# London



## Parrot of Doom (Dec 18, 2004)

Shithole. Discuss.


----------



## KevtoTTy (Aug 24, 2004)

Geazer......

Have you something to say????

:x :x :x :wink:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

ahem.... I think you mean "geezer". :wink:


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

Parrot of Doom said:


> Shithole. Discuss.


HUGE shithole actually!! :wink:

If you are rich in London, it is a great place to be. If you work there for living then it is bad.

I was there today. Very annoying that my office is in West London and I am coming from the East. I need to go 15 tube stops and one change.


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

That's not fair..... it is after all the centre of the universe.....

(Universe = England)


----------



## r1 (Oct 31, 2002)

Parrot of Doom said:


> Shithole. Discuss.


Manchester. Disgust (ing).


----------



## steveh (Jan 14, 2004)

All cities have their good and bad points. There are parts of London that are the pits but there are parts of most cities like that. I've only been to one part of Manchester (I think it was Salford) which was a bit of a shithole but I'm not going to judge the whole city by one small part of it. :roll:


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Yep - hate the place and avoid it as much as possible.


----------



## Parrot of Doom (Dec 18, 2004)

r1 said:


> Manchester. Disgust (ing).


Maybe 10 years ago. Its now a quite beautiful city, with some pretty shitty outskirts. Thankfully I live outside the shitty outskirts in a very pretty area 

Personally I reckon the IRA bomb was the best thing ever to happen to Manchester.


----------



## Joegod (Aug 25, 2004)

Parrot of Doom said:


> r1 said:
> 
> 
> > Manchester. Disgust (ing).
> ...


Agree - the city is great sinse the redevelopment after the bomb.

It's a cracking place for a night out!


----------



## imster (Apr 26, 2003)

both manchester and london suck...


----------



## kingcutter (Aug 1, 2003)

Parrot of Doom said:


> r1 said:
> 
> 
> > Manchester. Disgust (ing).
> ...


Agree what pretty part do you live in then.


----------



## stgeorgex997 (Feb 25, 2004)

I think London is a great city, very picturesque with some fantastic architecture, it's the people who tend to spoil it.

If you walk around and ignore the people (especially at night) you can see why so many tourists come to see it.

The outskirts are shocking esp considering the prices you pay to live their, case in point the Isle of Dogs, sky high prices with some great views, but even in your multi-million pound house/flat you are only ever a few hundred feet from scum...


----------



## Parrot of Doom (Dec 18, 2004)

kingcutter said:


> Agree what pretty part do you live in then.


I live in Flixton, which is just SW of Urmston. Its a nice area, was once a village but its now a bit overgrown (urbanisation). Beyond my house theres plenty of fields and farms, its a bit of an overspill area for Sale/Altrincham, since the house prices are much fairer here. Lots of tree lined roads and generally good quality housing.


----------



## kingcutter (Aug 1, 2003)

Parrot of Doom said:


> kingcutter said:
> 
> 
> > Agree what pretty part do you live in then.
> ...


Know it well i used to live in Hale village.


----------



## dj c225 (Nov 3, 2004)

I also think London is great.

Firstly i live in central London and have a central London office.

I think the night life is pretty good, lots of shops and lots of god looking chicks.

The only cons are buses, taxis and busy roads and large road bumps.


----------



## ARTT (Dec 27, 2004)

London, nice place for a visit now and again. Glad I don't work there, too many people for my liking.

You should try Scotland, limited traffic, great coutryside, great people with a very laid back attitude.

Only downside is the sh*t weather and the roads around town are full of potholes.

However, all places have there good and bad points. You pays your money you takes your choice.

All this and I'm originally from Bristol.


----------



## zipper (Sep 23, 2003)

London - a shithole, Err No!

It does have its shit-spots, granted and it has its fair share dickheads but no where on earth is void of this simple formula and considering its size this ratio (i.e. shit-spots and dickheads) are bound to affect a lot of folk either living or visiting in town.

I think London is one of the greatest cities in the world and I feel v.honoured to live here. Yes it has its problems and is incredibly expensive, neither of which I can do much about but I accept that and enjoy all the positive aspects it has to offer, which in my opinion, far out weigh the negative.

Iâ€™m not saying London is the most fantastic place to live and I can appreciate it doesnâ€™t suite a lot of people but Iâ€™m cherishing my time in it now as I doubt it will always be my home.

