He works in the industry. Does that make him an expert in your eyes?Originally Posted by johnroe
Well heck, I have a job - That must make me an expert in that, right?
Jeez, he made ONE post in the thread, to say he was a game dev and you've decided that makes him Sid Meier??!!
Well like I say, I've been watching the changes on the estate by me for over twenty years. Reading the tenants of Grenfell complaints and how they are ignored, I now see what's happening, is happening across the country. Unless anyone else can give me an insight as to their local area.
They moved all the people here in the late sixties. (this term which apparently the Left are using is a misnomer and inaccurate). They didn't spend any money on the estate for fifty years. By the look of some of the properties recently condemned and evacuated, I think this was policy. The UK pays into the EU Social Fund, and that is usually used to regenerate run down areas in eastern Europe. These estates qualified for the grants, this one got £50M (it's a small estate, several towers several blocks), so you can imagine how run down it was.
There seems to be an idea that people can separate an incident from it's context. Isolate it and solve the problem. But in reality everything is interconnected. Like I say I'm waiting for some more real expert opinions from those involved on the actual cause and spread of the fire. But that seems to be obvious to most of us.
The underlying problem of letting housing stock deteriorate to such a level that mass evacuations are happening across the country, and then thinking it's okay to patch it up. Well the consequences made people around the world wonder at Britain, could this be happening in a so called first world country.
But I see a complex political intrigue here from; party political, to local and council level, and to the general politics of how people are respected. I think in many ways the people in those towers are caught in a complex political situation, like pawns in a game. I'm going to look into it, but I see many conflicts of interests within the council, the constituency, the results of which led to this situation. These Towers and estates are massively over crowded, but they are all potential voters.(I'm not overly interested in politics, I got more interested in lead up to Brexit, but British politics is a strange world of it's own. But to think that it doesn't in the general sense affect every part of our lives, would be to misunderstand it. Radical politics was a uni thing, but that just helps me understand the tactics and strategies of the Left).
With reference to>'Hmm, I found that quite funny....when I first heard it in the first year at secondary school', I was thinking that is when you develop the pun or the sarcastic remark, when you run the chess club and your class mates are built like pro wrestlers, saved my life many a time.
You mentioned me giving maybe relevant, maybe not, references. What about if you removed all the posts(hypothetically) that don't mention; cladding, housing problems, and solutions, probably halve the number of posts
Last edited by johnroe; 12-06-2018 at 11:45 PM.
great. does that mean you're going to stop making grandiose claims about stuff you don't understand in the mean time?
edit. sadly I can see from above that isn't happening. they're massively over crowded are they. stats please with source references. what are the prescribed occupancy limits and how many people more have been put in them? You can't make claims like that without bringing some facts to back it up
It's interesting that Haringay council is trying to build new homes. Momentum are against it. Maybe that's the real problem, political infighting. Thinking about it there is a negative attitude here to modernisation, not just our housing stock, but road and rail networks, airport extensions(Local and national political differences hold them up for years). Interesting to see what happens when the alternative to refurbishment is suggested. I'm confused as to what Labour want(I do have a cynical opinion though)>
'The High Court has given the go-ahead to a £2bn housing scheme in north London after a legal fight to stop it....division in the Labour-led Haringey Council...campaigning against it by Momentum'
from https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-42989312
'The council leadership’s case is blunt. Haringey has more than 9,000 households seeking council homes and more than 3,000 people in temporary accommodation, while even in the borough’s poorest areas would-be first-time buyers are faced with prices for two-bedroom flats of around £500,000. There is no point tinkering at the edges. Their radical solution envisages building more than 5,000 homes for sale or rent, 40% of them priced below market levels, plus a library, a school, a health centre and town centre offices and shops. The leadership says the plan would create 7,000 jobs and make money for the council too'. from> https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-corbyn-labour
thanks oh great revealer of newsheadlines we've all read previously. Perhaps start a new thread for "social housing policy" and stop posting that in the cladding + grenfell thread. The link between that last post and grenfell is tenuous at best. I notice you haven't answered the question regarding justification of your claims of "massive overcrowding". Are you going to? Or is this another question you will simply ignore because you know full well you can't back it up?
