Jeremy

Well although those on the left are not necessarily liberal (and vice versa)... surely in reality, any political party campaigning under the "liberal" banner are in favour of addressing social inequality to varying degrees..

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You'd be hard pressed > to even describe him as a traditional socialist > let alone anything more extreme. Yeah I was thinking the same thing. He actually comes across as fairly moderate to me.. more like a pragmatic centre leftist promoting social justice within the framework of a market economy. Yes his father was a marxist... doesn't mean he is (assuming L was confusing marx and stalin)

I agree Otta. Developers will only build affordable homes if they are forced into it... maybe this is a missed opportunity?

I think electic vehicles are ideal for London driving.. problem is that don't you really need a driveway to recharge them?

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be fair they do have a transgender ex > candidate > .... who is now urging all UKIP voters to vote > Tory tactically. I don't think Kelly Maloney is a candidate this time round.

Anyone who's reviewing this place on Tripadvisor basically went there by accident. This is not somewhere you stay for a "trip". Really the guy working there should have explained the actual nature of the business, and suggested they find somewhere more suitable.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jeremy, as I said, it is a matter of proportion, > the principle remains the same whatever the size of site. How is the principle different to any other building of homes? > I rather disagree with your inference that private > enterprise has absolutely no responsibility to the > community in which it operates. That's not what I suggested at all. There's clearly a gulf between how we'd like developers to act, and the way they actually do act when left to their own devices. We all want more affordable housing, but the government need to step up and enforce this (or build it themselves).

Not sure that can really be demonstrated. But certainly Obama's stimulus package has appeared more effective than Tory austerity.

As you say, FM... a matter of proportion, and the proportion of this development is not really comparable with the large developments you're talking of. Even compared with all the blocks of small 600sqft flats which have been built in ED recently, this seems like a drop in the ocean. Otta - yes I totally agree that we need more affordable housing, but that needs to be a government initiative. I don't think it's realistic to expect a property developer (or really any private business) to suddenly come over all altruistic.

Yeah I think what we've seen is just the natural bottoming out - and eventual gentle upswing - of the economic cycle, rather than the result of any government intervention. But y'know... there's probably no government in the world that wouldn't try to take credit.

Surely you can see the difference between a couple of flats above a shop, and the extensive development we're currently seeing in Vauxhall, etc? You assume I'm in favour of properties lying empty, owned by foreign investors... because I have called for a little perspective. Strange conclusion.

I'm not really convinced by the fuel consumption argument, when London driving is mainly stop-start anyway. But yeah... 20mph on main roads with good visibility makes no sense to me either.

But surely more housing in London equates to greater density?

Imagine thinking you'd booked into a nice little B&B, and you turn up to find it's actually grim homeless accomodation. Ouch.

Building more housing? In London? When will this madness end?

Yes, I hope your... erm.. friend sorts out the problem!

Donating to charity is a nice idea, but I think it would have to be reasonably modern to be of use to anyone (the charity Sue linked to ask for machines five years old or less). And of course, giving to charity and destroying the hard drive are mutually exclusive..

Southbank - and central London - are just a short journey away. As is Greenwich. Plenty to do if you can be bothered.

All the usual things really. Walk/jog/run in the park. Swimming/leisure centre. Lots of cafes/restaurants/bars. Adult learning and creative courses at the Thomas Calton Centre. Maybe look into some volunteering opportunities.

Help-Ma-Boab Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wouldnt you if you had just been charged ?100 for > a haircut? Nah, if my hair looked like that by the end of it, I'd consider it money well spent!

I could possibly (but probably actually not) be persuaded by the argument of staying home and watching DVDs or streamed movies instead. But as for the TV argument... sitting in your pants with a cheese sandwich watching Moonraker for the 10th time... no thanks!

And trolleys!

Argh... they're kids films innit. The "comedy" bits probably seem alright when you're 12.

Looks like they've slashed the price!

I don't really care what it's called. It was (and predominantly still is) a number of local independent businesses selling good/cheap food. But in the last couple of years that ethos has been diluted by a few businesses which seem a bit more up-market or corporate.