« No-one makes you shop at Wal-Mart: a review | Main | Against equality of opportunity »

October 23, 2006

Comments

Maynard Handley

"
We need to change the planning rules so that we get fewer small flats, and more homes with gardens. Fewer homes designed for young single people, and more designed for life.
"

WTF? Are single young people not alive?

Will Williams

1. Don't underestimate Government's powers of good and evil through zoning (town and country planning). Communities and extended families were broken up by misplaced altruism, with a profit for many decision-makers, to clear the slums, build homes in the sky and put up housing estates, 1945 - 1975.

2. Your point 2 shows you and I might agree on what I just said. But the contrast between low-density living and environmentalism is hooey, I believe. It's not environmen-talism, if you scratch the surface and the messages of lobby groups like the Council for the Protection of Rural England. It's about letting the better-off and those with the good fortune of already owning a home, have a nice view from the bedroom, and a pleasant walk to the village pub. They get this free of charge because of the way land use was nationalised, in the UK, by governments of both parties, after 1945. This is good for the developers and their land banks and gives a feel-good factor to the electorate who happen to be home owners whose property values have out performed the stock market for decades.

If the market wants South East England to be the engine room of Britain’s wealth, those chosing to live there ought to accept a shortage of views while they accumulate their wealth, or move out. Or work from home, only doing a long distance commute when necessary.

3. More government meddling in the way companies want to run their affairs is, in principle, not good. But might there be a case for some pressure to make up for the inertia all organisations have? Retirement at 65, if you lived that long (early and mid 20th century), or did not end up unemployed and off the market or, to mask the statistics, on incapacity benefit (final two decades of the 20th century), may have been effective when work involved more manual work than now, and when demography gave a greater supply of new entrants than retirees, but that has changed.

Another way, perhaps, might be to give an inducement - the longer you wait to claim your state pension, the more you will get?

dave heasman

"the longer you wait to claim your state pension, the more you will get?"

This already happens, surely?

And what could be more agreeable as one slouches towards dotage than to give up the suburban house with precipitous garden and take up residence in a high-density Georgian terrace in the centre of a town, or indeed Town? I'd be up for it. (Haven't asked the Mrs, though..)


Belstaff chaquetas

Don't know what is wrong what is rite but i know that every one has there own point of view and same goes to this one

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad