Are Britain's planned 15-minute cities effectively 15-minute control grids?

[scottbeard]

3 hours ago, nightowl said:

Indeed, limitations of a sort of exists in fuel duty (and car tax too), which illustrates the point why introduce another measure targeting essentially the same thing?

Fuel duty though is applied equally across the country, not for specific areas.

In the end that's irrelevant as much like Ulez expansion, it will be about the revenue received and will be expanded and will encroach well beyond it's original form - It has a different name but is localized travel taxation.

There are two points here though that I fear you're conflating:

Is 15 minute city really just a control mechanism in disguise? I say no

Will the government tax things that are easy to tax like long distance travel? I say yes because they already do

2 hours ago, Casual-observer said:

Why not, what evidence do you have they wouldn't? 

Thing is I wasn't alluding to it being specifically people on this board, it's just a general observation. 

Plus it's an odd mindset you have if you seriously think anyone would have some sort of HPC notebook where I track every political point of every poster on this board that I could refer to as some sort of dictionary. 

Anyone would almost think you're being disingenuous. 

Back on point though it's a farcical notion that to highlight risks on rolling out this tech and this trend makes you sort sort of lunatic. On the contrary, it's the height of delusion to simply sit there like a lobotomised sheep watching a bought Govt roll out measures and...say....nothing. 

I'm not being disingenuous though I am being cheeky perhaps.

Of course i dont expect you to be able to prove your point, because I don't believe it's true.  I don't believe that very many people both think showing ID at restaurants is OK and showing ID to vote isn't.  Its contradictory, makes no sense, and I'm not willing to accept its generally a widely held opinion, even if you happen to heard a couple of people say it.

[Confusion of VIs]

 

23 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

The notion is absurd.

It can only implemented if you have a command economy which is socialism or communism.

How can all the people living within a certain, specific area live and work in that same place?

Companies hire and fire people all the time.

Are they to only hire people within a 5 mile radius of where their business is based?

Good luck with that.

What if someone hates their job but there are no jobs available in their area of residence? Are they just expected to stay in their same job indefinitely?

Will they be allowed to travel 30 miles for a job interview and work their if successful?

Sounds like hell to me.

You need the freedom of movement of people and capital in a capitalist society.

If you don't like that you're a commie and in that case you can move to Cuba or China as far as I am concerned.

The notion is that we should return to a more normal life. One where you don't have to get in a car to travel to nearest shop, school, doctor etc and your streets are not used as rat runs.

Why is that so threatening? 

[The Angry Capitalist]

8 hours ago, scottbeard said:

Quite a relief to see 99% of posters on this thread agreeing that having most of what you need less than 15 minutes away is in fact utopia and not dystopia.

No is imprisoning anyone in cities.

The lunatics who said “COVID restrictions will never be lifted, you’ll see” have been forced to change their tune when they were lifted : the new tune is “ah they were just a test, you’ll see”

Perish the thought that COVID restrictions were a simply temporary response to a temporary threat; or that planning cities well just leads to well-planned cities.

 

How can you have "everything you need" within a 15 minute time-frame? Isn't everyone different in society?

What one person regards as essential another person does not.

Who decides on what "you need"?

Or are you expecting every kind of store under the sun in your 15 minute zone or expect all the people living in that area to have the same needs and wants and tastes etc?

Are entrepreneurs just going to say "Oh I will open a butchers shop in that 8 story building in that 15 minute zone because there is not one currently there"?

What type of restaurants will operate there? 1 Italian, 1 French bistro and 1 Chinese? What if you think all their prices are too expensive? Are you going to travel 30 minutes away to eat in a burger place because you want a burger and don't fancy an Italian or Chinese etc?

That would make you a hypocrite wouldn't it?

Furthermore, if it is a 15 minute city don't you think there will be a lack of competition in that zone? Or are you expecting a choice of 3 supermarkets, 2 furniture stores, 5 restaurants and 6 hairdressers etc?

Good luck with that.

If you are living within a 15 minute city you are going to have monopolies and very little choice. Plain and simple. You're goods and services are going to be expensive as there inevitably will be exploitation by the companies operating there.

Or are you expecting the councils to set price controls?

