Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

HPC regulars will recall references to Japan's fiscal stimulus policy after the late 80s stockmarket and property collapse. All the funny money failed to create growth and resulted in building projects with no particular purpose. 

Here is a recent article indicating the phenomenon may be returning: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/e4044976-1812-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385

Now my question. Does the failed Japanese approach remind you of anything in the UK? 

 

>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7986955/amp/Downing-Street-confirms-seriously-considering-NI-GB-bridge.html

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-51443421

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really better than a garden bridge - that was merely a waste of money. This would be an unpleasant waste of money. Still, modern people love their obnoxious infrastructure, the purpose of the world is to sit there and wait until we can build pointless, revolting crap on it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Didn't Bozo once suggest building a bridge across the Channel?

Probably more viable than building one across the Irish Sea. Shallower (I think), would have more traffic anyway, and isn't filled with old bombs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

HPC regulars will recall references to Japan's fiscal stimulus policy after the late 80s stockmarket and property collapse. All the funny money failed to create growth and resulted in building projects with no particular purpose. 

Here is a recent article indicating the phenomenon may be returning: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/e4044976-1812-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385

Now my question. Does the failed Japanese approach remind you of anything in the UK?

Oh yes, it does!

 

Quote

 

Boris Johnson’s garden bridge

This scandalously mismanaged ‘gift to the people of London’ will cost the taxpayer £43m. For nothing.

We are invited to embark on an adventure. It will be an emblem of the enterprise of a proud people. Its cost will be zero, or not much, or a sum that, if quite large, will absolutely be worth it. Naysayers are pooh-poohed. Practical objections are for losers. A deadline is imposed, meaning we have to rush ahead with it at all costs. And driving it all forward are the quipping, gurning, dissembling features of Boris Johnson.

Guardian

 

 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

Still a thing.

23h ago 11:26
Government officials working on plans for bridge linking Scotland to Northern Ireland, says No 10

Q: Is the government committed to building a bridge between Scotland and Northern Ireland?

The spokesman says he has nothing to add to what the PM said about this at PMQs a few weeks ago. The PM said the idea had some merit.

So officials are looking into this, he says. He says:

    Work is underway looking into the idea of a bridge.

Q: Is the PM concerned that his previous record with bridges does not inspire confidence?

The spokesman does not accept this. He says:

    The PM is ambitious in terms of infrastructure projects. He is looking at a wide range of schemes across the United Kingdom that could boost productivity.

Asked for more detail of the work being undertaken, the spokesman says he has not more to add.

Q: Can you say roughly how many officials are working on this?

No, says the spokesman.

Q: Recently the Treasury told ministers not to waste money on projects. Would this count as a waste of money?

The spokesman did not accept this.

Q: But it is being seriously considered?

Yes, says the spokesman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

Probably more viable than building one across the Irish Sea. Shallower (I think), would have more traffic anyway, and isn't filled with old bombs.

Tough sell post-Brexit. The Northern clods would accuse the govt of consorting with the enemy.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zugzwang said:

Didn't Bozo once suggest building a bridge across the Channel?

Thatcher nearly did, the leading plan for a fixed link across the Channel would have been two artificial islands with bridges to the mainland on either side and a tunnel between them, all for cars. It was feasible from an engineering perspective but she went with the train tunnel as it was cheaper.

Belfast to Dumfries seems a daft Britain-Ireland link as it's not where the population centres are, surely a Dublin-Holyhead tunnel would make a lot more sense and you could split the cost with RoI. But even that one suffers from the relatively low population on the RoI side meaning expected use would be about a fifth of the Channel Tunnel which is itself not quite economically viable.

If the English aristocracy hadn't genocided Ireland it would have a population of 20-30 million by now and these projects would be completely economically viable.

Edited by Dorkins
Link to post
Share on other sites

How much time would be saved compared to a Dublin - Holyhead ferry with this daft bridge? And when it comes to commercial traffic can the ferry crossing be treated as a rest break, reducing the appeal of the longer route even further?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

How much time would be saved compared to a Dublin - Holyhead ferry with this daft bridge? And when it comes to commercial traffic can the ferry crossing be treated as a rest break, reducing the appeal of the longer route even further?

The bridge is a nonsense, how high will it have to be to accommodate navigation, what are the winds up there? How deep is the trench of the Irish Sea, gonna fix massive columns to the sea bed yeah? What does the tide do down the Irish sea to make securing those columns so possible or impossible. The bridge will never be built. The whole thing is just symbolic gesturing which Johnson thinks is enough to distract the public. That's all he is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Thatcher nearly did, the leading plan for a fixed link across the Channel would have been two artificial islands with bridges to the mainland on either side and a tunnel between them, all for cars. It was feasible from an engineering perspective but she went with the train tunnel as it was cheaper.

