Page 9 of 35 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 45 of 171

Thread: Housing Mistakes

  1. #41
    Senior Member az_gila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    I have a pet hate for flat roof and so called designer zany shaped roofs that are never going to dispose of rainwater like is needed. You're right in that the architects would never live in these, just try to make selfish personal statements and let some poor other buggers be the guinea pigs.
    Same goes for the city/urban planners or whatever they call themselves now.

    They follow the world-wide trend of forcing the population into denser housing and to be near "transportation hubs" - but if you ever meet one, ask them where they live. I have done this locally to two of our county planners and they both live in our little town 20 miles outside Tucson, and also drive into work every day...


    My English ex-roomate from the 70's now lectures in Urban Planning in Canada - does he live in one of these green urban utopias that is the now trendy design? -- No he lives on one acre on a small island in the St. lawrence Seaway with a view of Quebec...

    People like different living arrangements, but the planners seem to prefer one version that they say is "good for us". They should just plan a mix...

  2. #42
    Member Peter McGurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    'The slums remain, overcrowding continues whilst the land goes to waste. Shopkeepers and traders are overburdened with rates and taxation whilst the increasing land values that should relieve the ratepayer go to people who have not earned them.

    ‘Because here, the part of the United Kingdom with the longest tradition of radicalism, we have no difficulty in understanding the notion that land is `common wealth' – that land is a resource in common.’

    Well this may be true for Wales but it certainly isn’t a common tradition in England, much as anyone may wish it otherwise.

    In England at least there is a rather more rounded view of the issue, or rather it’s place at the heart of a state run by capital. In England’s book, wealth creates prosperity and jobs for all. Indeed the creation of wealth is fundamental to the liberal notion of prosperity for all.

    If you are anti-capitalist well fine, argue your corner but don’t hide behind social(ist) idealism as the only alternative for the common good. Widespread wealth is for the common good.

    This city especially needs wealth-creators - we should not be turning them away with a wealth tax cloaked as a Land Value Tax and we don’t. Not that it would particularly work as wealth tax in any event.

    There was a time when property owners smashed toilets to render empty properties unusable and untaxable. Why? Because there was no market for them. They were empty. No-one keeps property empty where there’s a more economically viable market for it - even ‘arry Hyams (of Centrepoint fame) even as a land-bank. A land-bank simply indicates lack of opportunity, or a lack of potential customers.

    ***

    Business rates and income tax go in part to fund infrastructure. That is, the money that builds CrossRail is pre-taxed from the rates and taxes of the better off. The beneficiaries are the people in general that that infrastructure serves (in helping create greater wealth, prosperity and employment). Is it reasonable for these wealth creators, the risk takers, be taxed again for taking that risk?

    At a real and immediate level, there’s gorgeous period properties in Everton, for example, rotting away - not for want of investment but for want of anyone who can afford to occupy them and pay builders, decorators, plumbers, electricians and shopkeepers ie., the common man to service them. We need wealth.

    ---------- Post added at 05:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:03 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ged View Post
    I have a pet hate for flat roof and so called designer zany shaped roofs that are never going to dispose of rainwater like is needed. You're right in that the architects would never live in these, just try to make selfish personal statements and let some poor other buggers be the guinea pigs.
    Well as an architect, I'm not having that am I?

    There's a bizillion buildings with flat roofs and 'zany' shapes that are all perfectly waterproof. There's many that aren't. Some buildings are built well. Others aren't. Some buildings are maintained. Others aren't. There are almost as many reason for building failure as they are building failures.

    But one thing is certain. If it's the architect's fault he will pay for it. There's not many architects can go bust at the drop of a hat to avoid litigation and many who carry the can for others involved who do.

  3. #43
    Re-member Ged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Here, there & everywhere.
    Posts
    7,197
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts

    Default

    All I know is, at a residential level, every bod with more money than sense (it seems) that appears on Grand designs with some wacky idea that looks to me like it'll fail at the first downpour does so every time.
    www.inacityliving.piczo.com/

    Updated weekly with old and new pics.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Rhoobarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Liverpool
    Age
    49
    Posts
    71
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    I don't really have anything to add other than what a great thread, really enjoyed reading it.
    I wouldn't give Satan a snowball's chance in hell against a woman's ego, man. He'd rule the Earth for a day. A week later we'd see Satan out cuttin' the lawn.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter McGurk View Post
    Well this may be true for Wales but it certainly isnít a common tradition in England, much as anyone may wish it otherwise.