Or do you think a new entrepreneur will open a second or third store in that 15 minute zone and offer lower prices than the monopolist? In a 15 minute zone where there will not be many people living I highly doubt it. There might not be any property available even if they wanted to operate there.

Or are you expecting the councils to build an adequate supply of property for the companies to move in and cater to every persons whims in the 15 minute zone? There's going to be limited space for companies to operate in so we are going to have to build some mighty tall buildings.

Who is going to pay for all those mighty skyscrapers?

Some areas might work due to having the appropriate local wage salaries and adequate property available for businesses and residents but it will be impossible to implement on any large or significant scale. You would probably have bad ghettos in poorer 15 minute zones too as not all 15 minute cities will be equal.

15 minute cities is COMMUNISM. Plain and simple. It's a command economy.

It would be mighty inefficient despite the utopian propaganda.

If you want to live or like the idea of a 15 minute city then you can now TODAY go find a job in a city and move near to that job where I am sure you will have most amenities close at hand and not need to travel too far to have what you need especially in places like London. You don't need any authority to dictate to you to live in one or build one for you because you are now FREE TO CHOOSE that option for yourself TODAY.

No? You can't do that? Will that be impractical because London is expensive and there might not be any jobs there that you like or can do in your chosen profession?

Then what are you expecting in a 15 minute city???

Do you think that all the housing in that area will just magically have rental prices in line with your wage from working there?

People commute far to where they work for many reasons and despite what the commies running our country are saying it is efficient. It's not perfect and yes our system is broken at the moment for obvious reasons but that is capitalism.

[14stFlyer]

Are Britain's planned 15-minute cities effectively 15-minute control grids?
 

No. 

[Unmoderated]

8 hours ago, msi said:

Oh for f***k sake, show us actual numbers or keep your drooling for Lozza Fox

+1

8 hours ago, daveyj said:

Do you think all the new laws giving the state/police more and more powers and restricting protests are for nothing?

You can be arrested in the uk for unloading "not my king" placards from a van.

We do not really have a democracy. The only protests allowed are the ones the gov supports ie XR and just stop oil and other environmental cults.

BLM protest...

XR protest...

Covid lockdown protest...

see any difference?

Yeah, the timing. What sentences did lockdown protesters receive versus XR people? 

5 hours ago, Will! said:

Yes and people will be geofenced by the nanoprobes in their Covid vaccines.  If you can’t find any evidence to support this then that’s because it’s being suppressed, which proves that it’s true!

hahaha, very good!

5 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

 

How can you have "everything you need" within a 15 minute time-frame? Isn't everyone different in society?

What one person regards as essential another person does not.

Who decides on what "you need"?

Or are you expecting every kind of store under the sun in your 15 minute zone or expect all the people living in that area to have the same needs and wants and tastes etc?

Are entrepreneurs just going to say "Oh I will open a butchers shop in that 8 story building in that 15 minute zone because there is not one currently there"?

What type of restaurants will operate there? 1 Italian, 1 French bistro and 1 Chinese? What if you think all their prices are too expensive? Are you going to travel 30 minutes away to eat in a burger place because you want a burger and don't fancy an Italian or Chinese etc?

That would make you a hypocrite wouldn't it?

Furthermore, if it is a 15 minute city don't you think there will be a lack of competition in that zone? Or are you expecting a choice of 3 supermarkets, 2 furniture stores, 5 restaurants and 6 hairdressers etc?

Good luck with that.

If you are living within a 15 minute city you are going to have monopolies and very little choice. Plain and simple. You're goods and services are going to be expensive as there inevitably will be exploitation by the companies operating there.

Or are you expecting the councils to set price controls?

Or do you think a new entrepreneur will open a second or third store in that 15 minute zone and offer lower prices than the monopolist? In a 15 minute zone where there will not be many people living I highly doubt it. There might not be any property available even if they wanted to operate there.

Or are you expecting the councils to build an adequate supply of property for the companies to move in and cater to every persons whims in the 15 minute zone? There's going to be limited space for companies to operate in so we are going to have to build some mighty tall buildings.

Who is going to pay for all those mighty skyscrapers?

Some areas might work due to having the appropriate local wage salaries and adequate property available for businesses and residents but it will be impossible to implement on any large or significant scale. You would probably have bad ghettos in poorer 15 minute zones too as not all 15 minute cities will be equal.

