I know, but Litterbug doesn't believe it. If you'd bought that flat and hung on to it until now, you'd be sat on a fortune and railing against punitive IHT charges on your estate down the line.
UK General Election 2015 | Conservatives win with an overall majority
- Thread starter langster
- Start date
40K was just too much money (all a long time ago -the developer even offered me a top-up mortgage at near cost). I wouldn't rail against IHT - my kids have had massive advantages compared to our upbringings they don't really need more bunce.
My sister lived in W14, never understood the hype around that postcode. Some nice parts yes, but some really trashy spots as well. Yet the premium for living there was nothing short of scandalous, irrespective of whether or not she was in a nice area or not.
I never liked west London much compared to north, south or east.
Yeah, I'll be moving down soon myself. Hopefully have a flat lined up in South Woodford, which is a pretty nice spot all things considered.
Not a huge fan of South London though, the place just depresses me, no idea why...
Some bits are ruff (tho not compared to Rotherham).
Lol that is true. In fairness, the South of London is probably the area of the city I've seen the least of.
North London is by far the nicest, just a shame it's so damn expensive and prohibitively far in terms of the commute to any potential jobs I may find...
North London is by far the nicest, just a shame it's so damn expensive and prohibitively far in terms of the commute to any potential jobs I may find...
I haven't got kids and aint got much time to squeeze them out with the missus tbh so that tax isn't my biggest worry in life tbh. If we do though, I'd like to think my kids wouldn't be saddled with the debts I was by going to uni. That has screwed a generation pension-wise and that will come back to haunt the state down the line given increased longevity.
I lived north (Finsbury Park, Islington -briefly), east (Limehouse), south (Streatham Common- briefly) and west in Hammersmith and now Brook Green. Quite liked Finsbury Park, but the missus hated it. We both much prefer the west though. South least favourite. Arguably more leafy in parts, but feck me, some of the commutes. Years ago, I ended up back at a Danish lass's house in Surbiton and was working in Farringdon at the time- the trip up there the next morning was horrific. Doing that twice daily is not an option for me.
You can say that about anywhere in London tbf, but South Woodford is one of those places you only ever go to if you fall asleep on the central line pissed.
What jobs you looking for that you can't find centrally?
I dunno, from recollection it wasn't too bad and was reasonably priced (for London). Near some nice areas too, like Wanstead, Snaresbrook, Woodford etc. And I would still have my little dose of home (from a South Asian background) with areas like Leyton, Walthamstow being equally close too. Good for the commute as well with the North Circular being on the doorstep.
Surbiton's the bleedin' sticks. I can leave the house and be in Farringdon in 25 mins.
I'm disabled mate, so I have to use the car more often than not. Will look into using public transport once I move in, and ideally it would be perfect cos of the subsidised rate I would get.
Looking to get into the International Development sector, very competitive but it's something that I feel best suits my skills and qualities. Bloody difficult to get that first job though!
My experience of east London is limited tbh. As you know, the further out you live, the more you get in terms of property and garden, which is an obvious plus. I like living in zone 2, but the missus quite fancies a more rural existence.
We occasionally go up to Southall, eg the missus will get some sweets and cakes for Diwali. It's a bit raw but some great food there- hate Green Street though. Nasty place. I got my wedding suit there back in the day and was dodging old men firing snot out of their nostrils onto the pavement. My wife hates that area too thank god.
I've no idea what condition you have, but appreciate the tube is shite for the disabled. My own minor experience of that was watching my mother suffer late last year as she struggled up the stairs just before her knee replacement, cos such a tiny number of stations actually have lifts.I'm disabled mate, so I have to use the car more often than not. Will look into using public transport once I move in, and ideally it would be perfect cos of the subsidised rate I would get.
Looking to get into the International Development sector, very competitive but it's something that I feel best suits my skills and qualities. Bloody difficult to get that first job though!
Good luck in the job hunt and yep, I can imagine that is competitive. @Marcosdeto has done some sterling overseas charity work- dunno if he has any pointers.
That night was such an anti-climax too. Really fit blond Dane and seemed very keen in the pub and on the way home. By the time we eventually got back to her flat she changed her mind and we ended up sleeping next to each other in our clothes. I guess she sobered up, but it turns out she had a boyfriend. Never has such a sweet moment turned so sour.
It was like unexpectedly getting within touching distance of winning the league for the first time in over 20 years but slipping at the last moment and seeing your dreams fade. Might as well have had Demba Ba rattling her back end off in the bed next to me.
