daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area > Speakers' Corner

Speakers' Corner For London related discussion



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 22nd, 2012, 03:50 PM   #9321
Bezben
Registered User
 
Bezben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Norwich
Posts: 212
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
Boris equated gay marriage with dogs marrying, you've just repeated the comparison, can you really not see how offensive that is? I'm not even sure if Boris is homophobic, went to Eton after all, which is worse when you think about it because he's pandering to prejudice to make money.
Oh ok so if he went Eton then that MUST mean he's Homophobic, just like David Cameron (who said he is for gay marriage)
Bezben no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old August 22nd, 2012, 03:51 PM   #9322
spindrift
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,197
Likes (Received): 300

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bezben View Post
Oh ok so if he went Eton then that MUST mean he's Homophobic, just like David Cameron (who said he is for gay marriage)
Err, no, I implied the opposite. See, where I said I don't think he's homophobic? I think he just makes homophobic remarks to promote his column and make money, which is worse, in my opinion, like saying black people are monkeys or jews are rats or whatever. It's troubling that you're having difficulty following this, it's the classic dehumanisation of a section of society, if done by an unintelligent, disenfranchised racist it's depressing, if done by an intelligent person to make money it's outrageous.
spindrift no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2012, 04:11 PM   #9323
Octoman
Just Relax
 
Octoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,506
Likes (Received): 2811

So David Cameron is pushing hard for gay marriage (and provoking a fight with a core voter base in the church in the process) and Boris Johnson has come out and publicly supported it. This is something that the nauseatingly righteous left never achieved in their decade of power and yet Cameron and Johnson are homophobes?
__________________
You don't pull a person up by pulling another person down.
Octoman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2012, 04:21 PM   #9324
spindrift
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,197
Likes (Received): 300

Quote:
Originally Posted by Octoman View Post
yet Cameron and Johnson are homophobes?
Once again, that's not what I said.

Anyhoo, remember the Standard story about MASSIVE ELECTORAL FRAUD in LBTH, just two days before London's mayoral election?

Quote:
Isabella Freeman



Tower Hamlets
15 August 2012

On 2 May we reported allegations that Isabella Freeman, the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services) and Monitoring Officer of Tower Hamlets, had shown a lack of care about alleged voter fraud in Tower Hamlets and, on the contrary, was involved in a deliberate cover-up.

We accept that those allegations were untrue and any suggestion that Isabella Freeman had not overseen the correct procedures was wrong.

She has, in fact, taken steps so that the council has the most robust systems and processes permitted within electoral law to ensure the integrity of the electoral register and identify any malpractice.

Tower Hamlets electronically scans 100 per cent of postal votes and rejects any that have non-matching signatures. The article also incorrectly stated that Ms Freeman had blamed Muslim voters for the claims by others of voter fraud in Tower Hamlets.

We apologise to Ms Freeman.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...n-8049773.html

Fancy that, Boris's mate Sarah Sands printing damaging stories that are damaging to Ken just before the election, and the story turns out to be a load of old trousers, what a staggering coincidence.
spindrift no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:10 PM   #9325
wjfox
Futurist
 
wjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L O N D O N
Posts: 37,481
Likes (Received): 6102

Yet another inflation-busting fares hike. Shame on you Boris.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...e-8293591.html
__________________
FutureTimeline.net...
wjfox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:27 PM   #9326
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,062
Likes (Received): 1722

It was well advertised this would happen and will continue to happen for the next fifteen years and Londoners voted for Boris so have no cause to complain.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:30 PM   #9327
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,062
Likes (Received): 1722

Quote:
Originally Posted by wjfox
Yet another inflation-busting fares hike.]
If you can't afford it then work harder or move your entire life out of London, as the Tories would say.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:31 PM   #9328
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,935
Likes (Received): 1934

it is such a short-termist ideology though, hiking the point of use price to maintain current investment, very US style, but easy to sell to those who dont like to invest in the city they live off.