    In England at least there is a rather more rounded view of the issue, or rather itís place at the heart of a state run by capital. In Englandís book, wealth creates prosperity and jobs for all. Indeed the creation of wealth is fundamental to the liberal notion of prosperity for all.
    But in England most of the wealth ends up in the hands of the top few percent.

    If you are anti-capitalist well fine, argue your corner but donít hide behind social(ist) idealism as the only alternative for the common good. Widespread wealth is for the common good.
    You are very confused. I am a free-marketeer. I never mentioned socialism, you did. The current system is systemically flawed, hence two world-wide crashed in 80 years. As Gillian Tett, the assistant editor of the Financial Times said, changing a few bad apples will not put it all right. The system we use is fundamentally flawed. It can be put right by the Single Tax, Land Value tax - no Income Tax, no Council Tax, no VAT, etc. The average man would be far better off and enterprise promoted. No expensive tax accountant bills for small businesses, no expensive to process VAT and other such nonsense enterprise restricting taxes. More time to devote to enterprise activities.

    This city especially needs wealth-creators - we should not be turning them away with a wealth tax cloaked as a Land Value Tax and we donít. Not that it would particularly work as wealth tax in any event.
    Land Value Taxes create wealth, it promotes it, especially when income tax is reduced or eliminated, as in Hong Kong. All implementations around the world have done sop. We tax a man's labour via income tax. This is retrograde, as it prevents enterprise. It makes him poorer taking a part of his income at source - income tax was a temporary tax to fund the Napoleonic wars which Tory Land owners got made permanent to push taxes from their lands onto the people. Currently wealth laying idle is not taxed. We tax the fruits of the the labours of those who need least to be taxed - the wealth creators. That is why most wealth of a society ends up in the hands of the top few percent.

    There was a time when property owners smashed toilets to render empty properties unusable and untaxable. Why? Because there was no market for them. They were empty. No-one keeps property empty where thereís a more economically viable market for it - even Ďarry Hyams (of Centrepoint fame) even as a land-bank. A land-bank simply indicates lack of opportunity, or a lack of potential customers.
    Hyman's paid little to no tax on Centre Point in London. At 3/4 finished he turned the contractors off site. He paid no taxes as the building was not being used. The price of land was spiraling, so he left it and got rich in his sleep as the land prices rose - as did those adjacent to the Jubilee Line which they never paid for. Yesterdays London Evening Standard had an article on house/land prices rising dramatically around Crossrail stations - these people never paid for CrossRail, yet they walk off with massive windfalls, we all paid for it with our taxes. In fact the Welsh MP was slightly wrong. The Jubilee Line extension costed £3.4bn while land value rose by 14bn around the line

    Property owners, speculators to be more precise, smashed their properties to render them untaxabale to take advantage of land prices rising. Back to clearing up derelict buildings....Land Value Tax prevents that as many US cities have demonstrated. Liverpool needs it badly.

    Business rates and income tax go in part to fund infrastructure.
    Land Value Tax is the perfect method of funding growth creating infrastructure. Hong Kong built a metro from the taxation of land only. Crossrail was paid for out of UK taxes. The taxes of a man in Cornwall also paid for it. Land Value Tax would mean those who benefit from the rail line would pay for it - via Land Value Tax reclaimed from the land the rail line increased in value.

    Community created economic growth soaks into the land and crystalizes as land values - that is where land values come from, this is economics. Land Value Tax merely reclaims that growth and puts it back into the cycle to fund the infrastructure that aided the creation in the first place. Currently the cycle is cut and a giant sluice takes away that wealth in the form of windfalls in the land market - socially created wealth is privatized. It needs to be 180 degrees the the way. Socially created wealth socialized and privately created wealth privatized. Get it?

    At a real and immediate level, thereís gorgeous period properties in Everton, for example, rotting away - not for want of investment but for want of anyone who can afford to occupy them and pay builders, decorators, plumbers, electricians and shopkeepers ie., the common man to service them. We need wealth.
    The owners of the Everton properties still make money on the land under the decaying bricks. If they paid tax on the value of the land the homes would be renovated or sold off to someone who could renovate. Or fall into the hands of the city who could sell it off or do something with it. Currently they pay zero tax.


    Advertisements -------
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

Page 9 of 35 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Terraced Housing In Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-05-2013, 09:15 AM
  2. Court Housing in Liverpool
    By Bob Edwards in forum Bob Edwards' Liverpool Picture Book
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2012, 11:41 AM
  3. Eldon Grove Housing
    By Kev in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 11:31 PM
  4. Insanitary Housing Images
    By Kev in forum In My Liverpool Home
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 02:37 PM
  5. cathedral &housing
    By gregs dad in forum Buildings and Structures
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-09-2007, 08:34 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68