- The health of our aging demographic covered by lower tax receipts
- Britain to naturally regress to an ‘also-ran’ nation

You missed off:

- No more widescreen TVs
- No more avocados

 

[wingy]

View attachment 36176

Tented city like Victorian projects and the Irish?

 

[Ashdown]

Stick to having a hissy fit because the club wants you to pay a few quid more per game.

Haha, got an ST now, keep up sugar plum

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Would you really rather live here:

View attachment 36169
Than here:

View attachment 36168

Or here:


View attachment 36170
Than here:

View attachment 36171

Or here:

View attachment 36172
than here:

View attachment 36173

Extreme examples, but not all high density is awful to be around and not all low density is good. If we could legislate for taste the world would be a very different place. But I’m not sure we can.

And all of these can have private gardens or face onto public green space. In fact the higher the density the more space available for public green space.

Genuinely would choose the first option for the first two. Given the choice I think a lot of people (especially those with young kids/grandkids which is a lot of people) would prefer a separate house with a small garden. I just find larger apartment blocks overbearing and a bit claustrophobic, especially if they're built quite densely. I need green and open space to calm me down. I accept not everyone is like me - some can't stand open spaces.

I'm not saying flats can't be nice. Nor am I saying that we shouldn't build. I just think we need to think carefully about where and how. It's been shown in numerous studies green spaces are good for physical and mental health and can help alleviate anxiety and depression. So as long as there is a good sized green space within 15-20 mins walk and green/blue corridors linking it all up then all is good. If we had more large blocks with living walls and roof gardens then that could be more acceptable. People with acres of land can fuck right off - you could build nice houses with gardens on it, but we can't have them losing their hot border can we!

 

[Ian1779]

And that is what the loony lefties always resort to. Very childish for a teacher.

It was a childish picture in response to your childish rant.

 

[SIR ERNIE]

People with acres of land can fuck right off - you could build nice houses with gardens on it, but we can't have them losing their hot border can we!

What if they grew up on a council estate, worked hard, became successful and bought a nice house in the country 'with acres of land'.

Can they still fuck off?

 

[shmmeee]

And I would imagine all those pictures will be of housing built many years ago and unaffordable today for the average working person

Genuinely would choose the first option for the first two. Given the choice I think a lot of people (especially those with young kids/grandkids which is a lot of people) would prefer a separate house with a small garden. I just find larger apartment blocks overbearing and a bit claustrophobic, especially if they're built quite densely. I need green and open space to calm me down. I accept not everyone is like me - some can't stand open spaces.

I'm not saying flats can't be nice. Nor am I saying that we shouldn't build. I just think we need to think carefully about where and how. It's been shown in numerous studies green spaces are good for physical and mental health and can help alleviate anxiety and depression. So as long as there is a good sized green space within 15-20 mins walk and green/blue corridors linking it all up then all is good. If we had more large blocks with living walls and roof gardens then that could be more acceptable. People with acres of land can fuck right off - you could build nice houses with gardens on it, but we can't have them losing their hot border can we!

Of course and no one is saying knock down every estate and build flats. But near large city centres and transport links build the sort of housing that allows enough people to come together and make a proper city. You can still live in the suburbs if you’re happier with a longer commute or WFH or retired or whatever.

We’re talking about two or three cities getting a big boost in central population to get it to 2m+, and the more easy transport you can put into these places the less dense any bit of it needs to be. But in areas around stations or in city centres, we should be aiming to build modern versions of the 5-6 storey houses and apartment blocks that exist in major cities around the world. And can be beautiful if we want.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

What if they grew up on a council estate, worked hard, became successful and bought a nice house in the country 'with acres of land'.

Can they still fuck off?

Yep. It's greed and depriving others. If they grew up on a concrete council estate they should know better.

 

[MalcSB]

Of course and no one is saying knock down every estate and build flats. But near large city centres and transport links build the sort of housing that allows enough people to come together and make a proper city. You can still live in the suburbs if you’re happier with a longer commute or WFH or retired or whatever.

We’re talking about two or three cities getting a big boost in central population to get it to 2m+, and the more easy transport you can put into these places the less dense any bit of it needs to be. But in areas around stations or in city centres, we should be aiming to build modern versions of the 5-6 storey houses and apartment blocks that exist in major cities around the world. And can be beautiful if we want.

Or if it can be afforded by those who will live in them. Whoever builds them will want a return on investment. Or are they going to be delivered by government funding - or working persons taxes as I like to think of it.

 

[MalcSB]

Yep. It's greed and depriving others. If they grew up on a concrete council estate they should know better.

Are you a fucking communist, Labour say they are all about wealth creation. If someone works hard and creates wealth, for the country, their workforce and themselves, there has to be some incentive for them to do so. They aspire for better.
For some it may be hot cars - or sorry, you cant buy a new one of them after 2030, for some it may be “hot borders”. But you are happy to conduct property theft.

 

[fernandopartridge]

It should have definitely linked up with HS1. You should be able to get on a high speed train from Birmingham/Manchester to Paris.

I remember in the mid 90s going to Drayton Manor and roughly where HS2 was supposed to go and their used to be a sign talking about being able to get trains to the continent, I'm sure it had Eurostar badges on it. What a joke of a country that we can't even build a high speed line from our major cities to other continental cities. As shmmeee alludes to, that's why they are all also-rans in European terms. Successive governments have utterly failed the country.