Why isnt the congestion charge rising by the same level? Very poor Mayoral management of a city.
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:32 PM   #9329
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,935
Likes (Received): 1934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
It was well advertised this would happen and will continue to happen for the next fifteen years and Londoners voted for Boris so have no cause to complain.
well something like 20% did
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:36 PM   #9330
wjfox
Futurist
 
wjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L O N D O N
Posts: 37,481
Likes (Received): 6102

Quote:
Originally Posted by potto View Post


Why isnt the congestion charge rising by the same level?
Because that would be socialist and/or "eco-Nazism".
__________________
FutureTimeline.net...
wjfox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:48 PM   #9331
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,062
Likes (Received): 1722

Quote:
Originally Posted by potto
Why isnt the congestion charge rising by the same level?.
Because those elderly mothers need to get to their French lessons in Mayfair?
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 03:53 PM   #9332
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,935
Likes (Received): 1934

oh yes and the farmers taking organic carrots to borough market, silly me
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 06:17 PM   #9333
.Adam
Registered User
 
.Adam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 1,855
Likes (Received): 176

Don't forget those all important trips to the V&A
.Adam no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 07:08 PM   #9334
pricemazda
Titter ye not.
 
pricemazda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lincoln, EU
Posts: 17,449
Likes (Received): 1043

Quote:
Originally Posted by Octoman View Post
So David Cameron is pushing hard for gay marriage (and provoking a fight with a core voter base in the church in the process) and Boris Johnson has come out and publicly supported it. This is something that the nauseatingly righteous left never achieved in their decade of power and yet Cameron and Johnson are homophobes?
I feel the need to tell you to shoo off. I too wish that Labour had grown a pair of balls and rammed it all through. They had a huge numbers of members willing to take it behind the Speaker's Chair and one by one waited their turn to force it right through the lobbies.

I think you'll find Labour has done far more for gay equality than the Tories.

Decriminalisation of homosexual acts 1967
Age of consent
Gays in the military
Civil Partnerships
Employment protection
Scrapping the openly homophobic Section 28

Oh and marriage equality is being pushed by the Lib Dems and used by Cameron to claim he isn't a typical nasty bastard cutting everything Tory.
__________________
In Brussels no one hears you scream
pricemazda no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 09:40 PM   #9335
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,295
Likes (Received): 288

I sometimes wonder if anyone is paying attention to the size of the deficit. The structural deficit according to the IMF was £76 billion pounds prior to economic bust. We were living on borrowed time. The reality is whoever is in power is going to have to make cuts and raise taxes.

The choice for the next decade when it comes to public transport is either to cut spending or make the users of that service pay more through higher fares. London has billions from central government to support the running of TFL. No where else gets such a sweet deal. Other regions might find it even more galling that central government spending is effectively subsidising TFL generous and various expensive travel concessions. No where has free travel for children in other areas over 60's can only use the bus and then after 9.30.

TFL would run an operating surplus if it was not for these concessions.

I'm not arguing against these concessions but they have to funded from somewhere. It's either going to be council taxes or fares. I'm sure if you put forward a candidate who promised much higher taxes for lower fares they'd sink like a stone. Not even Ken did that, he just promised to raid the capital budge to subsidise the operating one.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 10:02 PM   #9336
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,062
Likes (Received): 1722

All this means nothing, if there's no money then Boris shouldn't be splashing out on non essentials such as cable cars and faux-Routemaster buses.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 10:23 PM   #9337
Langur
Londinium langur
 
Langur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 9,089
Likes (Received): 832

The reason we have no money is because of the Labour Party's reckless spending binge. Boris reigned in Ken's wasteful spending from the moment he took office.

Meanwhile the cable car pays for itself (unlike every other form of public transport), and the Boris bus costs no more than any other model.
__________________
"Climb if you will, but remember that courage and strength are nought without prudence, and that a momentary negligence may destroy the happiness of a lifetime. Do nothing in haste; look well to each step; and from the beginning think what may be the end." Edward Whymper
Langur no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 11:06 PM   #9338
dom
Registered User
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: SE England
Posts: 1,174
Likes (Received): 7

The travel concessions are over generous. Over 60s is far too generous - a large portion of the 60+ demographic in London are arguably some of the most asset rich people in the world, sitting on properties worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

It seems perverse that students who've been clobbered with a 300% (!) inflation in their tuition fee costs (albeit no longer upfront) and 20 something Londoners who've had no benefit from lower mortgage costs that many of the working population nor benefited from the spritely jobs market from 1997-2006 are those who are paying for this overly generous free travel!

I would reclassify the free travel to over 70s or 75s.

Re our deficit, part of it is structural and part of it is from a downturn in the economic cycle. Problem is large amounts of our tax take were from City of London 'froth' derived from financial services boom and spending increased faster than this by Brown post 2003 hence we've got the mother of all deficits. City employment has reduced from 350k down to 250k-ish and will take a fair old time to recover, prob not late in the 2010s. These figures exclude growth in the insurance/reinsurance industry e.g. AON relocation etc.

The UK deficit is currently around 8-9%, down from 12% but still substantial. Not so long ago deficits of 5-6% were banana republic territory! Peeps in the UK are simply going to have to get used to being poorer, paying slightly more tax and paying more for their public services or more for things that were previously 'free.'