Haha Green Street: Bengalis and their paan
. Matchday whenever West Ham play is an absolute nightmare in and around that area. Whenever I've been to Southall, I've found it a bit meh. Actually, Southern food in general is a bit crap when compared to the North, well in regards to Asian food anyways. Manchester, Bradford, even the relatively overrated Birmingham are better quality and better value for money.
One thing I can't knock the South for though, is the variety on offer there. London is probably the only place where I can have something different every day of the week if I had the cash.
I'm physically disabled so I can't walk at all without the use of crutches &/or a wheelchair, so yeah I agree, it's very much pot luck in regards to the tube stations, and disabled access generally. The renovation is badly needed. In an ideal world, I'd move to somewhere like Sheffield, Manchester, or Leeds, but the jobs in the sector are almost non-existent there, or if they are available, experience is crucial, and all the entry-level positions are in yep, you guessed it: London...
I'm ok for mobility in the sense that I'm quite independent, but for those who aren't in the same position, it must be a painfully difficult existence. That's part of my motivation to work in the Int'l Development sector tbh, cos I have seen and experienced it firsthand and the disabled are really an afterthought in all societies, even though they constitute the largest minority in the world (10% of the world's population as per UN figures)
I'm disabled mate, so I have to use the car more often than not. Will look into using public transport once I move in, and ideally it would be perfect cos of the subsidised rate I would get.
Looking to get into the International Development sector, very competitive but it's something that I feel best suits my skills and qualities. Bloody difficult to get that first job though!
That's a shame about your health because my mum would rent you a room in Leytonstone. That's just the right distance from the City and not a bad place to live at all.
Would she rent me a room?
I actually live in Leytonstone already, like the area and have to move out of my house in September.
Last edited:
South Woodford's lovely mate, good choice. Make sure you check out the Ho-Ho when you move in - London's best Chinese outside of Chinatown. Only downsides are your reliance on the central line, and that your mp's a cnut.
And aagreed on your second para, it's just not the same.
I know there's plenty of cockney reds but this is ridiculous.
I'd vote for her.
South of the river yeah generally not great but South West London is lovely. By South West I do of course mean SW postcodes not south of the river
I lived in SW6 for many years before moving outside London and it was pretty much great. All the posh birds you could handle as well as loads and loads of Americans
Lived for a couple of years in St John's Wood as well and that was good too. Generally West London I would say is decent with good and bad bits while east has become quite bad in the past 10 years or so.
What are you defining "good" and "bad" as here? West is better for families, but I find it far less interesting.
It's genuinely the only campaign leaflet I've bothered to read. Though tbf, nationalising all banks and big businesses to build one million new council homes in the area seems a bit of a stretch..
It's genuinely the only campaign leaflet I've bothered to read. Though tbf, nationalising all banks and big businesses to build one million new council homes in the area seems a bit of a stretch..
London is the greatest city in the world, and the SW is the greatest part of this great city.
I don't think any of London is good for families to be honest that's why I moved outside to be honest.
Generally the areas, people, amenities, nightlife etc. I used to live on an estate in East London 17-18 years ago and it was pretty decent but now its so depressing, dirty and quite frankly it doesn't give you the feeling that you're safe and not just the estate, but the whole area.
I've actually found London to be safer than other places I've lived in the UK, such as outside Hull and in Durham, tbh. Never had any real hassle even when I lived at or have visited more down at heel places. Except Shadwell, which has a simmering air of menace.
Yeah I don't really buy the "London is dangerous/unsuitable for families" argument. It's no more proportionally unsafe than any other major city, it's just much, much bigger. Manchester used to have proportionally higher gun crime, Liverpool, Birmingham and Leeds more homicides per populace, and Brighton was just named the most dangerous place for students, so it's all relative. Obviously if you live on a council estate in a dodgy area it's going to be less suitable than if you live in a leafy enclave, but I can't imagine how you could live in Notting Hill, Chelsea, Wimbledon, Richmond, Chiswick, Barnes, Westminster, Kensington, Fulham etc and think it was unsuitable.
Plus I grew up in London. Done me no 'arm guv. Apart from my natural sense of superiority and rampant coke habit, of course.
Plus I grew up in London. Done me no 'arm guv. Apart from my natural sense of superiority and rampant coke habit, of course.
Last edited:
Dunno, it's all about your own experiences. I've been mugged three times in East London. I love it here, but there are plenty of areas you'd feel uncomfortable going late at night. Zones 1/2 are safe as anything these days but go a bit further out and I can see why people feel 'London' is dirty and rough.