Belfast to Dumfries seems a daft Britain-Ireland link as it's not where the population centres are, surely a Dublin-Holyhead tunnel would make a lot more sense and you could split the cost with RoI. But even that one suffers from the relatively low population on the RoI side meaning expected use would be about a fifth of the Channel Tunnel which is itself not quite economically viable.

If the English aristocracy hadn't genocided Ireland it would have a population of 20-30 million by now and these projects would be completely economically viable.

Famines in Ireland were a common feature their due to the over reliance on one or two crops, in 1328, 1339, 1521, 1740 and 1845. The famine of 1740 killed a greater fraction of the population than that of 1845 and the the landlords and the UK on that occasion tried very hard  to help by stopping exports of food and charitable distributions. It is rather sad that people only remember that of 1845 when the UK was dependent on the food itself and the English aristocracy were all too aware that the French revolution had started with food riots.

Edited by debtlessmanc
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, smash said:

How deep is the trench of the Irish Sea, gonna fix massive columns to the sea bed yeah?

An alternative to columns would be a floating submerged tunnel attached to the sea bed by cables as is being considered in Norway for getting across deep fjords, trouble is the cables would be very expensive and everybody's a bit wary of the technology as it has not been widely used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submerged_floating_tunnel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is 1000' really that deep? It'll depend how rapidly the seabed drops (presumably almost instantly in the fjords) but conventional tunneling might still pose less of a problem than a submerged one, and keeps you away from all those bombs.

Or just take the ferry, this whole idea (like certain other expensive white elephant projects in the news) is just one of those things dreamed up by people who get excited about ploughing their big engineering projects through as much as possible.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Is 1000' really that deep? It'll depend how rapidly the seabed drops (presumably almost instantly in the fjords) but conventional tunneling might still pose less of a problem than a submerged one, and keeps you away from all those bombs.

Or just take the ferry, this whole idea (like certain other expensive white elephant projects in the news) is just one of those things dreamed up by people who get excited about ploughing their big engineering projects through as much as possible.

 

A submerged tunnel would realistically be the only way to go.  The towers would be 1400ft tall...The tallest ever used (they usually average around 300ft)..and the high winds would also mean that it would be closed half the time..

Norway are dabbling with the idea of a floating tunnel..

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/norway-underwater-floating-tunnel-intl/index.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be worse. They could be spending billions of pounds to shave 20 mins of a train journey from Birmingham to London in an era where ‘commuter’ office type roles are increasingly moving from offices to remote working and I believe that will evolve hugely over the next 20/30 years  Particularly roles from London.  

Not to worry though...I am sure some big boys will be making some money on the back of all the building and consultations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Pop321 said:

Could be worse. They could be spending billions of pounds to shave 20 mins of a train journey from Birmingham to London in an era where ‘commuter’ office type roles are increasingly moving from offices to remote working and I believe that will evolve hugely over the next 20/30 years  Particularly roles from London.  

Not to worry though...I am sure some big boys will be making some money on the back of all the building and consultations. 

Blairite moron 'Lord' Jim O'Neill was on the radio yesterday cheerleading for HS2. He suggested preposterously that it was responsible for an arbitrage in house prices - with London house prices falling and Birmingham house prices 'not falling'.

This being the BBC no-one was on hand to point out that HS2 is at least ten years away from completion and that house prices in the West Midlands are already stupidly expensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point of HS2 is to suck more out of Birmingham into London anyway. Want to extend the London commuter belt of dormitory towns? That's the way to do it! Now to be fair there is an issue with capacity, but a new line at conventional speeds could ease that (although I suspect it's one of those situations where numbers will always expand to fill any reasonable capacity) and have less danger of sucking more down into London, although it would still be pretty hideous and unwelcome due to our inability to build anything that isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, 2buyornot2buy said:

Building a £15 billion bridge to potentially link 2 countries that in 5-10 years will be independent and in the EU. Absolutely zero chance of this thing being built. Some donor consultancy group is getting a bung. 

The idea that this could be built for 15bn is ridiculous. Inevitably costs would rise 3 or 4 times. Then you have to build 100m of motorways to connect it into the road network (and train?). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Riedquat said:

How much time would be saved compared to a Dublin - Holyhead ferry with this daft bridge? And when it comes to commercial traffic can the ferry crossing be treated as a rest break, reducing the appeal of the longer route even further?

I suspect you could set up a £20 a ticket air bridge between the actual population centres the bridge is meant to serve and run it forever at less financial/carbon cost than the bridge/ motorway option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

The idea that this could be built for 15bn is ridiculous. Inevitably costs would rise 3 or 4 times. Then you have to build 100m of motorways to connect it into the road network (and train?). 

Oh I agree. A classic case of "look squirrel". 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 417 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.