 

[MalcSB]

I remember in the mid 90s going to Drayton Manor and roughly where HS2 was supposed to go and their used to be a sign talking about being able to get trains to the continent, I'm sure it had Eurostar badges on it. What a joke of a country that we can't even build a high speed line from our major cities to other continental cities. As shmmeee alludes to, that's why they are all also-rans in European terms. Successive governments have utterly failed the country.

Successive governments have utterly failed the country, I’m not sure rail links are the best yardstick though.

 

[clint van damme]

Successive governments have utterly failed the country, I’m not sure rail links are the best yardstick though.

Well the general discussion is about housing and infrastructure so I'd say they're a decent yardstick.
In fact the fact we've privatised rail profits and nationalised their losses sums this bin fire of a country up completely.

 

[MalcSB]

Well the general discussion is about housing and infrastructure so I'd say they're a decent yardstick.
In fact the fact we've privatised rail profits and nationalised their losses sums this bin fire of a country up completely.

The general discussion on here may be, but there seems to be a lot more in Labours manifesto than housing and infrastructure.

 

[MalcSB]

If Capital Gains Tax is applied to primary residences, that will put off a lot of old farts like me from downsizing. Stamp duty is bad enough as it is.

That has made me wonder - when the Labour government grabs land through compulsory purchase for all these infrastructure and housing schemes, will CGT be payable on the proceeds?

 

[SBAndy]

If Capital Gains Tax is applied to primary residences, that will put off a lot of old farts like me from downsizing. Stamp duty is bad enough as it is.

That has made me wonder - when the Labour government grabs land through compulsory purchase for all these infrastructure and housing schemes, will CGT be payable on the proceeds?

Think the theory behind it is fairly sound - plenty who purchased houses back in the 70s and 80s have seen exponential growth in their wealth without really doing anything. In practice, though, I struggle to see how it works: you’d effectively reduce housing market liquidity for exactly the reason you’ve identified.

 

[wingy]

Questions for Thatcherism, kind of redress of the situation?

 

[MalcSB]

Think the theory behind it is fairly sound - plenty who purchased houses back in the 70s and 80s have seen exponential growth in their wealth without really doing anything. In practice, though, I struggle to see how it works: you’d effectively reduce housing market liquidity for exactly the reason you’ve identified.

I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.

 

[wingy]

I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.

But will anyone pay it, seems so atm, need a cull of some sort?

 

[PVA]

Are you a fucking communist, Labour say they are all about wealth creation. If someone works hard and creates wealth, for the country, their workforce and themselves, there has to be some incentive for them to do so. They aspire for better.

I hate this aspiration thing. This notion that some people are poor because they lack aspiration.

 

[oakey]

Any idea why people buy houses (especially new builds) with such tiny windows? Every room in my house has a window for its entire length. I would go crazy with so little light and view.

 

[MalcSB]

I hate this aspiration thing. This notion that some people are poor because they lack aspiration.

Where did I say that? I said wealth creators aspire for better. Poor people aren‘t wealth creators.

 

[MalcSB]

But will anyone pay it, seems so atm, need a cull of some sort?

Compulsory euthenasia?

 

[fernandopartridge]

I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.

So you'd rather make no capital gain in your life than pay a bit of tax on it, sounds plausible.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Well the general discussion is about housing and infrastructure so I'd say they're a decent yardstick.
In fact the fact we've privatised rail profits and nationalised their losses sums this bin fire of a country up completely.

As Martin Luther King once said of the US, we have socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Are you a fucking communist, Labour say they are all about wealth creation. If someone works hard and creates wealth, for the country, their workforce and themselves, there has to be some incentive for them to do so. They aspire for better.
For some it may be hot cars - or sorry, you cant buy a new one of them after 2030, for some it may be “hot borders”. But you are happy to conduct property theft.

Why does anyone need acres of land attached to their property? Have I said they can't have a nice house? No. Have I said they can't have any land at all? No. Did I say that that land should be confiscated? No - they should be paid for it. I'm saying when we have such a need for new housing why should some people have massive amounts of land, some of which they probably never even visit, while others can't even get a house to live in?

As for 'creating wealth', I think what you mean is 'hoarding wealth'. We've seen these 'wealth creators' and their shit contracts, shit working conditions and shit pay leading a race to the bottom for workers. That's why we have so many people that are struggling just to keep their head above water while the 'wealth creators' are rolling in money. In another post you say the poor don't create wealth. How about giving the money to those further down the social scale in better pay and conditions, even company ownership for employees, and those poor people can be wealth creators because they'll have more money to spend on goods and services and help create jobs because of that. Because you know the thing about wealthy people - they already have enough money to spend if they want to, but they choose not to.

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

Blimey you to feel for Laura Trott she is totally out of her depth as soon as she can’t stay on script.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Any idea why people buy houses (especially new builds) with such tiny windows? Every room in my house has a window for its entire length. I would go crazy with so little light and view.

My current house is a 60s built house with windows the width of every bedroom. The council house I grew up had the same.

The first house I bought was a new build, the only benefit of the tiny windows was that it was nice and cool in summer. It's the polar opposite in the current one.