Manctopia on BBC2

The building boom in Manchester has been so beneficial to our local economy over the past decade. Long may it continue. The more work available means there's a bigger opportunity for people to earn more money and make it out of relative poverty.

I'm also a big fan of sky-scrapers and interesting architecture. I think the Owen St towers are brilliant and a real landmark for our City now.

I do think more needs to be done for the homeless, - but I don't think it's directly linked to Manchester's building boom (the same issues are prevalent everywhere in the UK).
 
jimharri said:
Guessing what's likely to be in the "pop" programme, I'll give it a miss. All the 10cc and Hollies in the world won't make up for 30 seconds of he who must not be named.
Click to expand...
I shall fast forward when encountering Mo....er, some crap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Manchester33 said:
The building boom in Manchester has been so beneficial to our local economy over the past decade. Long may it continue. The more work available means there's a bigger opportunity for people to earn more money and make it out of relative poverty.

I'm also a big fan of sky-scrapers and interesting architecture. I think the Owen St towers are brilliant and a real landmark for our City now.

I do think more needs to be done for the homeless, - but I don't think it's directly linked to Manchester's building boom (the same issues are prevalent everywhere in the UK).
Click to expand...

Out of all the homeless people in that building only two accepted help. The rest will break in another building, get evicted. The guy outside court was off to find somewhere.

Rinse and repeat!
 
Several notable acts missed. A number of references to Trafford FC WTF have best and beckham got to do with music ? not a single mention of the blues despite having several opportunities ! The bbc Agenda continues even though this was a repeat !
 
What got me about the Salford listed building is where do these people expect £4 million to come from to restore it, that’s a lot of homes that could be built with that cash. Sometimes you have to compromise, on that map there looked a lot of derilict land they could have used to build houses instead of the park, why not try using that, but basically they didn’t want more than 10 houses, well that isn’t going to raise £4 million.
i really don’t know what the answer is but I think that developer said out of 3000 houses 130 would be affordable, maybe it should be a better % and they get less profit, they are making millions, maybe make a bit less, I know this isn’t very free capitalism but maybe it’s morally right.
Companise should be told brown sites or nothing, near us they want to build on green space yet there are brownfield sites which cost more to develop so profits go down, well tough shit, also if you are building a certain amount they should have to include the infrastructure I.e. a doctors, if you build 400 houses what a out a school, it’s ridiculous things like this can be done without infrastructure in place to meet the needs.
 
Blue Maverick said:
What got me about the Salford listed building is where do these people expect £4 million to come from to restore it, that’s a lot of homes that could be built with that cash. Sometimes you have to compromise, on that map there looked a lot of derilict land they could have used to build houses instead of the park, why not try using that, but basically they didn’t want more than 10 houses, well that isn’t going to raise £4 million.
i really don’t know what the answer is but I think that developer said out of 3000 houses 130 would be affordable, maybe it should be a better % and they get less profit, they are making millions, maybe make a bit less, I know this isn’t very free capitalism but maybe it’s morally right.
Companise should be told brown sites or nothing, near us they want to build on green space yet there are brownfield sites which cost more to develop so profits go down, well tough shit, also if you are building a certain amount they should have to include the infrastructure I.e. a doctors, if you build 400 houses what a out a school, it’s ridiculous things like this can be done without infrastructure in place to meet the needs.
Click to expand...
It's fine building a doctor's surgery but pointless if you haven't a doctor

That listed building and the 60 houses. I thought they were going to build on the brown field and the locals were misinformed!
 
dickie davies said:
It's fine building a doctor's surgery but pointless if you haven't a doctor

That listed building and the 60 houses. I thought they were going to build on the brown field and the locals were misinformed!
Click to expand...
Very true about the doctor but schools is huge as well, they wanted to build 400 houses near us on greenbelt, so where do they all go to school, the ones round here are full, even if only half had 1 child that’s 200 that’s a school on its own. The need to start thinking about the bigger picture rather than just houses it’s everything else, in the city centre I think it’s fine as they will be mostly single people but when it comes to houses that’s the problem.
 
Blue Maverick said:
What got me about the Salford listed building is where do these people expect £4 million to come from to restore it, that’s a lot of homes that could be built with that cash. Sometimes you have to compromise, on that map there looked a lot of derilict land they could have used to build houses instead of the park, why not try using that, but basically they didn’t want more than 10 houses, well that isn’t going to raise £4 million.
i really don’t know what the answer is but I think that developer said out of 3000 houses 130 would be affordable, maybe it should be a better % and they get less profit, they are making millions, maybe make a bit less, I know this isn’t very free capitalism but maybe it’s morally right.
Companise should be told brown sites or nothing, near us they want to build on green space yet there are brownfield sites which cost more to develop so profits go down, well tough shit, also if you are building a certain amount they should have to include the infrastructure I.e. a doctors, if you build 400 houses what a out a school, it’s ridiculous things like this can be done without infrastructure in place to meet the needs.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I didn’t really get that or the mayor of Salford either. the plan seemed a reasonable compromise. Building affordable homes on derelict land and in return pump some of the profit into refurbishing the mansion that was derelict. Everyone’s a winner surely.
 
dickie davies said:
It's fine building a doctor's surgery but pointless if you haven't a doctor

That listed building and the 60 houses. I thought they were going to build on the brown field and the locals were misinformed!
Click to expand...

Yes I was really confused by that as well. When that particular story arc was introduced it definitely said the idea was to build on the derelict storage places but by the time it got to the public meeting it had become 60 houses built in the middle of the park!
 
