Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
London Mayor's Appalling Plan
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by vernonk. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm just so glad I don't live anywhere near London. Last time I visited (only 'cos step-daughter lives there) about 5 yrs. ago, I was gritting my teeth, but I enjoyed the National Portrait Gallery. I honestly can't see why anyone would want to go near the place. I've been to exhibitions, but it is prohibitively expensive, disruptive and complicated so I doubt I'll bother again. I've complained all my life about having to go there to see these things. Another 1.5 million people -from wherever - is an appalling thought. The Great Wen indeed!
jourdain2
I feel the opposite about living outside London (with the possible exception of Manchester.
The ability to go to a concert, theatre, gallery, bars and get home within 30 minutes is a big thing for me.
The fact that I can get to work in 20 minutes, rather than paying thousands to commute in is a big plus.
The fact that when we sell our home and downsize, we can pick almost anywhere in England to live with the profit is a big deal.
Also, we get to be labelled the 'metropolitan elite', which is so much better than what my family used to be called a few years ago ('borderline chavs').
I feel the opposite about living outside London (with the possible exception of Manchester.
The ability to go to a concert, theatre, gallery, bars and get home within 30 minutes is a big thing for me.
The fact that I can get to work in 20 minutes, rather than paying thousands to commute in is a big plus.
The fact that when we sell our home and downsize, we can pick almost anywhere in England to live with the profit is a big deal.
Also, we get to be labelled the 'metropolitan elite', which is so much better than what my family used to be called a few years ago ('borderline chavs').
Don't forget the cockerels crowing, Togo. Oh! by the way, geese and ducks fly past about 6a.m. and make quite a noise. Our road is 5m wide (measured it) and an average modern Combined Harvester is 3.8m wide - causes a few problems if someone has arrived to service the boiler/deliver groceries (no shop) etc.. The sheep-poo from when the flocks are moved on the road can, unfortunately, be trodden into the house (or eaten by the dog with results including vets' bills). The nearest village shop and PO is 2 miles away, the nearest mini-Tesco about 8 miles. You are very welcome, sp, but you must try to keep the village alive - that includes things like last night's (interminable - I hate it) Bingo to keep the Community Centre going. I could go on and on............ you really don't have a clue, you metropolitans, sorry. I'm afraid to say that I have heard people say how much they hate you lot and how much harm you have done to the country Me, I take people as they are, but you must join in. So be careful as to where in the country you move, Sp. :)
“Its report, which ranks the world’s 30 leading cities via a series of measures etc. etc.”
This is all well and good. The difficulty is that the people earning £100k are well fixed. They probably live in Canary Wharf and either walk or go two stops on the DLR to get to the office. Not so fortunate are their scribes earning £20-£30k. They live in the suburbs (or even further out) and have a considerable struggle to get to work on transport that is creaking at the seams.
“When that happens, more people will commute and move to London. This means that we have to ensure that the infrastructure can cope, and businesses will have to fund that through taxes.”
But it can’t. And nothing in the Mayor’s plan (or in anybody else’s plan, for that matter) suggests that it will. Countries, cities and towns cannot depend on a constantly increasing population to fuel their growth. It’s simply not sustainable. The UK in particular needs to develop a new model that relies on, preferably a reducing population but at least one at a stable level.
“Of course London can 'cope' with extra people, as can the UK.”
It obviously cannot. Anybody who visits London will tell you that in many respects it is an utter shambles and much of that shambles will not be cured by endless supplies of taxpayers’ dosh being spnt to accommodate an ever-increasing population. Huge amounts of money have been poured into the London Underground and Overground systems in the past decade and at best all it has done is maintained the status quo. Your “wish list”, allen, is very laudable. Alas, in particular with regards to “proper housing”, it is not achievable. And it has nothing to do with “prejudices”.
“How would you suggest he tries to discourage people from coming?”
Principally by not suggesting he will support the building of 25 million zillion homes over the next five years. If people had nowhere to live they’d be somewhat reluctant to come. “Hello: I'm the mayor of London: *** off please!” would be perfectly acceptable (in principle, anyway) and would do the city far more good than unsuccessfully trying to accommodate ever growing numbers. All those numbers are doing is making life for those already here a little more unpleasant.
This is all well and good. The difficulty is that the people earning £100k are well fixed. They probably live in Canary Wharf and either walk or go two stops on the DLR to get to the office. Not so fortunate are their scribes earning £20-£30k. They live in the suburbs (or even further out) and have a considerable struggle to get to work on transport that is creaking at the seams.
“When that happens, more people will commute and move to London. This means that we have to ensure that the infrastructure can cope, and businesses will have to fund that through taxes.”
But it can’t. And nothing in the Mayor’s plan (or in anybody else’s plan, for that matter) suggests that it will. Countries, cities and towns cannot depend on a constantly increasing population to fuel their growth. It’s simply not sustainable. The UK in particular needs to develop a new model that relies on, preferably a reducing population but at least one at a stable level.
“Of course London can 'cope' with extra people, as can the UK.”
It obviously cannot. Anybody who visits London will tell you that in many respects it is an utter shambles and much of that shambles will not be cured by endless supplies of taxpayers’ dosh being spnt to accommodate an ever-increasing population. Huge amounts of money have been poured into the London Underground and Overground systems in the past decade and at best all it has done is maintained the status quo. Your “wish list”, allen, is very laudable. Alas, in particular with regards to “proper housing”, it is not achievable. And it has nothing to do with “prejudices”.