We'll also become relatively less rich compared to the rest of world. It all sounds a tad depressing.

We could cut a 1-2% of the deficit by getting rid of the absurd notion that the UK needs to contribute 0.7% of GDP in aid, spending of which will rise to 12 billion p/a by the end of parliament.

Also our welfare bill is massive, something like £200 billion, NHS spending over 100 billion. Welfare looks fairly easy to go for in terms of cuts as it has increased by so much over the past 12 years... people were hardly starving back in 2000 were they?!

We've got something like £120 billion as our yearly deficit so a fair old way to go. In the interim our interest payments will increase as the debt is racking up by ~120 billion a year.

I firmly believe that the government should focus on cutting the 'running costs' of government and reinvest large portions in revenue and non-revenue generating infrastructure...

Anyway, on a positive note...

UK gilt yields are ridiculously low, the UK can borrow for only 1.8% over 10 years (!!) so at least the interest rate that the UK can borrow has dropped massively since the coalition go in...

It'll be fascinating to see what happens in the next 10 years or so re all the deficits, Euro, dollar, yuan (floating or not?) and whether the BRICS live up to their hype....
__________________
skyraper.dweeb
dom no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2012, 11:52 PM   #9339
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 2,909
Likes (Received): 334

Free travel for over 60s is nothing to do with Tfl, it's paid for by local councils (For 2012/13 London boroughs are paying in total £317m)

Concessions are a factor but they're overplayed. Last time i checked the tube funded about 95% of its costs. The bus network does have a larger black hole, a 9-figure sum iirc, but it's not enough to explain the huge fare increases over the past decade (There has been a 55% increase since 2008 alone for buses). That's mostly to pay the debt Tfl have taken on for upgrade works, crossrail and so on. Imo this is a ******* stupid way to pay for infrastructure improvements and something very few other developed cities would do because it projects a poor image and narrows the spread of the costs. Most places would use a combination of ridership increases and a time-limited tax - or taxes - to spread the costs around. Tfl would also likely get lower repayment costs by replacing their different sources of funding with a long-term bond(s).

One suggestion put out was in exchange for central government grants to give the Mayor income from business rates which currently go to boroughs. It would more than cover most of the upgrade payments. More radically a new levy on business to replace Rates could be an option. Either way business is likely to prefer paying to a single authority which is more transparent and gains more media coverage compared to seeing cash disappear into the wilderness of borough budgets.

Last edited by kerouac1848; November 8th, 2012 at 12:02 AM.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2012, 05:45 AM   #9340
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,295
Likes (Received): 288

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerouac1848 View Post
Free travel for over 60s is nothing to do with Tfl, it's paid for by local councils (For 2012/13 London boroughs are paying in total £317m)

Concessions are a factor but they're overplayed. Last time i checked the tube funded about 95% of its costs. The bus network does have a larger black hole, a 9-figure sum iirc, but it's not enough to explain the huge fare increases over the past decade (There has been a 55% increase since 2008 alone for buses). That's mostly to pay the debt Tfl have taken on for upgrade works, crossrail and so on. Imo this is a ******* stupid way to pay for infrastructure improvements and something very few other developed cities would do because it projects a poor image and narrows the spread of the costs. Most places would use a combination of ridership increases and a time-limited tax - or taxes - to spread the costs around. Tfl would also likely get lower repayment costs by replacing their different sources of funding with a long-term bond(s).

One suggestion put out was in exchange for central government grants to give the Mayor income from business rates which currently go to boroughs. It would more than cover most of the upgrade payments. More radically a new levy on business to replace Rates could be an option. Either way business is likely to prefer paying to a single authority which is more transparent and gains more media coverage compared to seeing cash disappear into the wilderness of borough budgets.
I think you need to look at New York which is drowning in payments to Bonds it borrowed to pay for network upgrades that it could not raise from fare increases or local taxes. In fact lots of transit authorities around the world are burdened with lots of debt because that was a way to raise money without taxing people or increasing fares.

As for business rates, where do you think that money goes now? It's not sitting in some bank account. You'd have to take money from someone else.

Busineses's may moan about rates, but they'd not be keen about local control again. The problem is that local companies don't vote, so there is always the temptation to tax them more heavily than residential occupiers.

You'd think that local authorities would control this to prevent business fleeing, but it is always tempting to raise those taxes to avoid having to control spending elsewhere. I few extra percent this year can't hurt that much can it? Except of course it's never for just this year it's every year, until suddenly the local tax base starts to collapse as everyone who can flee does.

This was the reason central control was brought in, in the first place.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu