‘Poor doors’ are just a natural consequence of putting social housing where it doesn’t belong. Making social housing more luxurious isn’t solving any real problems. Tax the luxury developments more and spend that money on social housing in a reasonable location instead.
It can be argued that luxury homes don't belong in a densely populated city, and they should be moved to a "reasonable location". Low density makes the city a worse place for everyone.
Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
51–60 of 72 posts
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The architecture of their home is telling them that they are inferior every time they enter their homes. Well, they don't belong there. They are there because the government has mandated it. It's unnatural, and this is the result.
I see. So, who is going to make your coffee, sweep your streets, drive your buses, collect your trash, teach your children, and cook your meals, once all of the lower wage earners have been excluded from the area? You?
Socialism - reliably fails every time.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#53There's a real misunderstanding in this thread of what this "social housing" actually is. This is not council housing. This is affordable housing. It's owned by a landlord and then privately rented. The people in it tend not to be the unemployed, because they can't afford it. The rental prices tend to be set higher than the Local Housing Allowance, and so Housing Benefit (or the housing element of Universal Credit) w…
However forcing “affordable” housing in “rich” areas is the wrong way to deal with it IMO.
Let the market deal with it. These people can switch careers (or not consider such a career in the first place) to something that’s better paid. When the talent pool dries up the salaries for these careers will rise naturally because there’s gonna be no other way to get police officers, nurses, etc.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#54What if the "poor people" become a nuisance? Such articles always frame things in a rosy light, as if the evil rich planners are the only reason people are divided. What if the poor people are alcoholics, drug dealers, petty thieves, antisocial people? Why should other people be forced to deal with them?
do only poor people mess up? why should i have to put up with that rich neighbors son who thinks he can do whatever he wants because his parents keep bailing him out? this attitude is clearly discrimination and unfair.
Do you have children? Did you get a cheap flat in the poor part of town? Many families pay higher rents, so that their kids have save streets and playgrounds to play in.
In my middle class neighborhood, I am not aware if a rich kid causing trouble. What trouble do you have in mind? Loud parties? Is the rich kid going to steal my kid's iPhones? I am talking about violence, pollution, syringes on playgrounds, stuff like that.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#55‘Poor doors’ are just a natural consequence of putting social housing where it doesn’t belong. Making social housing more luxurious isn’t solving any real problems. Tax the luxury developments more and spend that money on social housing in a reasonable location instead.
Where does social housing belong then? Where rich people can't see it? Society benefits greatly from mixed areas - race, class, etc.
And councils have finite budgets so every £ extra spent paying someone's rent is a £ that isn't spent on supporting and caring for the elderly and the disabled and the mentally ill / funding schools / running buses / maintaining cycle paths and parks and play areas and libraries.
Unfortunately there are a number of disadvantages to this:
1. Making affordable housing a condition of planning permission doesn't cost the council anything, whereas houses built in other councils' areas would have to be paid for.
2. The vast majority of social housing users have jobs and loved ones. If someone has to buy a car to get to work, or can no longer get babysitting from their parents while they work, or moves somewhere with lower wages, such a move makes them poorer.
3. Many of the jobs these people are doing need doing anyway, so they'll have to be replaced - possibly with someone with a longer/more expensive commute. Some people have a certain cynicism about capitalism, and are sceptical as to whether these jobs' wages will rise at all, let alone rise enough to cover a more expensive commute.
4. Regeneration often involves demolishing homes poor people live in. As some minorities are richer than others, regeneration that sends poor people out of a city is also regeneration that sends certain minorities out of the city. Some people feel this has shades of "ethnic cleansing".
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#56So I know in London any new housing development has to allocate part of the properties for shared ownership or social housing, To be able to get planning approval. Seems very reasonable because property developers make a lot of money selling luxury homes. And also in a lot of places the development is made after demolishing "unsightly" high density social housing. Often with far fewer homes than there were there orig…
> The architecture of their home is telling them that they are inferior every time they enter their homes. Rather is it telling them that the tax payers are paying for their home. The idea being that (for those without a permanent disability) social housing should not be something you stay in forever, rather only until you have the means to find a place to stay on your own. Is it necessarily bad that people are remin…
The people that lived there before gets their community destroyed through compulsory purchase orders.
And then they get out into a place that is is designed to show them their inferior place in the world.
Their community has been taken over by the rich moving in and they need to leave because they didn't have the ability to buy when prices were low.
All this is reminding them is that they are peasants and if they don't want to be treated like that then they should leave the city because they don't have the means to live there.
To be honest your attitude just makes it seem moral for the poor to attack the rich. Like burn down the luxury development that stole your home and put a label around your neck shouting that you're poor.
And I'm saying that in the living room of my privately owned flat in a housing development that's currently constructing social housing that will have a poor door, at least according to the plans.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Creating ghettoes by segregating and concentrating people into certain zones or buildings based on class, national origin, or perceived race is bad public policy that has many unwanted bad outcomes.
> based on class, national origin, or perceived race Well it is you who are mixing “race” into this. I am just reading “people from whatever background that currently do not have the means to get a roof over their head”.
In reality immigrants separated into ghettos of affordable housing because they are generally poorer and don't have the means to get a roof over their head.
The very idea of these mixed housing developments is to not have these style of ghettos.
London is a very different city to your typical American city in that there's a lot of mixing of poor and rich areas.
Of course when there's a block of homes just for poor people in a rich area, since they're less likely to vote, the elected officials don't give a damn about them.
Like this:
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
do only poor people mess up? why should i have to put up with that rich neighbors son who thinks he can do whatever he wants because his parents keep bailing him out? this attitude is clearly discrimination and unfair.
The poor peole (on welfare) are mor likely to be trouble - they are on welfare for a reason.. Rich people pay good money to be shielded from trouble. Do you have children? Did you get a cheap flat in the poor part of town? Many families pay higher rents, so that their kids have save streets and playgrounds to play in. In my middle class neighborhood, I am not aware if a rich kid causing trouble. What trouble do you h…
as someone who's family has lived on welfare too, i find that notion insulting.
the reason for people being on welfare most often has nothing to do with people getting in trouble. loosing a job, divorce, natural disasters, illness in the family. there are many reasons someone could need welfare.
i urge you to really meet these people and understand their situation instead of dismissing them like that.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The architecture of their home is telling them that they are inferior every time they enter their homes. Rather is it telling them that the tax payers are paying for their home. The idea being that (for those without a permanent disability) social housing should not be something you stay in forever, rather only until you have the means to find a place to stay on your own. Is it necessarily bad that people are remin…
Why must “social housing” be temporary? I have no problem with people living the entire lives in social housing if they do wish, as it’s a good way of distributing the wealth of countries, and the state can provide secure, affordable housing much better than capricious profit-driven landlords.
Now imagine you were taking money from one person and going to the grocery store to buy for a second person. How much do you take? What do you buy? It adds a layer of ignorance to something straightforward.
It's true enough that sometimes that's necessary - what if the person you're buying food for will starve to death if you don't act? - but to my mind it's something you do because you have to and something you stop doing when you can.
Re: Ministers pledge to end 'poor doors' in new build housing
#60There's a real misunderstanding in this thread of what this "social housing" actually is. This is not council housing. This is affordable housing. It's owned by a landlord and then privately rented. The people in it tend not to be the unemployed, because they can't afford it. The rental prices tend to be set higher than the Local Housing Allowance, and so Housing Benefit (or the housing element of Universal Credit) w…
The real problem is that these people aren’t paid enough to afford “rich” housing which is a problem considering these people make society work. However forcing “affordable” housing in “rich” areas is the wrong way to deal with it IMO. Let the market deal with it. These people can switch careers (or not consider such a career in the first place) to something that’s better paid. When the talent pool dries up the salar…
You comments about people switching careers are incoherent.