Panorama tonight: The Great House Price Bubble?

grizzly1911

michaels wrote: »

Off topic (even more off topic?) but didn't they do an actual lenth of shower rather than self-reported length of shower survey and find that showering actually uses more water on average than bathing?

My daughter probably used to.:eek:

For a basic shower for a reasonable amount of time I believe it is considerably less.

I did leave the plug, in an over bath shower once and it a barely covered my ankles in depth.

dktreesea

mayonnaise wrote: »

Yes, because Thames Water has been shutting down reservoirs hand over fist. (in other words: delivering shareholder value)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/drought/9236909/Thames-Water-accused-of-mismanagement-by-closing-two-dozen-reservoirs.html

We wouldn't have to tap as much into the aquifiers if there was more storage capacity.

Thanks for posting quite an interesting article. So Thames Water shuts down reservoirs because they are not fit for purpose, but doesn't replace them with reservoirs that are big enough to meet the South East's needs?

Scotland should vote for independence. There is no chance of any of her lochs being drained for housing. If the ever expanding, population wise, London (except for born and bred Londoners, who are off to warmer/wetter/less populated places,i.e. the rest of Britain) will come to the party by running out of water 10 or 20 days a month, Scotland can build a pipe line and sell water to England....

Loughton_Monkey

dktreesea wrote: »

....Scotland can build a pipe line and sell water to England....

No. Use the pipeline to send Scotch down to the South East.

As for water, I see no reason to change existing habits of stealing it from the Welsh. They make less fuss than would the Scots.

IveSeenTheLight

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

No. Use the pipeline to send Scotch down to the South East.

As for water, I see no reason to change existing habits of stealing it from the Welsh. They make less fuss than would the Scots.

If Scotland was to vote yes, how long do you think Wales would consider it's own independence?

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If Scotland was to vote yes, how long do you think Wales would consider it's own independence?

Doesn't really matter.

While considering it, they will be able to witness the colossal mistake Scotland made and will never get the chance to vote.

Loughton_Monkey

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If Scotland was to vote yes, how long do you think Wales would consider it's own independence?

Personally, I think they would think about it for about 30 seconds before rejecting it. Scotland could invite them into a "United Salmondom of Celts" or similar, and we could possibly offload NI in the same parcel.

The Farage clown, if ever elected would almost certainly get us out of Europe (phase 1) and phase 2 would be to declare UDI for England, forcing Scotland, Wales, and NI to go whatever way they choose.

I'm sure all of this will be covered fully in tonight's Panorama.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Doesn't really matter.

While considering it, they will be able to witness the colossal mistake Scotland made and will never get the chance to vote.

Why is it such a colossal mistake?

I'm interested to know why you think Scotland would not prosper as an independent country, especially when you consider many other nations which have made a success of being independent.

Factor also in the wealth that Scotland can generate against other similar nations which has gained independence.

Why are the unionists so keen to keep hold of Scotland if they are such a drain on the union?

moneyinmypocket

I have been on the streets promoting homeownership today, stayed out a bit longer to try and counter this program. There is no bubble, but now, hones for the win

dktreesea

cells wrote: »

Two big reasons

Development land is a lot cheaper because uk policy makes development land a lot more expensive (before the stupid chime in with...france is larger...well fekin Scotland is larger still on a per capita basis yet the French build 3-4x as mucj as the Scottish too)

Extra taxes are placed on uk builders which makes building less desirable



Also concreting over all farmland is a red herring. Inner London is about 0.13% of the area of the UK and houses 3.25 million. If another 0.13% of the land is dedicated to housing you could build the homes and other infrastructure for 3.25 million people (probably closer to 4 million as there is a lot of things in inner London whoch don't need to be duplicated)

So for each 4 million more people you only need dedicate about 0.13% of the land.

Too true - people don't have to take up very much land at all. Urban sprawl seems to be more a feature of countries with plenty of land, like the States and Australia, rather than Britain, where my impression is that the continuous countryside must be maintained, so villages and towns tend not to expand very much, even when there is a chronic need for housing.

dktreesea

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Doesn't really matter.

While considering it, they will be able to witness the colossal mistake Scotland made and will never get the chance to vote.

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Personally, I think they would think about it for about 30 seconds before rejecting it. Scotland could invite them into a "United Salmondom of Celts" or similar, and we could possibly offload NI in the same parcel.

The Farage clown, if ever elected would almost certainly get us out of Europe (phase 1) and phase 2 would be to declare UDI for England, forcing Scotland, Wales, and NI to go whatever way they choose.

I'm sure all of this will be covered fully in tonight's Panorama.

Ther really ought to be another side to this. Not just do the Scots/Welsh/Northern Irish want to be occupied by England (yes, I know, with Scotland it's a "union", but Westminster still call the shots for what matters (unlike in , say the Channel Islands, Gibraltar, or the Isle of Man), so has some of the hallmarks of occupation) but do the English want to be the occupiers, with all the costs that befall their taxpayers to maintain the occupation?

No one dares ask the English, because they might vote overwhelmingly for the break up of the UK into it's separate countries, maybe (like with the Channel Islands) those countries paying into Westminster's coffers towards the cost of the defence forces.