And that is what the loony lefties always resort to. Very childish for a teacher.
RussiansDamn those foreigners taking another country's housing stock...
And I would imagine all those pictures will be of housing built many years ago and unaffordable today for the average working personWhy 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.
Stick to having a hissy fit because the club wants you to pay a few quid more per game.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.
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
Tented city like Victorian projects and the Irish?
Haha, got an ST now, keep up sugar plumStick to having a hissy fit because the club wants you to pay a few quid more per game.
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.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.
It was a childish picture in response to your childish rant.And that is what the loony lefties always resort to. Very childish for a teacher.
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!
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!
Yep. It's greed and depriving others. If they grew up on a concrete council estate they should know better.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?
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.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.
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.Yep. It's greed and depriving others. If they grew up on a concrete council estate they should know better.
It should have definitely linked up with HS1. You should be able to get on a high speed train from Birmingham/Manchester to Paris.
Successive governments have utterly failed the country, I’m not sure rail links are the best yardstick though.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.
The general discussion on here may be, but there seems to be a lot more in Labours manifesto than housing and infrastructure.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.
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?
I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.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.
But will anyone pay it, seems so atm, need a cull of some sort?I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.
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.
Where did I say that? I said wealth creators aspire for better. Poor people aren‘t wealth creators.I hate this aspiration thing. This notion that some people are poor because they lack aspiration.
Compulsory euthenasia?But will anyone pay it, seems so atm, need a cull of some sort?
So you'd rather make no capital gain in your life than pay a bit of tax on it, sounds plausible.I suppose on the bright side, reduced housing market liquidity means higher house prices. Assuming you are a homeowner, of course.
As Martin Luther King once said of the US, we have socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor.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.
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?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.
My current house is a 60s built house with windows the width of every bedroom. The council house I grew up had the same.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?