Two Gun Bob said:
I do too but the have's deserve their lot in life if they have put in the effort to enrich their lot. I begrudge them nothing.
As for the have not's try living in a country nowhere near as generous as ours. I have seen real hardship on my travels throughout the globe with poor kids in Mumbai liviving under corregated iron and having to piss and shit in a river bed overhanging a sewer pipe. We dont have such things here and our government looks after it's populace and anyone who says otherwise is deluded
Click to expand...
sorry mate, I can’t agree with you there. There are plenty countries worse than us, India (despite its wealth) being one of them. That doesn’t mean we don’t have problems in the U.K. though as that excellent young man has been highlighting very effectively;

Marcus Rashford.
“I spoke to a mother recently who, along with her two young sons, is currently living off three slices of bread a day – soaking them in hot water and adding sugar, hoping that the porridge consistency might better sustain the hunger of her one-year-old child,” he wrote. “This is the true reality of England in 2020.”
 
Saddleworth2 said:
sorry mate, I can’t agree with you there. There are plenty countries worse than us, India (despite its wealth) being one of them. That doesn’t mean we don’t have problems in the U.K. though as that excellent young man has been highlighting very effectively;

Marcus Rashford.
“I spoke to a mother recently who, along with her two young sons, is currently living off three slices of bread a day – soaking them in hot water and adding sugar, hoping that the porridge consistency might better sustain the hunger of her one-year-old child,” he wrote. “This is the true reality of England in 2020.”
Click to expand...

Yes we have problems in the UK, but they pale into insignificance compared to the poverty faced by our overseas contingent. Universal Credit is not designed to promote high end living in this country but it does stretch to cover the basics. Unless the young lady has received sanctions then there should be sufficient money in the pot to provide more food than the quoted three slices of bread and sugar. I would be interested to hear of the breakdown because most on Universal Credit will be able to feed themselves and maintain dignity until such time as they re-enter the workforce. If they cannot do this because of disability then the generosity of our government will kick in alongside their Universal Credit with LCWRA and PIP payments. You cannot begin to compare our lot in life compared with the poverty the third world has to suffer. Not just a home, food and warmth but clean water health educational and medicine in abundance. I have no doubt that life on U.C will be difficult but would say that most are not living on three slices of bread and sugar a day. Having said all that, I do empathize with people who are living in difficult circumstances but they are on the whole not as difficult as those faced by millions in our third world. Probably open a big can of worms this, but there you go. Take care mate.
 
Last edited:
Two Gun Bob said:
Yes we have problems in the UK, but they pale into insignificance compared to the poverty faced by our overseas contingent. Universal Credit is not designed to promote high end living in this country but it does stretch to cover the basics. Unless the young lady has received sanctions then there should be sufficient money in the pot to provide more food than the quoted three slices of bread and sugar. I would be interested to hear of the breakdown because most on Universal Credit will be able to feed themselves and maintain dignity until such time as they re-enter the workforce. If they cannot do this because of disability then the generosity of our government will kick in alongside their Universal Credit with LCWRA and PIP payments. You cannot begin to compare our lot in life compared with the poverty the third world has to suffer. Not just a home, food and warmth but clean water health educational and medicine in abundance. I have no doubt that life on U.C will be difficult but would say that most are not living on three slices of bread and sugar a day. Having said all that, I do empathize with people who are living in difficult circumstances but they are on the whole not as difficult as those faced by millions in our third world. Probably open a big can of worms this, but there you go. Take care mate.
Click to expand...

I agree with your points, but I think the amounts people received from UC (and other benefits) are usually far lower or less accessible than the average person considers. Having had family members who were made redundant, I've seen first hand the very quick transition from financial sound to scraping the barrel.

We haven't got issues like India and other countries. However, considering how wealthy our society is, it's a failure of monumental significance that even one child is worrying about their next meal. Especially when you consider the vast scale of wasted procurement from this government.
 
Manchester33 said:
I agree with your points, but I think the amounts people received from UC (and other benefits) are usually far lower or less accessible than the average person considers. Having had family members who were made redundant, I've seen first hand the very quick transition from financial sound to scraping the barrel.

We haven't got issues like India and other countries. However, considering how wealthy our society is, it's a failure of monumental significance that even one child is worrying about their next meal. Especially when you consider the vast scale of wasted procurement from this government.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree but it has to be a safety net as originally devised. The current rate for a couple with 2 children in the over 25's bracket would be £595 per calender month plus payment of housing costs up to a cut of point. In addition council rates are discounted by the local authorities. The additional child rates are approximately £280 for the first child and £230 for the second child. So assuming a monthly rent of £500 the figures would transcribe as approximatly £300 weekly. It's not a lot to be fair but a parent should be able to buy in more food than three slices of bread per day. It's a safety net unless you are genuinly prevented from work through disability and then extra payments become available. I feel the rates have potential for an increase and could as you say be paid for from the vast waste of procurement from this government.
 
Last edited:
Two Gun Bob said:
I tend to agree but it has to be a safety net as originally devised. The current rate for a couple with 2 children in the over 25's bracket would be £595 per calender month plus payment of housing costs up to a cut of point. In addition council rates are discounted by the local authorities. The additional child rates are approximately £280 for the first child and £230 for the second child. So assuming a monthly rent of £500 the figures would transcribe as approximatly £300 weekly. It's not a lot to be fair but a parent should be able to buy in more food than three slices of bread and sugar per day. It's a safety net unless you are genuinly prevented from work through disability and then extra payments would become available. I feel the rates have potential for an increase and could as you say be paid for from the vast waste of procurement off this government.
Click to expand...
The 5 weeks at least it takes to access this help gives many a big problem.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
The 5 weeks at least it takes to access this help gives many a big problem.
Click to expand...

It does cause a big problem which is why the government afford the claimant an interest free one year loan to help them through this period. Someone who finds gainful employment and is paid monthly will not receive this assistance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top