Oh, Iâ€™m not rich either, but I donâ€™t think you have to be. There are a life times worth of places to eat, drink, shop, chill, be entertained, educated or even live that donâ€™t require vast sums of money, just a little local know-how or good contacts, both of which you soon find once you spend a decent amount of time here.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Parrot of Doom said:


> Shithole. Discuss.


Would you kindly elaborate more as to why you think London is a shithole?


----------



## dj c225 (Nov 3, 2004)

The main thing is cost of houses, rent, council tax, insurance etc, all these seem to be greater than other parts of the counrty.

Also apparently we earn more down south :roll:


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Poole & Bournemouth, beautiful, that's why everybody wants to live here!

:x :x :x

keep out we're full!


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

dj c225 said:


> The main thing is cost of houses, rent, council tax, insurance etc, all these seem to be greater than other parts of the counrty.
> 
> Also apparently we earn more down south :roll:


Work in London but live outside. Best of both worlds - money, buzz, etc of the City and cheaper prices, quieter outside the M25. :wink:


----------



## moley (May 14, 2002)

zipper said:


> London - a shithole, Err No!
> 
> It does have its shit-spots, granted and it has its fair share dickheads but no where on earth is void of this simple formula and considering its size this ratio (i.e. shit-spots and dickheads) are bound to affect a lot of folk either living or visiting in town.
> 
> ...


Good response - my thoughts as well (although I don't live in London - but would love to).

I think you just have to pick and choose the best places. It's got everything you'd want.

Moley


----------



## dj c225 (Nov 3, 2004)

scoTTy - the problem is, i've grown up in London, made lots of mates, live in a nice area and like the busy fast life, if i were to move away, ie Herts, life would totally change, friends etcccc..

Im staying put for the moment!


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Living within 30 miles or so of London I've always been in and out of it a lot. I lived there for 3 of my 4 years whilst doing a degree and have now worked there for about 14 years.

When I moved out (after my studies) I did really miss the ease of transport, having everything on your doorstep etc etc but now much prefer being able to get away although it's great for nights out etc.

I guess at the end of the day there's not a right or wrong. It comes down to whether you're a 'towny' or not.


----------



## dj c225 (Nov 3, 2004)

Agree, maybe when i get older i will get tired of town life...
Still a long time


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

If I didn't feel old before..... :roll:

:wink:


----------



## Grauditt (Nov 29, 2004)

ARTT said:


> You should try Scotland great people with a very laid back attitude.


Cheers ARTT, I'll take that as a compliment, even if I did have to modify it slightly 

Bin lookin for something to cheer me up all day


----------



## Parrot of Doom (Dec 18, 2004)

^Abi^ said:



> Parrot of Doom said:
> 
> 
> > Shithole. Discuss.
> ...


Well, I'll give it a try  Please note there are many other shitholes in the country, but London gets my vote as the biggest, purely because

1) crap roads - full of potholes, painted lines everywhere
2) ignorant drivers - no courtesy
3) never-ending urban sprawl - does my head in
4) Londoner's think its the centre of the world - which it isn't
5) Expensive - I'd rather live near the country than make up excuses about the nightlife
6) Smelly - no, seriously it really does stink
7) People - quite definitely on average more rude than northerners
8) House prices - a joke, I live in a palace compared to what I'd get down there
9) Centralised - if its good for London, it must be good for the country - bollocks

/rant

I'll give it one plus point though - architecture. Beautiful buildings (houses of parliament are utterly beautiful inside and out), just a shame that its all in London


----------



## silkman (Jul 29, 2004)

dj c225 said:


> I think the night life is pretty good, lots of shops and lots of god looking chicks.
> 
> The only cons are buses, taxis and busy roads and large road bumps.


I second that. I would have added to the cons the congestion charge but last time I was in London it seems to do the trick - also it doesn't matter if you plan to use your car at nights which I do.


----------



## jampott (Sep 6, 2003)

Having never lived close to London before, its all pretty new to me. I'm still coming to terms with the reality that I can either drive or catch the train, and within 20 mins be in the centre of London (yet am outside the M25 by about 7 miles...) :lol:

Going to London used to be an adventure, but I guess it'll soon be part of reality for me, as I get used to it. Sunday I drove down into Camden, parked up, and had a mooch around the market (see my new thread in the flame room) and it was just so easy to do - but having said that, I'd hate to have to contend with the traffic, the noise, the grime and the people every day.

