Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

IGNORED

Slumification of UK housing


macca

Recommended Posts

Simple really, pack them in tight gives you the highest profit! This is what our masters are cooking up for us..

 

West is transitioning towards a globalized housing system, to reach the state of housing in BRICS (Brazil, India, and China). This is the basis of creating and keeping housing bubbles.

Contrary to what naive folks might assume, the really stupendous profits aren’t made in luxury buildings–they’re generated by tightly packed slums. Here’s how it works. Let’s say a middle-class flat of 600 square feet (7.5 square meters) goes for $1 per square foot. The slum’s equivalent 600 sq. ft. has been cut up into numerous cubbyhole rooms, each housing many people who each pay a relatively high fee for the miserable lodging. The rent per square foot in the slum is thus $5/sq. ft.

According to Davis (and this book is heavily, even obsessively footnoted/sourced), densities in Third World slums are astronomical–18,000 residents per acre is not uncommon. That’s four modest-sized 10,000 sq. ft. residential lots in the U.S. suburbs–4 houses that might house 8 people, total, not 18,000.

So slums are immensely profitable–much more profitable than permanent “middle-class” housing. And will you be surprised to learn that most of the property in these mega-city slums is concentrated in a few hands?

The net result of this great urban overcrowding/high-rents/profitability is indeed pernicious.

The Western housing market is in the process of gradual slumification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, macca said:

Simple really, pack them in tight gives you the highest profit! This is what our masters are cooking up for us..

 

West is transitioning towards a globalized housing system, to reach the state of housing in BRICS (Brazil, India, and China). This is the basis of creating and keeping housing bubbles.

Contrary to what naive folks might assume, the really stupendous profits aren’t made in luxury buildings–they’re generated by tightly packed slums. Here’s how it works. Let’s say a middle-class flat of 600 square feet (7.5 square meters) goes for $1 per square foot. The slum’s equivalent 600 sq. ft. has been cut up into numerous cubbyhole rooms, each housing many people who each pay a relatively high fee for the miserable lodging. The rent per square foot in the slum is thus $5/sq. ft.

According to Davis (and this book is heavily, even obsessively footnoted/sourced), densities in Third World slums are astronomical–18,000 residents per acre is not uncommon. That’s four modest-sized 10,000 sq. ft. residential lots in the U.S. suburbs–4 houses that might house 8 people, total, not 18,000.

So slums are immensely profitable–much more profitable than permanent “middle-class” housing. And will you be surprised to learn that most of the property in these mega-city slums is concentrated in a few hands?

The net result of this great urban overcrowding/high-rents/profitability is indeed pernicious.

The Western housing market is in the process of gradual slumification.

So you mean that we are going back to what it was like 150 years ago in the UK?...no, wait, we had an industrial base then!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn’t this already happening? You can convert a two up two down terrace into 4 bijou one bed apartments. Bung in a small bathroom with a shower and toilet, small table top stove and the government classes it as a one bed flat for LHA purposes. You’ve gone from a two bed house to 4 one bed flats. Charge the LHA rate for each 1 bed flat and money in the bank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is already happening.. I would imagine the accidental increase in our population by our government is all part of the slumification of London and the huge increase in wealth for the 1% who own allot of the land.. 

what I don’t get is with 2/3rds of Londoners being on benefits who pays for this transfer of wealth.. and how long can they keep it going without bankrupting us..

What percentage of the London population are actually useful to our prosperity? 

And what percentage are just providing services for each other? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, macca said:

It is already happening.. I would imagine the accidental increase in our population by our government is all part of the slumification of London and the huge increase in wealth for the 1% who own allot of the land.. 

what I don’t get is with 2/3rds of Londoners being on benefits who pays for this transfer of wealth.. and how long can they keep it going without bankrupting us..

What percentage of the London population are actually useful to our prosperity? 

And what percentage are just providing services for each other? 

Who pays for the transfer of wealth?...previous generations by the selling off of infrastructure that they paid for via taxation, and the current generation  directly via income tax.....when will it stop?...when all of the silver has been sold and those that are working FT get sick of it and vote with their feet by relocating permanently overseas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MrXxx said:

Who pays for the transfer of wealth?...previous generations by the selling off of infrastructure that they paid for via taxation, and the current generation  directly via income tax.....when will it stop?...when all of the silver has been sold and those that are working FT get sick of it and vote with their feet by relocating permanently overseas. 

Already happing, productivity is tanking.  You can ‘leave’ your job without actually leaving it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

19 hours ago, macca said:

Simple really, pack them in tight gives you the highest profit! This is what our masters are cooking up for us..

I recall Jack London described very clearly the same dynamic in the East end of London at the start of the 20th century (in "People of the abyss"). Ordinary, or even quite well-to-do streets, gradually eaten up by the slums, because the original residents couldn't afford to live there any more; the well-to-do couldn't compete with the money of the poor when packed tightly enough. That was without the rocket-fuel of state benefits.

I guess that unwound a decade or so later, with the slaughter of the Great War.

Again, Eric Arthur Blair ("The road to Wigan pier") described conditions not quite so harrowing (and I don't think he was very explicit about the creeping tide of slums), but comparable, nonetheless. That devaluation of work, and spiral of low, and below-subsistence wages, was reversed by the second war.

It would be nice to think that we will find a less gruesome way out - or rather that the piles of human tinder gradually accumulating; the despondent, with a nothing-left-to-lose kind of freedom, won't be sparked to conflagration by some supremely self-centred rabble-rouser, or sent out to die in a concocted war to stop them from rebellion at home.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, One percent said:

Already happing, productivity is tanking.  You can ‘leave’ your job without actually leaving it 

Yep, you can get your feet under the table at any reasonably large corp and just check out. I do short contracts in IT at investment banks; the permanent staff I encounter broadly fall into three categories: (1) not up to the job, but impossible to sack, (2) smart but lazy (waiting for redundancy money) and (3) smart and willing. The number of people who fall into the third bucket is tiny, and most of the people in the first two buckets are on six figures plus a bonus, there or thereabouts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AnythingWithWheels said:

Yep, you can get your feet under the table at any reasonably large corp and just check out. I do short contracts in IT at investment banks; the permanent staff I encounter broadly fall into three categories: (1) not up to the job, but impossible to sack, (2) smart but lazy (waiting for redundancy money) and (3) smart and willing. The number of people who fall into the third bucket is tiny, and most of the people in the first two buckets are on six figures plus a bonus, there or thereabouts.

Any jobs going?  xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AnythingWithWheels said:

Lack of relevant skills is no bar to employment in investment banking :)

I wish I was joking...

That’s what I was hoping. Where do I sign? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...