Wow those grapes are sour.
I never claimed to be an expert, far from it, that's your label. Another straw man for you to kick down.
The irony being that I'm not even a game designer, so definitely not an expert on game design.
Exactly, Oh and the 'straw man' cliche. Does anyone around here not think in predictable cliches. So now you have nothing to say on this thread either, great.
No, it's used to improve social cohesion and economic well-being of regions and as K&C along with most likely other places with tower blocks are neither socially divided or economically disadvantaged they wouldn't qualify, I'm guessing i don't have to explain why regions where tower blocks are situated are normally neither socially divided or economically disadvantaged.
It's more than okay IMO, it's preferable and if you don't understand why then i suggest your not seeing the bigger picture.
It's not a cliché, it's a logical fallacy used by people trying to defend a weak argument. Did you not read the list of logical fallacies wiki link i gave you?
Given you're a walking cliché factory (and you overuse that word to boot) what did you expect? Reasoned debate when you just call everyone else shills and shout from your soap box?
You reap what you sow.
Corky, you might be right, but I do know that grants are available for improving social housing blocks. Where they come from varies, but JR may well be right that he knows an estate that got a large grant. I'm sure he'll be able to provide the details to show that it came from the EU Social Fund now that you've queried this. That's right isn't it JR? You've got some details you can forward so we can make our own decisions? That is after all what you hold most important: that people are given the information to make their own decisions.
Corky34 (14-06-2018)
So our tax money goes into this fund... right.....
Again, using our tax money...
So it basically comes down to how much money the government has and how much/what they have to spend it on to keep the highest number of people happy... or at least appear to achieve something that keeps them happy.
It's the same in our private industry - We have X amount of money from our customers' bills. We have to spend some of that on fixing and maintaining our assets. We spend the least amount we can get away with, because that frees more of it up for infrastructure investment and supply and process and all the other things we have to do with it.... and then there's the shareholders who need paying, which the public always get upset about until they realise that our shareholders are the companies that provide their private pensions.
It's all about what we, the people, collectively want these people to do with our money.
That's quite a small sum, really.
You should see what a couple of old pump houses cost to refurb. Not the pumps, just the brick buildings!
Well yeah - Every voter in a constituency will be demanding that their representative represents their issues, as a matter of the highest priority. Since there are only a few people living in these tower blocks, the vast majority of issues will be around speeding cars and wheelie bins not being emptied.
And that's how Labour likes it. Disadvantaged immigrant underdogs, all desperate for someone to give them everything on benefits... and Labour will give them that. Tax the rich few (well, the Middle and Working classes who can't afford to move their money overseas) to feed the poor masses and get all their votes.
Y U no unnderstand?
Is very simple - Is about who in power. Who want power do whatever get votes. Once in power, stuff everyone and claim it all on expenses.
The be all and end all, right there... and in a Tweet-friendly nutshell!
Wait, isn't that.... stereotyping???!!!!
All the wrestlers and rugby players at my school were top level students and most of them were chess club champions. They'd laugh off your cliched old Dad-joke with a witty retort of which you'd take weeks to fathom the depths.
But you'd need to understand the design and the designer enough to implement their designs, which makes your knowledge far wider and deeper than a good many of us on here, I'd warrant... which is why we gave your aforementioned response such respect!!The irony being that I'm not even a game designer, so definitely not an expert on game design.
If it were that predictable, why didn't you apply a pre-emptive counter beforehand?
There are a couple of wordplay jokes begging to be used there, but I'd hate to be boring, predictable
and cliched...
They're also a bit rude, too, and I can hear the scratch of itchy Banhammers being soothed.....!!
I know a number of planning experts who feels the number of new developments are harming local communities, loss of local jobs and giving too much power to developers right across London. Momentum is a relatively newcomer in the scheme of things.