I've read Peter Ackroyd's novels, therefore I'm too scared to live in London.
That's a general City problem rather than a specific London one though. When you grow up in a city you learn to find it less intimidating than if you move from a more sedate environment. Everyone gets a bit edgy walking around places they don't know at night. Plus there are significant cultural benefits.
I understand why parents would feel naturally safer raising young kids away from it, obviously, but it seems like a fear of the unlikely extremes for me. Which isn't to say London can't be dangerous and grotty, just that it's unsuitability for families is hugely overstated. If it wasn't it'd be amazing that any of us made it to adulthood.
The majority of people I know whose parents moved out of the city to raise them, moved straight back as soon as they could anyway.
Last edited:
Not about safety as much as suitability. I can't see myself with kids in London on the public transport etc. Not many areas for kids to play generally and then there's also house affordability to think of.
I have a 3 bed detached new build with decent garden space, garage and massive undevelopable green space in front of my house at the moment and if I was to sell that and buy in London that would most likely translate to some kind of a large 1 bed or very small 2 bed.
As for safety, apart from terrorists we have not had any other problem in Aylesbury, but they wouldn't bomb where they live anyways
tbh having grown up in Manc I never found London threatening. Bear in mind I spent three years working on what the Daily Mail kindly dubbed hell's waiting room, so I was hardly chilling in Islington. But I dunno, the vibe was just different.
Compare that to when I worked in Skelmersdale. Now there's a tough place.
Not about safety as much as suitability. I can't see myself with kids in London on the public transport etc. Not many areas for kids to play generally and then there's also house affordability to think of.
I have a 3 bed detached new build with decent garden space, garage and massive undevelopable green space in front of my house at the moment and if I was to sell that and buy in London that would most likely translate to some kind of a large 1 bed or very small 2 bed.
As for safety, apart from terrorists we have not had any other problem in Aylesbury, but they wouldn't bomb where they live anyways
I understand the affordability aspect completely. That's just common sense, but I don't see why the underground would be more than an inconvenience, or why a City with more open green spaces than any other in the country (I think?) has "not many areas for kids to play"...Depends where you are, of course, but I live in Lambeth, which is technically the most dangerous borough in London (though I admittedly don't live in a particularly dangerous part of it) and I've got at least four huge feck off parks/commons right on my door step.
Well exactly. I actually find this a positive of a City upbringing. It's a learning curve essentially. Though admitedly not having kids means I have no emotional pull the other way to keep them safe from "the worst that could happen"
Last edited:
In fairness, until you have kids you have no idea what a military operation getting anywhere is.
I can understand why London would be an impractical place to raise a family. I just don't think it'd be a bad, or unsuitable one, providing you could. I'm aware I can only speak from my experience of being an annoying child here, rather than having to actually deal with one.
Me and the missus were the ones sitting on buses and trains making fun of parents struggling with their children on there having no idea how tough it was, however when my sister had kids and we travelled anywhere with public transport it was then it hit us. I used to live a stone throw away from Bishop's park in Fulham however I would not be able to afford anything decent there. Taking all things into consideration we decided that it would be difficult with a family so that's why we moved. Also there's the job aspect of it, both me and the missus only work 5 minutes away from home and don't have to deal with the lengthy stressful commute that London offers for most people.
I'm not saying London is bad, I love London and am there every weekend at the very least but me and the missus (mostly me) felt that at least for us it wouldn't be right with a family. That of course does not mean that it is not right for the millions that live there.
Fair enough. I think we're largely talking cross purposes now anyway. The expense is obviously a huge issue for anyone living here, kids or not. Which is why we need to work on reducing the inequality/wealth gap.
Aaaand, we're back in the room.
Aaaand, we're back in the room.
http://www.theguardian.com/business...ve-30bn-black-hole-in-spending-plans-says-ifs
Once the NHS promise and tax cuts are factored in, cuts of up to 30% (!) would be required from all non-protected budgets. I think its fair to say that's impossible, which rather begs the question of which current promises would go out of the window.
It also says that Labour would require less cuts, but they're vaguer about how much they'd want to borrow, with a potential extra £90Bn borrowed over the course of 5 years compared to the Tories.
Probably ammo there for both parties' campaigns, even if the left-leaning paper highlights the Tories problems over Labour's.
I'm quoting Andrew of Allerton, and damn the consequences:
Andy@Allerton said: