Apparently voting for the conservatives 2 terms in a row was actually a terrible idea. Who'd have guessed. Also, whilst I'm here... Will Self should be arrested for the vicious beating he gave Chris Philp there and I believe this video should have a parental advisory because that was utterly brutal. (And completely... wonderfully delicious.)
sjoyce100 Probably. Hell, I'd have preferred the SNP to get into power than the pitiful showing of Labour and the disgusting showing of the Conservatives. Luckily Corbyn is heading labour now so, for all his faults, there's someone with a proper agenda in the House as opposed to an agenda written and paid for by corporations.
+Bushflare Now the Tories are cutting the number of MPs by 50 in their gerrymandering of constituencies. At the same time as Cameron has added over 200 lords to the upper chamber. It might be perpetual Tory rule .
+Bushflare Unluckily corbyn will not win, and we will once again be stuck with the tory's, labour and its love of mass immigration has driven millions of labour voters away, and they can't seem to take a hint.
Will Self: "Are you a property developer yourself?"' 00:05:12 Chris Philp: (long silence) "Well, before [...] I was involved in funding different construction projects"
Everything is about cost saving for this Tory government regardless of the public good. They know the price of everything but the value of nothing. It might be pragmatic in allowing private firms pay for the construction of public spaces and own it as an asset but there must be strict regulations whereby they can not ban protests or filming for any reason. This is deeply political and points to the general undermining of democracy by the Tories. Their boundary changes, their judicial reforms, their decimation of trade union protest rights. Appalling.
+Olisa Maduegbuna then buy it back and do what you want on it. their property, their rules. you have the right to film in your property, not on your neighbours property.
***** It was the government's property and therefore the people's property in the first place. Then it was flogged off. When private firms take public assets there must be strict rules and it can not be considered like any random private property, In these deals for example.government has right to compulsory purchase back. That is not a real property right for the firms. All I'm saying is rather than a long-term last resort of compulsory purchase there should also be strict rules for buyers that filming, protests etc. should be allowed on the land. Everything should be allowed except vandalization or damage.
Olisa Maduegbuna then what's the point in buying it? so you just buy it so that can you maintain it but have no say in how it's run? businessmen usually like to stay away from politics and don't want their park used for political purposes. remember zuccotti park? the park is named after the company chairman. he doesn't want his park used for political movement, any movement. listen the reason why they were sold off was because the government didn't have enough money to develop them, now private money is coming in, developing public areas pouring billions of dollars doing work that the government should be doing. at least give them some credit for that. it's the government who sold it in the first place. and just look at the pictures of those places while they were controlled by government. do your research instead of just hating rich people. for some people bill gates can never be a good guy because he has lots of money. anyway the positives outweigh the negatives.
***** No I don't hate rich people. They can pay to develop it and what not. The profit for them is having a stable asset that is guaranteed. It is like buying a treasury bill- the American tax payer backs it. It is a method for the rich to avoid bank charges etc.or for Middle Eastern countries to invest their oil profits through sovereign wealth funds. I see it as an asset for them but there should be regulations on what they can do while owning the asset. The regulations should be clearly in the contract before they buy it. I am trying to strike a balance here between freedom of the public and the rights of private individuals. If there are not regulations on privatized spaces you could set some dangerous precedents as this practice expands more and more.
Olisa Maduegbuna as i said before, if you don't want private money buying public assets, don't sell it. and if you go to any of POPS, you can do absolutely everything other than protest and take videos/interview without their permission. why don't you go to any of those places and see for yourself what you can and can't do. there's absolutely no difference for 99.9% of people. the 0.1% troublemakers aren't welcome anywhere anyway.
Can somebody please explain to me why big foreign corporations should want to purchase large tracts of former public prime city space if they have no control over what could be built on it ?
+sjoyce100 Yup. Like a store of cash since govt compulsory purchases can be guaranteed. It's almost like a government bond. Tories are creating new national debt.
+Olisa Maduegbuna it's not, the government CAN purchase it if they want to but they don't have to. it's more about bragging rights than anything else. they're paying for maintenance, they don't make any money, it's not your typical investment. it can be compared more with philanthropy. same reason why people donate hundred million dollars to university so that they can have a building named after them.
+meandmymouth Hopefully... Like the NHS, if the next government re-nationalises things at "market price" it'll be nearly impossible. But TTIP is designed to stop anyone even trying- the companies will be able to sue said later government for potential loss of earning.
Aren't you a property developer? Uhhh... ummm... I was last year... You still are though? Uhhh... ummm... Maybe... Fucking brilliant. I wish more tory MP's got called out on their self interest. He looked like a landed fish.
The conservative guy is in the right here. We profit by selling the land, we profit by not having to upkeep it, and we still get to walk all over it. The other guy would have us lose billions of pounds just so we can, what, film in certain places ?
Channel Four isn;t serving the Public Interest, but preaching fascist beliefs rather than objective, rational and credible information, you-sad-corporate/fascist-propagandists.
MrCherubhair1 Propaganda is a form of communication, often biased or misleading in nature aimed at influencing and altering the attitude of a population toward some cause, position or political agenda in an effort to form a consensus to a standard set of belief patterns. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
To me it looks like good old fashioned gentrification to raise property value for the surrounding offices/flats so people want to invest there.
Apparently voting for the conservatives 2 terms in a row was actually a terrible idea. Who'd have guessed.
Also, whilst I'm here... Will Self should be arrested for the vicious beating he gave Chris Philp there and I believe this video should have a parental advisory because that was utterly brutal.
(And completely... wonderfully delicious.)
+Bushflare Voting Labour would've been even worse. But the Tories are cunts.
sjoyce100 Probably. Hell, I'd have preferred the SNP to get into power than the pitiful showing of Labour and the disgusting showing of the Conservatives.
