Jump to content
Message added by Administrator,

Due to this topic being excessively long, a new 2024 "New Shops in Dulwich / Peckham" has been opened here. Please continue the discussion there.

Recommended Posts

Why should I change the record when all the places that appeal to me are either going or gone, and replaced with shops I don't see a need in using. Functional places such as Iceland disappearing from the high street, great little family run restaurant like le moulin which by the way DID address its client base and was VERY popular but just failed to attract the new people into the area. I make UKIPs case for them do I? The new ED seems to make the case for champagne socialism in that case too, sneering urban guardian readers claiming to support the needs of the working class and then removing everything they hold dear to them at the same time.


Louisa.

The other day you were complaining about schools being built in the area though. This will happen if an area continues to thrive, and grow. I appreciate you feel sad at the loss of establishments you know well and care about, and I've lived here long enough myself to find the pace of change a bit much at times, but nowhere stays the same. Nowhere.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

.. le moulin .. was VERY popular but

> just failed to attract the new people into the

> area.


To be fair, you personally put quite a few of their new potential customers off by way of your EDF contributions 'on their behalf' back in the day.

Just to wuote the best bit from Mr Coren


Well, they are ladies and gents of a certain age, who for most of their lives lived in a London of closed boozers, awful food, stinky communal pissoirs, graffitied public buildings, incipient sexism and racism, and danger on every corner. And they are just so jealous about the great things their children?s generation are doing to this city that they want to nip progress in the bud by objecting to damn near everything. They want to turn the clocks back to a time that they somehow perceive as having been more ?real?, because it was their own miserable reality growing up, and they want it to be ours.

Baggs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What did you to piss off Giles Coren Louisa? He

> has had a right go at you in TimeOut...

>

> http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2015/01/20/giles-

> coren-they-are-determined-to-keep-london-shitty/?D

> CMP=OTC-cid=com-coren


In the past I've accused Louisa of trolling which she still does to a degree (use of phrases like 'posh tat for the blow in clapham folk' for example) but I can actually see her point.

Baggs I've just read that article. I'm going to do a bit of a Katie Hopkins twist now, the first name of the journalist sums up for me the type of person we are dealing with in ED. Classic blow-in Home Counties type who want to transform everything and save nothing. If I'm the bane of the guardianista with my "it's not like it was in my day", this chap is the polarised opposite.


The fact is rents have been hiked because of a domino effect involving estate agents and gentrifying. Some great local businesses vanishing and being replaced by a business which can afford to pay the extra. The likes of cle can't bare people like me because I'm the final obstacle in transforming this neighbourhood into a clapham-utopia. You might not use Iceland, good for you. A lot of others do and although it's a bit of a stretch to say its held dear, it is a convenient place for many people who like bargains. It's ok for me I drive, I can go elsewhere, not everyone else can. Where's their voice? Bit patronising to call Gravesend earthy too. The insinuation that only a certain type of person lives there, no different to my assumptions over the new folk of ED (most of which is tongue in cheek anyway).


Louisa.

Good response Louisa. Most of what Giles Coren writes is also tongue in cheek, and mostly just a long intro to a final line pay off - I wouldn't take it too seriously, even if it does touch a nerve.


People see value in different things. I don't see Iceland as providing bargains, although I admit it is cheap. It is a shame that local businesses are disappearing, but great to see new local businesses emerging. No-one wants a homogenised high-street on LL, no-one wants another Clapham, but that doesn't mean we should shit on anything new.

What's the point in insisting that Le Moulin was popular and there was nothing wrong with their business model, if someone else can (presumably) make the place work with 2015 rents?


I dare say that the new place won't be aimed at people like Louisa... but then, not many restaurants are these days...

Jeremy the trouble is, people of my ilk still represent a sizeable proportion of the population who would still use these establishments, and we are left high and dry as a result of rising commercial rents. And you're right, I wouldn't fancy eating a wrap whatever that is.


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy the trouble is, people of my ilk still

> represent a sizeable proportion of the population

> who would still use these establishments


Well not enough of your ilk were using it! Otherwise it wouldn't have closed. The couple of times I went in there (weekends) it was pretty empty.


> I wouldn't fancy eating a wrap whatever that is.


Now you're just being silly..

I'll spell it out; they had a rent hike, they were of a certain age and it triggered their retirement. The landlord's son was going to try something in there originally but it looks like he's leased it out.


Who knows if it'll work? I hope it does because it looks like a brave leap for a street food business.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...