It saddens me to think that people believes in the Haringey's case. Perhaps fuelled by lack of detailed planning understanding over the past ten years. Happy to discuss.
one of the key things to ask with any "master plan" policy (of which a good number of the boroughs seem eager to push forward) is what happens to the people currently living there. I've seen developments get pushed through and I mean large developments of entire neighbourhoods, multiple estates, where the current residents are driven out. by that I mean compulsory purchases at say £200k. they get rid but your welcome to buy a new apartment in our new blocks. those apartments are smaller and cost at least double, some treble and up. so people are driven out. The social housing tenants don't always get a say. and there is a real prospect of being moved to me areas or even counties. If there is not a clear promise that all residents will be rehoused in similar standards of property then be very very cautious about supporting redevelopment masterplans without giving it very careful scrutiny. I agree with topgun that to much power rests with property developers. What do you make of Croydon's brick by brick scheme?
Well look at what happened to Earl's Court?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...neration-wrong
https://www.propertyweek.com/protest...094094.article
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e...reat-m7sh0btrd
Destroy an iconic exhibition centre(which should have been listed),that none of the locals wanted to happen,which also benefited the local economy,and then replaced it with housing no one locally could afford,and then they attempted to sell the site to Saudi Arabia.
The Croydon's brick by brick scheme is a new one to me since I don't follow the news in Croydon that much. Historically, London's councils were developers in their own right, particularly in the 1960 and 70s, with a large department of architects. The Treasury has prevented the councils to raise money from the financial markets to build more homes at no cost to the tax payer. The brick by brick scheme should be a success in building affordable homes but I'm not up to date with the issues in Croydon.
Allowing councils to become developers is one step to resolving the housing crisis and provide healthy competition to the market. It seems the private sector developers want to build luxury flats for the overseas investors rather than providing homes for Londoners. Even better is to allow these councils to CPO land, which have been banked by the developers, to put to immediate developments. We already know London's developers have inflated the housing market by building slowing, banking land and doubling their profit margins.
This thread blunders along doesn't it!
That information about the social fund is fact when it came to the estate by me. And did it need it after actually about 45 years of neglect. I know the woman who applied for the grant. The regenerate the whole area; new schools, health centres and shops. They build what they call a defensible zone around the blocks, and install 450 cameras(actually most are within a quarter sq mile). The council get in contractors, who often create more problems. So they refused to paint one block, too many cracks in concrete. I know a builder(concrete construction works) so I suppose he has an eye for defects. He said in his block they just filled over, the steel reinforcement that was mostly red powder, showing on the surface. And then paint over it.
I'm not sure if Kens and Chelsea Council applied for the grant, I doubt it with their wealth. I'm just pointing out that from what I've seen in person, and from what tenants are saying and the pictures inside their blocks they post, these blocks are in a bad state of repair. I know I have a thing about TB(actually it's mostly about what's happened to Iraq, with it's long history and long involvement with British oil companies+the many lies), but under Gordon Brown there was continued deregulation of the financial sector. Also the fire safety regulations on cladding was down graded at the end of his premiership. So the former led to the financial crash. That seems to be the point in recent times when the housing market stopped. Projects were halted. Ken and Chelsea council decided under that changed financial climate to down grade from a full regeneration of that estate to a refurbishment of the buildings.
What is the bigger picture?
I know all about forum cliches, I know all about people who think in cliches. I read the posts on several levels, quite frankly I feel like I've fallen into a Boy's Own annual from 1963. 'Here come the gang to insult(passive-aggressive) and attack you for thinking differently, like a bunch of cliched bullys; badas, butcher,disturbed guy,Corky and T(by name thinks he's the boss)'. Although you now again seem to be focusing on the subject, which I appreciate. I think this inquiry will have a wide breadth, this cladding and refurbishment issue is a nationwide problem. These buildings have been porous for fifty years, and now they wanted to cover up the problem.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