London is like nowhere else in the UK - and is almost as "foreign" to me as some of the tourist destinations I've visited abroad. People in London act, talk and generally behave differently to elsewhere...


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

Parrot of Doom said:


> Well, I'll give it a try  Please note there are many other shitholes in the country, but London gets my vote as the biggest, purely because
> 
> 1) crap roads - full of potholes, painted lines everywhere
> 2) ignorant drivers - no courtesy
> ...


I think your post says more about your preconceptions of London than reality.

[1] agreed - roads are pretty poor.
[2] Courtesy - I've found the same all over the country. I wouldn't say London is worse although it is busier.
[3] So just because it's big, it's a shit hole? By the way it does end.
[4] That's not my experience either living or working here.
[5] yep expensive but I not so sure it is in real terms i.e. the cost in percentage terms of the salaries.
[6] Some bits do... as in any town. (Have you been to Paris in summer!!!)
[7] I have to concede that I find more rude people down here than up there.
[8] House prices - As I understand it Machester prices have also flown up. At least in London/South East the salaries make the houses affordable. As I posted earlier this gives me the choice to move anywhere in the country. If you're in a "cheap" mansion, then it could be a struggle to move down here (not that you'd want to of course!)
[9] I think you're mixing government up with London. I don't think you can blame the people or London for what the MPs (which come from all parts) choose to do.

You seem to have missed out the tropical weather we get in the south and how grim it is up north! :roll: :wink:


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Ken Livingstone!!!

Case proven beyond reasonable doubt!

:lol:


----------



## scoTTy (May 6, 2002)

OK I concede!


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I also work in london (brentford) but live up north.

Iâ€™m not sure its the best of both world, yes it has good night life. But so do many large cities.

The problem with london is too many people too many cars too little space/land. The goverment seems to want to crowd as many people as possible into this area. Spends Billions of our pounds doing up area's around london but ignores the rest of the country.

How the hell the new Wembley got the go ahead still amazes me. Donâ€™t even think about getting me started on millennium projects like the dome.

As for the Olympics yet again another excuse to redevelop a run down area in London.

A good point however would be even though it has lots of speed cameras dotted about, you can never go fast enough to get caught.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I think it really does have its plusses, but for me (at my 'lifestage') I no longer wanted to live in it, but I like working in it.

So now I commute.

There are few more truly cosmopolitan cities in the world than London, but you're right the house prices are truly unreal.

That said, there are other pockets around the country where the business centres push up up the prices of the surrounding areas. And there are also places where, to me, the house prices seem ridiculous in comparison to what you can get when you're near London.

For the price we paid for our four bedroom townhouse in High Wycombe, for example, we would be Â£150,000 short of a similar house in Barnstaple, North Devon.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

I did my five years in London - would have got less for murdering someone (out on parole after good behaviour). Thank goodness so many people love the place, leaves the rest of _this_ country relatively unpopulated / unspoiled.


----------



## Steve_Mc (May 6, 2002)

> Spends Billions of our pounds doing up area's around london but ignores the rest of the country.
> 
> How the hell the new Wembley got the go ahead still amazes me. Donâ€™t even think about getting me started on millennium projects like the dome.
> 
> As for the Olympics yet again another excuse to redevelop a run down area in London.


I'll address this in conjunction with one of Parrot of Doom's original points:



> 4) Londoner's think its the centre of the world - which it isn't


It certainly isn't the centre of the world, but it is the centre of the UK, like it or not. It's the seat of government, home to the Royal Family, houses all the national museums, the national opera, ballet and theatres, not to mention sports grounds. London has a GDP equivalent to entire countries (e.g. Switzerland or Argentina), and in fact has the highest GDP per capita in the EU.

As for having money wantonly spent on it, did you know that London contributes between Â£9â€"Â£15 billion more in taxes to central government than it receives in spending. So if we want a nice shiny new football stadium, then we'll have it as we paid for it :wink:

On the whole though, it's what you make it. If you're not a townie it's easy to see the faults and decide it's not for you. If you have to live here, or if you choose to, then you ignore the bad points and enjoy the good points, same as anywhere. The bad things about London (such as congestion, high cost of living) are undeniably worse than the rest of the UK, but the good points (arts, restaurants, sports, job prospects, salaries) are clearly much better too.