Luckily Corbyn is heading labour now so, for all his faults, there's someone with a proper agenda in the House as opposed to an agenda written and paid for by corporations.
+Bushflare Now the Tories are cutting the number of MPs by 50 in their gerrymandering of constituencies. At the same time as Cameron has added over 200 lords to the upper chamber. It might be perpetual Tory rule .
+Bushflare Unluckily corbyn will not win, and we will once again be stuck with the tory's, labour and its love of mass immigration has driven millions of labour voters away, and they can't seem to take a hint.
5 years later look where we are now
Liverpool One is all private now (owned by Grosvenor estate), but it has really helped the city improve. However, it makes me feel uncomfortable!
Losing public space means losing community.
the square in front of st pauls was brownfield?
Will Self: "Are you a property developer yourself?"' 00:05:12
Chris Philp: (long silence) "Well, before [...] I was involved in funding different construction projects"
Everything is about cost saving for this Tory government regardless of the public good. They know the price of everything but the value of nothing. It might be pragmatic in allowing private firms pay for the construction of public spaces and own it as an asset but there must be strict regulations whereby they can not ban protests or filming for any reason. This is deeply political and points to the general undermining of democracy by the Tories. Their boundary changes, their judicial reforms, their decimation of trade union protest rights. Appalling.
+Olisa Maduegbuna then buy it back and do what you want on it. their property, their rules. you have the right to film in your property, not on your neighbours property.
***** It was the government's property and therefore the people's property in the first place. Then it was flogged off. When private firms take public assets there must be strict rules and it can not be considered like any random private property, In these deals for example.government has right to compulsory purchase back. That is not a real property right for the firms. All I'm saying is rather than a long-term last resort of compulsory purchase there should also be strict rules for buyers that filming, protests etc. should be allowed on the land. Everything should be allowed except vandalization or damage.
Olisa Maduegbuna then what's the point in buying it? so you just buy it so that can you maintain it but have no say in how it's run? businessmen usually like to stay away from politics and don't want their park used for political purposes. remember zuccotti park? the park is named after the company chairman. he doesn't want his park used for political movement, any movement. listen the reason why they were sold off was because the government didn't have enough money to develop them, now private money is coming in, developing public areas pouring billions of dollars doing work that the government should be doing. at least give them some credit for that. it's the government who sold it in the first place. and just look at the pictures of those places while they were controlled by government. do your research instead of just hating rich people. for some people bill gates can never be a good guy because he has lots of money. anyway the positives outweigh the negatives.
***** No I don't hate rich people. They can pay to develop it and what not. The profit for them is having a stable asset that is guaranteed. It is like buying a treasury bill- the American tax payer backs it. It is a method for the rich to avoid bank charges etc.or for Middle Eastern countries to invest their oil profits through sovereign wealth funds. I see it as an asset for them but there should be regulations on what they can do while owning the asset. The regulations should be clearly in the contract before they buy it. I am trying to strike a balance here between freedom of the public and the rights of private individuals. If there are not regulations on privatized spaces you could set some dangerous precedents as this practice expands more and more.
Olisa Maduegbuna as i said before, if you don't want private money buying public assets, don't sell it. and if you go to any of POPS, you can do absolutely everything other than protest and take videos/interview without their permission. why don't you go to any of those places and see for yourself what you can and can't do. there's absolutely no difference for 99.9% of people. the 0.1% troublemakers aren't welcome anywhere anyway.
Reminds me of Back to the Future 2 where everything is fucked up and owned by Biff
you have the right to demonstrate but no where to do it
Can somebody please explain to me why big foreign corporations should want to purchase large tracts of former public prime city space if they have no control over what could be built on it ?
+meandmymouth it represents a safe investment.
+sjoyce100 Yup. Like a store of cash since govt compulsory purchases can be guaranteed. It's almost like a government bond. Tories are creating new national debt.
+Olisa Maduegbuna it's not, the government CAN purchase it if they want to but they don't have to. it's more about bragging rights than anything else. they're paying for maintenance, they don't make any money, it's not your typical investment. it can be compared more with philanthropy. same reason why people donate hundred million dollars to university so that they can have a building named after them.
+nepali hercules But can later government compulsory purchases not be below the price the corporation originally paid resulting in a loss for them ?
+meandmymouth
Hopefully... Like the NHS, if the next government re-nationalises things at "market price" it'll be nearly impossible. But TTIP is designed to stop anyone even trying- the companies will be able to sue said later government for potential loss of earning.
It's a lovely space. You can eat sandwiches there.
The stale, lifeless taste of freedom in corporate utopia.
Let's sell off the Grand Canyon next!
It's "Public Lands". We own it. We can sell it.
Aren't you a property developer?
Uhhh... ummm... I was last year...
You still are though?
Uhhh... ummm... Maybe...
Fucking brilliant. I wish more tory MP's got called out on their self interest. He looked like a landed fish.
The conservative guy is in the right here. We profit by selling the land, we profit by not having to upkeep it, and we still get to walk all over it. The other guy would have us lose billions of pounds just so we can, what, film in certain places ?
Nice one Will !
Why is Chris Philp constantly on TV all of a sudden?
Well done on calling our Tory property shark friend out, right on camera.
You can sit there and eat your sandwiches.
I'm not really agree 100% "will self" perspectives about socialogy and reason for disagreement on private public spaces!
ah luv the uk ant uk luvs me
Channel Four isn;t serving the Public Interest, but preaching fascist beliefs rather than objective, rational and credible information, you-sad-corporate/fascist-propagandists.
MrCherubhair1
Propaganda is a form of communication, often biased or misleading in nature aimed at influencing and altering the attitude of a population toward some cause, position or political agenda in an effort to form a consensus to a standard set of belief patterns.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda