I hate Britain [Rant thread]

[mystic brew]

kerching!

bonus points for use of the phrase "hell in a handbasket" in any rant.
:D

[Ice]

Curry's complaint was that the beauty of his local countryside was being destroyed by the development of hideous new mansions, to which CR replied, in words to that effect, that people had the right to do anything they wanted with their own property. Sasaki's point is therefore valid, and though Curry doesn't have a great view of a mountain range which is being obliterated by large, gaudy new constructions, the principle is the same.

I disagree. I doubt where curry lives looks as beautiful as the posted mountain range.

[ajaxfetish]

Since Curry only expressed his displeasure with the situation, and didn't mention anything about forcing the people to his will, approaching the government, or whatever, I think CR's assertion that he wants to control what other people do with their land is the best candidate for a straw man in this thread.

Ajax

[Scurvy]

I disagree. I doubt where curry lives looks as beautiful as the posted mountain range.

surely thats a matter of opinion, it certainly looks alot nicer than the alternative...

[Tribesman]

Some simple quesions for curry .
How old is your house ?
How old are the houses either side and opposite?
What was originally built on what you describe as the"wasteland" ?
Are the poor "wabbits and pheasants" native animals ?
Would you be willing to have your house and your neighbours demolished to improve the view ?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Could be worse:

That's nothing. Look at what's happening around Toronto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M...rbs.id.jpg.jpg

[doc_bean]

That's nothing. Look at what's happening around Toronto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M...rbs.id.jpg.jpg

dear lord ...

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

I disagree. I doubt where curry lives looks as beautiful as the posted mountain range.

I think you're underestimating just how pretty British countryside can be.

[Tuuvi]

I disagree. I doubt where curry lives looks as beautiful as the posted mountain range.

It's a matter of opinion, I live in the middle of a desert and I think it's beautiful.

That's nothing. Look at what's happening around Toronto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M...rbs.id.jpg.jpg

Ugh. I can't believe someone would even buy a house there. There's not even any landscaping or trees, just a bunch of identical looking houses and grass.

[rory_20_uk]

If you're poor, and this is the biggest house you can afford then there's no other option.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Yea thats whats happening here. I blame the yankees and the mexicans

And I'm sure that the native Texans running the county planning boards and councils have been so difficult to convince. "Oh please force me to quintuple my tax revenues again...."

[doc_bean]

If you're poor, and this is the biggest house you can afford then there's no other option.

They seem like pretty big houses to me, unless they have over three kids I don't see anyone needing a house that size. Bigger isn't always better, at least not when it comes to housing

[CrossLOPER]

There is a similar project near were I live. Hopefully, it's the last.

[BDC]

Piss-poor planning makes it all worse. I live in an 18th century terraced house, it's small and lovely. Population density is high, but it's a nice place to live. Why new estates insist on having hordes of detached brick sheds is a mystery to me. There's no sense of community and it's souless, and uses even more room. At least things are better than in the 1950s...

[Scurvy]

estates insist on having hordes of detached brick sheds is a mystery to me. There's no sense of community and it's souless,

Milton Keynes comes to mind... I live in london on a terraced street, and really like the sense of communti yand atmosphere you get, it does have disadvantages, but imo the advantages are far greater..

[KukriKhan]

Does the UK have "Wilderness Mitigation Areas"? That's the local scheme in my neck of the woods. My city bought a place called Daly Ranch which now comprises about 20% of our 94 square km of area. The plan is to keep Daly Ranch untouched (except for hiking trials), while every vacant lot in the city proper gets developed.

If such a project isn't considered in the UK, maybe currywurry can beat the drum for it to happen. It won't save his view, of course.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Does the UK have "Wilderness Mitigation Areas"? That's the local scheme in my neck of the woods. My city bought a place called Daly Ranch which now comprises about 20% of our 94 square km of area. The plan is to keep Daly Ranch untouched (except for hiking trials), while every vacant lot in the city proper gets developed.

If such a project isn't considered in the UK, maybe currywurry can beat the drum for it to happen. It won't save his view, of course.

The UK has a number of designation for protected areas - from full National Park status, through Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty to National Nature Reserve and Site of Special Scientific Interest. In addition, they have "green belt" planning protection and a myriad of complex planning laws. Each of these have fairly draconian restrictions on development.

There's also local charitable trusts such as the Devon Wildlife Trust (one for most counties) and the National Trust which buy up land and conserve it as private landlords.

If currywurry's neighbours got planning permission for their building, it wasn't for lack of barriers. In most country areas of the UK, you will have real trouble putting up a garden shed without expensive permissions. Of course, money and power will smooth the way in some cases, but it's not at all easy even then.