“How would you suggest he tries to discourage people from coming?”
Principally by not suggesting he will support the building of 25 million zillion homes over the next five years. If people had nowhere to live they’d be somewhat reluctant to come. “Hello: I'm the mayor of London: *** off please!” would be perfectly acceptable (in principle, anyway) and would do the city far more good than unsuccessfully trying to accommodate ever growing numbers. All those numbers are doing is making life for those already here a little more unpleasant.
“if "ordinary british" people can't afford to live in london, how do "immigrant benefit scrouners" manage it?”
Easy. It doesn’t apply solely to “benefit scroungers” but to many newcomers. Go to an area like Newham or Tower Hamlets and you will find thousands upon thousands of immigrant families (or, more probably now, descendants of immigrants) living in “affordable” housing where the ridiculously low rents are met by benefits. Examine a group of Polish plumbers living in Hackney and you will find eight or ten of them living in a two roomed flat. So a flat designed for a couple has ten decent incomes. They split the rent and send the remainder of their wages “home” to their families.
If you wanted to move to Newham it will cost you £400k for a flat, £550k for a terraced house and three quarters of a mill for a semi. Add £100k to £200k to those prices for Tower Hamlets. You won’t rent a two bedroom flat in Poplar for under £1,600 a month and you won’t rent a house of any description in Hackney for under £2k. The reason for those prices is quite simple – too many people chasing too few homes. And yet those areas are packed with low-income families, many of them immigrants. And few of them could afford the prices I’ve quoted without considerable assistance from the taxpayer.
There are insufficient homes for the people already in London. Encouraging more to arrive in pursuit of “growth” is utterly irresponsible. Mr Khan would do Londoners a far bigger favour if he told those seeking to live there to go forth and multiply rather than make unachievable promises to build more and more homes.
Easy. It doesn’t apply solely to “benefit scroungers” but to many newcomers. Go to an area like Newham or Tower Hamlets and you will find thousands upon thousands of immigrant families (or, more probably now, descendants of immigrants) living in “affordable” housing where the ridiculously low rents are met by benefits. Examine a group of Polish plumbers living in Hackney and you will find eight or ten of them living in a two roomed flat. So a flat designed for a couple has ten decent incomes. They split the rent and send the remainder of their wages “home” to their families.
If you wanted to move to Newham it will cost you £400k for a flat, £550k for a terraced house and three quarters of a mill for a semi. Add £100k to £200k to those prices for Tower Hamlets. You won’t rent a two bedroom flat in Poplar for under £1,600 a month and you won’t rent a house of any description in Hackney for under £2k. The reason for those prices is quite simple – too many people chasing too few homes. And yet those areas are packed with low-income families, many of them immigrants. And few of them could afford the prices I’ve quoted without considerable assistance from the taxpayer.
There are insufficient homes for the people already in London. Encouraging more to arrive in pursuit of “growth” is utterly irresponsible. Mr Khan would do Londoners a far bigger favour if he told those seeking to live there to go forth and multiply rather than make unachievable promises to build more and more homes.
Sorry, took that as read - they do moo quite loudly.
Seriously, the roads are filthy. I pick out my walking shoes (something you need to invest in sp & cohort) when I get home and the dog is trained to stand on a towel and be cleaned.
I know we are making a bit of a joke of this and it's not really sp's fault - but metropolitans simply do not, cannot, on the whole understand the difference of their lives, experiences and expectations to that of the majority of the country. Hence the Brexit vote. Resentment of London has been building for hundreds of years as far as I - and tipping point was reached recently.
Sp and his ilk (i.e. Londoners - and I include a step-daughter) simply can't understand that a gulf exists - nevermind the depth of the abyss.
SAnyway, off to bed now - 'night. :)
Seriously, the roads are filthy. I pick out my walking shoes (something you need to invest in sp & cohort) when I get home and the dog is trained to stand on a towel and be cleaned.
I know we are making a bit of a joke of this and it's not really sp's fault - but metropolitans simply do not, cannot, on the whole understand the difference of their lives, experiences and expectations to that of the majority of the country. Hence the Brexit vote. Resentment of London has been building for hundreds of years as far as I - and tipping point was reached recently.
Sp and his ilk (i.e. Londoners - and I include a step-daughter) simply can't understand that a gulf exists - nevermind the depth of the abyss.
SAnyway, off to bed now - 'night. :)
There seems to be a misunderstanding here.
Millions of people on average salaries live in London. Literally millions.
Not people on the national average salary - because when you live in London, your salary will automatically be higher than the national average.
Yes, getting on the property ladder is more difficult than in most parts of the country, but it's the same for for young people living in Bath, Rochester, Inverness and Cleethorpes - because the average salaries there will reflect the local markets.
Millions of people on average salaries live in London. Literally millions.
Not people on the national average salary - because when you live in London, your salary will automatically be higher than the national average.
Yes, getting on the property ladder is more difficult than in most parts of the country, but it's the same for for young people living in Bath, Rochester, Inverness and Cleethorpes - because the average salaries there will reflect the local markets.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.