Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Indeed. I'm reading a very good book about Barcelona and the 1992 games at the moment. Didn't do much for the poor of that city!
Map of where to build the Ken vs Boris Berlin Wall
- Thread starter HackneyE9
- Start date
Indeed. I'm reading a very good book about Barcelona and the 1992 games at the moment. Didn't do much for the poor of that city!
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
The Olympics IS going tobea disaster of huge proportions for London. KL did take a hit for his backing of it.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
central gov putting in £8-10 billion of new infrastructure that Londoner's aren't paying for is not too serious a disaster. Nor is the private money that will come into play because of that basic level investment.
And, fwiw, it isn't the role of regeneration to take people out of their financial, educational, opportunity poverty traps. Regenration is part of a solution, albeit an essential part.
And, fwiw, it isn't the role of regeneration to take people out of their financial, educational, opportunity poverty traps. Regenration is part of a solution, albeit an essential part.
newbie
undisambiguated
zenie
>^^<
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
But your hero backs it too?
Aha but Boris wasn't the one who actually agreed to this disaster in the first place. Livingsgone has to use an analogy, farted in the lift and left Londoners to continue smelling even though he has gone.
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
Because he can't. Same as Livingstone. There was nothing he could do, so he figured he might as well toe the party line and keep people onside for doing useful stuff. And Boris isn't going to change anything, not one little thing, because he doesn't have the power to. So he's not going to kick up a fuss and alienate big businesses.
toblerone3
Grrrrr
That is so negative. Based on a gloomy depressive character. Not on facts.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
Yeah it's great: people in that area are being priced out and finding it harder to afford to rent there now prices are going through the roof.
Well done Ken for helping to get the olympics foisted on London without asking them if they wanted them. What a great hero of the poor.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Newham BC:Yeah it's great: people in that area are being priced out and finding it harder to afford to rent there now prices are going through the roof.
Well done Ken for helping to get the olympics foisted on London without asking them if they wanted them. What a great hero of the poor.
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
I've lived and worked both in and at arms length
for Newham and if Sir Robin Wales or one of his PR cronies told me it was raining outside I'd fucking have to go and check. I take whatever comes out of official Newham in the same way as I view Fox News, as a form of jaw droppingly arse-squirmingly nauseous entertainment.
The key point here is 'affordable'. I've definitely not impressed with what is being classed and offered as affordable. They are normally the worst places on the throwaway parts of developments that laughingly passes as 'planning gain'. The cost is definitely NOT affordable for many Londoners. It goes without saying that these really should have been local authority houses.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Hang on, building land with planning permission inside the Norf Circ is . . . "throwaway" land? Can I have a bit?
What are you talking about new "local authority" housing for - it's the wrong decade/century for that, isn't it?
In fact, I can't find anything in your post that takes the issue further. You don't like this feller, blah, blah, you think this, you think that, blah.
Give us something to talk about, supported facts would be nice?
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
I meant the parts of development sites that are the least attractive.
I think that it is the only way to go. All that the great property owning democracy (and I have no problem with people wanting to buy property) has done is increase everyones personal indebtedness not through choice as in a fairer system where there is equal status and political emphasis on municipal/private rented and privately owned housing. I don't think that its the wrong century to be talking about a more balanced housing policy that learns from the mistakes in the public and private housing sectors.
As I said I've worked in Newham and have had close contact with quite a few people who have been in the governance of the borough and I've seen the mismanagement, waste, dumping on thier workers, venality, corruption and general incompetance that rules there. There is stuff I can't go into on here but will gladly do so over a pint.
OK are these properties affordable on minimum wage or if you are on a tenner an hour which a lot of people are and I think I have to say no.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
There's "affordable" to someone's definition and then there's "affordable" to those who are living there now.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
London Calling - are you able to answer this?
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Of course I'm not, the homes aren't priced.
btw, Is the only definition I'm allowed of 'affordable housing' one that's convenient to Mr Jockey?
btw, Is the only definition I'm allowed of 'affordable housing' one that's convenient to Mr Jockey?
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
No I think that the definition of affordable housing is 'could the majority of Londoners on an average wage afford them' and I don't really think they are in that case.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
We're all grateful for your definition, I'm sure.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
double post thanks to repeatedly being logged out by cookied-to-death software.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
So basically, you've got way of gauranteeing the current poor won't simply be priced out of their own area after all?
The definition you're allowed of "afordable housing" is one that's convenient to those on bugger-all incomes. Otherwise the term "affordable" is meaningless.
I mean, a thirty-bedroom mansion is "affordable" - to a multi-millionaire.
ExtraRefined
Better than you at everything you love
It doesn't even begin to compensate for the trillions of pounds that have been taxed in London and then wasted bribing feckless Northerners & Scots. I'm still in favour of complete independence for London.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
It was an eminently sensible one. What definaition of affordable do you go by?
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
It's a politically astute misnomer of a phrase. As someone pointed out, everything is 'affordable' to someone. Lets also have affordable yachts and affordable biscuits.
It's subsidised housing for the lower paid - the maths of how that works in a free market at all is very interesting in itself (someone pays for it somewhere), but where you pitch your thresholds must depend on on local circs and who you're aiming at (and it's not enough to say 'the low paid').
It's subsidised housing for the lower paid - the maths of how that works in a free market at all is very interesting in itself (someone pays for it somewhere), but where you pitch your thresholds must depend on on local circs and who you're aiming at (and it's not enough to say 'the low paid').
ska invita
back on the other side
I agree with that sentiment - the dome was slated mainly by the right wing press from the off. It was above all an attempt to knock new labour, and was branded a white elephant before building began.
In fact the building is an amazing bit of architecture, it was sold at a profit (I gather), it picked up the prize for the best stadium venue in EUrope (havent been myself but supposedly the sound is impressive), and it has played a part in regenerating a peninsula of waste land.
THat said there are many ways to regenerate an area, and this big project approach is far from the best - but the occasional big project in a big city is okay with me, so long as it is countered by more small-scale, community sensitive development - an example of which I cant really think of in London. Will be interesting to see waht happens with the Thames Gateway development...
Indeed. IIRR, the Dome only cost £35m, the £950m price-tag came from cleaning up the toxic waste on the peninsula - which was paid for by the taxpayer then handed over to property developers.
Is a shame, since the original Ralph Erskne designed millennium village is probably the best modern development in London.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Why post this nonsense? - I mean really, why bother? Why bother wasting your time writing it and the time of everyone who reads it?
Can you remind us who the original polluter was, and what their ownership status was at the relevant time?
You try and have a sensible discussion . . .
Similar threads