I love it. For now


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

London only contributes more in terms of tax because it spends more on investment and attracting business, which in turn makes it busier and more crowded.

Hence if things such as Wembley was built else where other regions would contribute more.

The point I made re Wembley was Birmingham was a lot better option both financially and in terms of a venue for sport.


----------



## Steve_Mc (May 6, 2002)

Toshiba said:


> London only contributes more in terms of tax because it spends more on investment and attracting business, which in turn makes it busier and more crowded.
> 
> Hence if things such as Wembley was built else where other regions would contribute more.
> 
> The point I made re Wembley was Birmingham was a lot better option both financially and in terms of a venue for sport.


I can't make head nor tail of your economics, but London does indeed spend more on investment which is why is has such a large economy and why it is the centre of the UK economically. I think you agree this point? The higher tax take is not just related to the higher population though. Higher house prices mean Londoners pay more stamp duty (plus VAT on estate agents' fees!) for instance. Higher salaries also mean more people are caught in the top tax bracket. It's fair to say the tax paid *per capita* in London will be the highest in the UK.

This is what generates London's "tax export", and I have no problem with it. Just as the tax system as a whole restributes wealth from the rich to the poor it also disperses money from the affluent areas to the less-affluent. It creates the stable social structure that Western civilisation is based on. It does however IMHO entitle London to claim the lion's share of any extra non-core spending the government deems appropriate.

As for building the new stadium in Birmingham, I can't think of any country with its flagship sports stadium outside its capital city, can you?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

My point was a simple one. I work in London and the roads are simply too congested, too many people going into a small area (even though Londonâ€™s a big city, its small in terms of land mass to the whole of the UK).

Donâ€™t even think about saying use public transport because most of the time it simply doesnâ€™t work. The tube is full to bursting.

Moving jobs and investment away from London would reduce the traffic, reduce the number of people. This would make the whole country better as a whole. It could also make london a better place too. The M4 may even move once in a while!

As for flagship sports stadium just because no one else does it is irrelivant. If we lived by the principle â€˜no one else does itâ€™ nothing would ever change. Im sure at one point no one ever used a car â€" so why invent it!


----------



## GHuTTch (Dec 4, 2003)

On topic or off-topic??? Flagship sport stadiums not in national capitals. How about Australia (Sydney), USA (New York / LA), Germany (Munich), Netherlands (Amsterdam), Canada (Toronto), Brazil (Rio), etc.

And London would be a great city if there were about 1million less people living in it.


----------



## Steve_Mc (May 6, 2002)

GHuTTch said:


> On topic or off-topic??? Flagship sport stadiums not in national capitals. How about Australia (Sydney), USA (New York / LA), Germany (Munich), Netherlands (Amsterdam), Canada (Toronto), Brazil (Rio), etc.
> 
> And London would be a great city if there were about 1million less people living in it.


I knew some smartarse would come out with Sydney, NY, A/dam etc. all of which reside in countries where a token capital city was chosen not to offend the civic pride of other cities. Nit-picker :wink: All flagship stadiums are in the _real_ capital cities :wink:



> As for flagship sports stadium just because no one else does it is irrelivant. If we lived by the principle â€˜no one else does itâ€™ nothing would every change. Im sure at one point no one ever used a car â€" so why invent it!


I don't think I said we should do because everyone else does. There is a reason everyone else does this - it's the capital, it's the place people want to visit, it's somewhere that has the infrastructure to cope with large numbers of people. Sure Birmingham makes sense geographically, but let's say we held something like Euro 96 again. Are tens of thousands of overseas football fans going to want to visit / stay / spend loads of money in Birmingham? Plus it's the national team, it should play in capital.

If you find London too congested for you, then why don't you "do one"


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I think your displaying the very London centric views other people have commented on.


----------



## LORD-OF-THE-RINGS (Jan 6, 2005)

England or United Kingdom should be renamed to LONDON, it is THE place to be. It is the centre of the world and universe as we know it. Manchester? aint heard of it.


----------



## Harv (May 12, 2004)

LORD-OF-THE-RINGS Posted: Sat Jan 15, 2005 1:43 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

England or United Kingdom should be renamed to LONDON, it is THE place to be. It is the centre of the world and universe as we know it. Manchester? aint heard of it.

:lol: :lol: [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Couldn't have said it better myself :wink:


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Typical ignorant london view.


----------