[Scurvy]

i we have similar schemes to what your talking about, Green Ebelts are areas around cities where building is very restricted, and also areas of natural beauty, and areas in city that planning permission can (in theory) not be granted upon... these may well not apply to curry...



Edit --> exactly what banquo just said as i was writing...

[Crazed Rabbit]

I think he just wants to rant about people who are acting perfectly within their rights of property ownership, but are still offensive in how they are exercising their property rights.

However, I'm curious CR. If my house was directly across the street from your kid's elementary school, and I decided that by way of exercising my rights to do whatever I wanted with my property I would erect (pun intended) a 30' tall statue of Mohammed doing Jesus doggie-style in my front yard, would you still be entirely supportive of my rights as a property owner? Or would you sign the petition that would surely circulate among my neighbors demanding that I get rid of my modern art masterpiece?

I'd oppose it on basis of obscenity and public display of indecent material to children. I wouldn't oppose a sign saying 'praise Allah', but pornographic material I will oppose.

Since Curry only expressed his displeasure with the situation, and didn't mention anything about forcing the people to his will, approaching the government, or whatever, I think CR's assertion that he wants to control what other people do with their land is the best candidate for a straw man in this thread.

Ajax

I asked only a simple question, which, given the vitriol Curry expressed for the developers, is only fair, methinks.

In the US, this attitude is widespread, especially among people who move to an area and then want all further development to cease, and the country people to change their lifestyles (I'm not saying Curry's guilty of this).

My family lives on a nice bit of country land, but the city is creeping closer. It'll spoil a bit (but not most) of the view - my main concern is bliss-a-ninny city idiots calling the cops should I happen to do some target practice with a shotgun ("OMG!!11! There's a man, and he's shooting a GUN!! GAH!!!1111!one ARREST HIM!!!!").

Crazed Rabbit

[Louis VI the Fat]

I guess this illustrates one part of the problem well:



The difference between England, Belgium, the Netherlands and Ireland, France or Scotland is striking.

It is a pity, the traditional English countryside is lovely, the largest and most pleasant garden in Europe. Its demise is a cultural-historical tragedy.

It should be protected against the encroachment of loud urbanisation. Cultural landscapes are as worhty of protection as historical cityscapes or nature reserves.

[Incongruous]

Wow, that picture is scary.

[Ignoramus]

It is, I am worried that soon we'll have tiny "reseves" in large urban developments rather than small villages/towns in rolling countryside.

I also totally agree with luigi. I want to move to Britian someday; and not to a comman sprawling urban mass.

[Scurvy]

it is rather firghtening, at least people (and more important the authorities) are getting stricter on urban sprawl/rural development...

[Goofball]

I think he just wants to rant about people who are acting perfectly within their rights of property ownership, but are still offensive in how they are exercising their property rights.

However, I'm curious CR. If my house was directly across the street from your kid's elementary school, and I decided that by way of exercising my rights to do whatever I wanted with my property I would erect (pun intended) a 30' tall statue of Mohammed doing Jesus doggie-style in my front yard, would you still be entirely supportive of my rights as a property owner? Or would you sign the petition that would surely circulate among my neighbors demanding that I get rid of my modern art masterpiece?

I'd oppose it on basis of obscenity and public display of indecent material to children. I wouldn't oppose a sign saying 'praise Allah', but pornographic material I will oppose.

So (just like the rest of us, I suspect), you believe that people are free to do what they want with their private property, unless it happens to be something you find to be extremely objectionable or detrimental to others. So really, there is no black and white to the issue as your initial question implied.

For what it's worth, I suspect that I agree with you on this issue. I may or may not grumble and complain about the property use described by the OP, but I would certainly not deny that property owner his right to buid a home to his liking on his own property. However, I would certainly object to somebody putting up the statue I described if it was in my neighborhood, and would do everything I could to make him remove it.

[Abokasee]

Yea thats whats happening here. I blame the yankees and the mexicans

Thinks you'll find most people do...

Thing is though, loads of brits are gonna start going of to canada, because canada is the second biggest country in the world, and it has a very small population compared to a island great britain.

[scotchedpommes]

Ah yes, that must be the thing. You lead the way Abokasee, and someone will
follow. Quite who, well...

[Abokasee]

Its only a predication anyway, Im not saying it will im say it might... I pefer it when people don't get flamed in the backroom

[KukriKhan]

I pefer it when people don't get flamed in the backroom

So do we, mate. So do we. Please PM me to explain your sig. It confuses me.

[Whacker]

5.

Based solely on Goofball's statue suggestion. As a bonus you could register the domain jesusvsallah.com with a webcam up 24/7.

[Lorenzo_H]

Britain is quite densely populated, I really don't think there is anything we can do about it. Other people have a right to build where they own.