Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

"Young professionals" to infest flats above Iceland

He's put of order, and so are you. It shouldn't be beyond my means to afford a fucking bedsit at the age of 39 after more than a decade and a half in the workforce. And calling me as cheapskate for saying so is genuinely foul. Arrogant and foul.
 
Justin said:
He's put of order, and so are you. It shopuldn't be beyond my means to afford a fucking bedsit at the age of 39 after more than a decade and a half in the workforce. And calling me as cheapskate for saying so is genuinely foul.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to affor such a thing, I'm just remarking that they're damn expensive.
 
poster342002 said:
Well, try living on the sort of income where that's all you could afford (and even then with difficulty). What then?


If you came into the area from outside, and you're being priced out because you don't earn enough (as opposed to spending more earnings on other things), then surely you can move somewhere else- maybe back to wherever you moved here from?

That's not intended to be unsympathetic, but despite what I2S says, it's not only the rich that price locals out of local accomodation- there is as much pressure on the bottom end of the market as on the top.
 
I've always seen getting your own flat as a bit of a luxury. If you want somewhere affordable, you share or, if you're fortunate, you live with your partner. It's just the way it is. We should be able to work three day weeks and eat affordable organic food too, but it's absurd to expect that it's gonna happen.
 
I have to say I agree with poster342002 and Justin. They're not cheapskates, they are on low incomes, which ain't the same thing at all. I don't know what poster342002 does for a living, but Justin does a very socially useful job which doesn't pay a lot. Fair Play to him.
 
newbie said:
Maybe they should be aiming to encourage young people to live near where they grew up? That's not to say 'compell', but throwing all the resources at the popular cities will surely increase the tendency for everywhere else to have a significant shortage of young people.

The fact is that people move where the jobs are. And that means London and the south-east, in many cases.

The problem of young people not being able to afford housing where they grew up is in no way limited to London, either. It's a huge problem in rural areas, where property prices are being forced up by pensioners retiring to the country.
 
Justin said:
You can't have it both ways. Either it's out of order or it's not.

I was referring to Hollis saying they're (average bed-sits) are damn expensive per se.

As I suspect you really know anyway.
 
okay.. sorry if I've offended anyone with the term 'cheapskate'.. it was just throwaway terminology.

But you are being hopelessly unrealistic. And I'd have said that as much 10-15 years ago, as now.
 
fanta said:
I was referring to Hollis saying they're (average bed-sits) are damn expensive per se.

As I suspect you really know anyway.
Unfortunately that won't do, as it was not that to which I objected. As you know anyway.
 
Hollis said:
But you are being hopelessly unrealistic.
What is the meaning of the term "unrealistic"? Isn't it always used to mean "the people at the bottom are expecting too much"? Isn't an equally reasonable use of the term "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap"? Or "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap - and then tell them to be 'realistic' without their getting the hump"?
 
Ms T said:
The problem of young people not being able to afford housing where they grew up is in no way limited to London, either. It's a huge problem in rural areas, where property prices are being forced up by pensioners retiring to the country.


Dead right.. the worst disparity between local incomes and housing is in West Somerset.. I find the intial dumping of all the problems of the housing market onto immigrant "young professionals" in the earlier part of this thread as abit crass.
 
Justin said:
Unfortunately that won't do, as it was not that to which I objected. As you know anyway.

I'm afraid it will have to do dear Justin.

How are going to undo it, pray tell?

You're not - as we all know anyway!
 
Justin said:
What is the meaning of the term "unrealistic"? Isn't it always used to mean "the people at the bottom are expecting too much"? Isn't an equally reasonable use of the term "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap"? Or "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap - and then tell them to be 'realistic' without their getting the hump"?

Why do you play this absurd sophist game?

We all know that Hollis was pointing out, albeit in a clumsy way for which he has said sorry, that bedsits are damn expensive per se.
 
Justin said:
What is the meaning of the term "unrealistic"? Isn't it always used to mean "the people at the bottom are expecting too much"? Isn't an equally reasonable use of the term "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap"? Or "it's not realistic to expect people to put up with crap - and then tell them to be 'realistic' without their getting the hump"?

It's not realistic to expect rents to come down, once they're up.
 
Ms T said:
The fact is that people move where the jobs are. And that means London and the south-east, in many cases.

The problem of young people not being able to afford housing where they grew up is in no way limited to London, either. It's a huge problem in rural areas, where property prices are being forced up by pensioners retiring to the country.


I know :(

But the solution to neither of these problems is to increase the London magnet effect (build more homes, create more jobs) and turn the countryside into a conservation area for the wellheeled.
 
Justin said:
Why sophist? It's a point about how language is used to make some things seem reasonable and other things not so. Quite an important point, too, I dare say.

Your reasoning is subtle and deliberately specious.

We know Hollis has said sorry for the 'cheapskate' remark.

We know Hollis is correct in pointing out that bed-sits are too expensive.
 
fanta said:
Your reasoning is subtle and deliberately specious.
You are calling me a liar, which is not acceptable. It is also something for which you have no basis whatsoever. I have been making this point about the use of the term "realistic" for many years.

You will withdraw, please.
 
Justin said:
Why sophist? It's a point about how language is used to make some things seem reasonable and other things not so. Quite an important point, too, I dare say.


Well I suppose I am using the term "unrealistic" in the practical day-to-day "as the situation presents itself" form.

You are using it in terms of your idea of social justice.
 
Hollis said:
Well I suppose I am using the term "unrealistic" in the practical day-to-day "as the situation presents itself" form.

You are using it in terms of your idea of social justice.
Quite. The point is that the first usage is too commonly employed without thought of the second. In effect, the first usage means "put up with this and don't complain".
 
Justin said:
You are calling me a liar, which is not acceptable. It is also something for which you have no basis whatsoever. I have been making this point about the use of the term "realistic" for many years.

You will withdraw, please.

I think you're one skilled in elaborate and sometimes devious argumentation.

The above is a clear example of that. Don't be offended when that is recognised.

The 'cheapskate' insult has been withdrawn and an apology offered.

The original point stands, namely: bed-sits are expensive.
 
fanta said:
I think you're one skilled in elaborate and sometimes devious argumentation.

The above is a clear example of that. Don't be offended when that is recognised..
Hollis managed to grasp that there was a real point involed. He also had the grace to apologise. You apparently have neither the grasp nor the grace.
 
Back
Top Bottom