Is wanting a large family so bad?

hngrymummy

LilacLouisa wrote: »

The welfare of animals is very important to me.

Which is great. However, intesive farming does not automatically = poor animal walfare. Intensive farming can be done in an environmentally sensitive manner. It is about making the best use of the resources available. It was done successfully in the Bronze Age, and in the Medieval period. It would be irresponsible of us not to make the best use of what is available to us.

hngrymummy

Mupette wrote: »

Are we talking about the old courage site in the center, that's tiny, and tiny flats for sale when complete.

such a shame lots of building around Bristol are just allowed to rot, the owners find that to make safe to expensive, not allowed to knock down due to some buildings being listed.

Which i know is a problem throughout the land.

Exactly. Hit the problem on the head.

The site might be tiny, but if you multiply that by the number of such sites in the country, then that's a whole lot of potential housing.

The flats in some of the developments are not priced appropriately. The iPads built in Swansea (a bathroom and a bedroom/kitchen/living room) are not really suitable for the people that can afford them, and the people that would find them suitable can't afford them. They need to be priced basically at 3.5 to 4x young single person's salary in that area, which would be about half their current price. That would get young people into the housing market, and help keep things moving. Instead, developers get greedy for profit.

If more sites were opened up to the developers, then Council's wouldn't have to try and squeeze their quota into such a small area and have such small properties. But by opening up new sites, there is the risk of NIMBYs complaining and suddenly deciding that the scruffy disused golf course is actually where they walk their dogs every day, so shouldn't be built on (seen it happen)

There is a huge problem with empty buildings in this country, which needs addressing. Empty houses can be reported to your local Council's empty housing officer and brought back into use. And local people can always campaign to have a building brought back into use. Every time that succeeds, it stops a new development taking place. Far better to campaign to have a building reused, than to campaign against a development. If you campaign against a development, it will just go elsewhere. If you campaign for a building to be brought back into use, then the development location is controlled by the local people.

Listed buildings are interesting, and somewhat complicated. They are perceived as being millstones around the owner's neck. That is not always the case, and they can be a real delight to live or work in. Some owners are lazy, and do not maintain the building, which leads to decay and extra expense, which the owner does not want, so they keep leaving it (often in the hope that it will fall down). It will then end up on the buildings at risk register, which is supposed to ensure that the buildings are repaired. (Grants may be available to some important buildings). Should that occur, then they can be brought back into use and remain as one of the country's architectural treasures. Again, local people can campaign to have buildings brought back into use.

There is often a lot of construction carried out on flood plains. If the water management is carried out correctly, then there should be no risk to the houses.

Sorry for the long answer Muppette, it's not something that's easily condensed. It's all based on personal experience of working within the construction/development/conservation industry, and not all cases are the same.

mumm

I have 5 children, (no.5 was in all honesty a surprise - a beautiful one though!) and we don't struggle generally as we're reasonably well off with a smallish mortgage.
However I will be honest and say that my health in the last year, due to the strain of having no.5 and having no extended family support, has really suffered. From a purely money perspective, being ill costs money. I have spent a lot of extra money on household help, childcare, and alternative medicine, due to being really unwell. And as you can imagine, all the kids have suffered to some extent.
That's not to say that having no.5 will make you ill, but for me the strain of managing everything finished me off health wise. Now that no.4 is starting nursery I am hoping things will get easier.

Until no.5 is 11, I cannot see him/her adding much to your budget, other than childcare costs if you work. My baby is the 4th boy, I never have to buy him anything (clothes, toys, nursery equipment) as we already have it all. I have brought nappies but then I get them reasonably cheap in bulk. he had home made baby food and moved on quickly to eating mashed up adult food. Plus the older ones love caring for him, and watching him grow, so I am fortunate it that sense, and it does them good too to care for a younger sibling.
Also, when you're cooking for 6 anyway, it costs little more to feed a small seventh one, nor does it really cost any more in utlities. Once in secondary, extra expenses do add up - expensive uniform, trips, lunches, wanting fancy phones - you know the story! Then if they go to university you will have to contribute a lot. But think of all the grandchildren you will get to babysit in the future...