Nimby's... I hate them

homelessskilledworker

I am just watching BBC Look east as I am logging on to MSE, and yet again a news item about local residents up in arms about I think it was 25 thousand houses being built in their area.. **** them **** them **** them.

The BBC interviewed half a dozen of them, same old type, plumby frumpy conservative types that don't want their perfect little bubble to be effected, selfish people.

Because of my particular issues with property I have had lived in more than half a dozen areas in the last 5 years in the Cambs area. Every time with out fail I have witnessed some form of NIMBYism, whether it is family homes, wind farms, business premises etc etc. I have actually had to listen to indignant village scumbags down their local village hall moaning and complaining about affordable homes being built three miles from there villages, yet they have dozens of BTL properties in areas that would in the old days homed young adults just starting out. they have filled them with any immigrant or welfare scrounger they can get in there, and in some cases illegally using some of them to work their farm land.

This country has something like a 70 million population now, there is going to have to be a few changes, some of these Nimby's are just going to have to like and lump it.

What a***holes

RenovationMan

Maybe we need to restrict population growth rather than covering the countryside with concrete?

abaxas

RenovationMan wrote: »

Maybe we need to restrict population growth rather than covering the countryside with concrete?

The problem is you cant do that easily.

Maybe it more a case of, build on hard to farm land first? It may cost a little more, but at least we use the land we dont 'need' first.

CLAPTON

homelessskilledworker wrote: »

I am just watching BBC Look east as I am logging on to MSE, and yet again a news item about local residents up in arms about I think it was 25 thousand houses being built in their area.. **** them **** them **** them.

The BBC interviewed half a dozen of them, same old type, plumby frumpy conservative types that don't want their perfect little bubble to be effected, selfish people.

Because of my particular issues with property I have had lived in more than half a dozen areas in the last 5 years in the Cambs area. Every time with out fail I have witnessed some form of NIMBYism, whether it is family homes, wind farms, business premises etc etc. I have actually had to listen to indignant village scumbags down their local village hall moaning and complaining about affordable homes being built three miles from there villages, yet they have dozens of BTL properties in areas that would in the old days homed young adults just starting out. they have filled them with any immigrant or welfare scrounger they can get in there, and in some cases illegally using some of them to work their farm land.

This country has something like a 70 million population now, there is going to have to be a few changes, some of these Nimby's are just going to have to like and lump it.

What a***holes

does that mean you object to having immigrants or welfare scroungers in your back yard?

RenovationMan

abaxas wrote: »

The problem is you cant do that easily.

Maybe it more a case of, build on hard to farm land first? It may cost a little more, but at least we use the land we dont 'need' first.

There are plenty of brownfield sites around, with derelict factories and office blocks that no longer serve their purpose. Having people living in the cities instead of the countryside would also reduce the environmental and social impact of commuting.

As far as population growth is concerned, the first step would be to stop paying childrens tax credit, family tax credits and child benefit. That at least would stop the gravy train of benefit families with 10 kids. Those of us who work tend to stop breeding at between 1 and 4 kids because they're an expensive pasttime.

Having council houses with a maximum of 4 bedrooms would also help.

Davesnave

abaxas wrote: »

The problem is you cant do that easily.

Maybe it more a case of, build on hard to farm land first? It may cost a little more, but at least we use the land we dont 'need' first.

Most of that tends to be in places where it would be hard to justify building, such as wetland subject to flooding, high land miles from centres of employment etc.

It's short-sighted building on decent farm land if alternatives exist, and in many cases there will be brown field sites available, though again, not where people might choose to live without 'incentives.' e.g ex industrial areas.

abaxas

Just rip up the road to the nimby's house, take out the electricity and cut off the gas (if they have any).

The dont want changes might as well give them what they want.

ukcarper

abaxas wrote: »

The problem is you cant do that easily.

Maybe it more a case of, build on hard to farm land first? It may cost a little more, but at least we use the land we dont 'need' first.

I’m sometime surprised that no one seems to value our wildlife and are happy to propose building on sites of great natural value.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I’m sometime surprised that no one seems to value our wildlife and are happy to propose building on sites of great natural value.

If that's the argument, we should stop building altogether, as every bit of land has some natural value to some part of the eco system.

abaxas

ukcarper wrote: »

I’m sometime surprised that no one seems to value our wildlife and are happy to propose building on sites of great natural value.

You cant argue that case as almost all our countryside is farmed, hence a non natural habitat.

ukcarper

abaxas wrote: »

You cant argue that case as almost all our countryside is farmed, hence a non natural habitat.

Still quite a bit around that isn’t. What is needed is planning and a bit of joined up thinking not the mess it currently is the trouble is there are to many groups with vested interest that are able to fight their cause effectively.