15 minute cities is COMMUNISM. Plain and simple. It's a command economy.

It would be mighty inefficient despite the utopian propaganda.

If you want to live or like the idea of a 15 minute city then you can now TODAY go find a job in a city and move near to that job where I am sure you will have most amenities close at hand and not need to travel too far to have what you need especially in places like London. You don't need any authority to dictate to you to live in one or build one for you because you are now FREE TO CHOOSE that option for yourself TODAY.

No? You can't do that? Will that be impractical because London is expensive and there might not be any jobs there that you like or can do in your chosen profession?

Then what are you expecting in a 15 minute city???

Do you think that all the housing in that area will just magically have rental prices in line with your wage from working there?

People commute far to where they work for many reasons and despite what the commies running our country are saying it is efficient. It's not perfect and yes our system is broken at the moment for obvious reasons but that is capitalism.

BS mate. For one.... are you familiar with e-commerce? Second, I live within TEN minutes of a Tesco, Waitrose and Morrisons. There's also various smaller independent shops and McColls and Coop. As others have pointed out you're still free to travel. 

Final points in bold - you're not making any sense. Country run by commies apparently and then you blame capitalism? 

Can't take you seriously. 

[Confusion of VIs]

3 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

 

How can you have "everything you need" within a 15 minute time-frame? Isn't everyone different in society?

What one person regards as essential another person does not.

Who decides on what "you need"?

Or are you expecting every kind of store under the sun in your 15 minute zone or expect all the people living in that area to have the same needs and wants and tastes etc?

Are entrepreneurs just going to say "Oh I will open a butchers shop in that 8 story building in that 15 minute zone because there is not one currently there"?

What type of restaurants will operate there? 1 Italian, 1 French bistro and 1 Chinese? What if you think all their prices are too expensive? Are you going to travel 30 minutes away to eat in a burger place because you want a burger and don't fancy an Italian or Chinese etc?

That would make you a hypocrite wouldn't it?

Furthermore, if it is a 15 minute city don't you think there will be a lack of competition in that zone? Or are you expecting a choice of 3 supermarkets, 2 furniture stores, 5 restaurants and 6 hairdressers etc?

Good luck with that.

If you are living within a 15 minute city you are going to have monopolies and very little choice. Plain and simple. You're goods and services are going to be expensive as there inevitably will be exploitation by the companies operating there.

Or are you expecting the councils to set price controls?

Or do you think a new entrepreneur will open a second or third store in that 15 minute zone and offer lower prices than the monopolist? In a 15 minute zone where there will not be many people living I highly doubt it. There might not be any property available even if they wanted to operate there.

Or are you expecting the councils to build an adequate supply of property for the companies to move in and cater to every persons whims in the 15 minute zone? There's going to be limited space for companies to operate in so we are going to have to build some mighty tall buildings.

Who is going to pay for all those mighty skyscrapers?

Some areas might work due to having the appropriate local wage salaries and adequate property available for businesses and residents but it will be impossible to implement on any large or significant scale. You would probably have bad ghettos in poorer 15 minute zones too as not all 15 minute cities will be equal.

15 minute cities is COMMUNISM. Plain and simple. It's a command economy.

It would be mighty inefficient despite the utopian propaganda.

If you want to live or like the idea of a 15 minute city then you can now TODAY go find a job in a city and move near to that job where I am sure you will have most amenities close at hand and not need to travel too far to have what you need especially in places like London. You don't need any authority to dictate to you to live in one or build one for you because you are now FREE TO CHOOSE that option for yourself TODAY.

No? You can't do that? Will that be impractical because London is expensive and there might not be any jobs there that you like or can do in your chosen profession?

Then what are you expecting in a 15 minute city???

Do you think that all the housing in that area will just magically have rental prices in line with your wage from working there?

People commute far to where they work for many reasons and despite what the commies running our country are saying it is efficient. It's not perfect and yes our system is broken at the moment for obvious reasons but that is capitalism.

You are starting to sound paranoid. 

For the last 30 years we have been building estates where people have no local services forcing them to rely on cars for almost everything. The aim behind 15 minute cities is to give people better choices than they have today.  

     

[The Angry Capitalist]

10 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

 

The notion is that we should return to a more normal life. One where you don't have to get in a car to travel to nearest shop, school, doctor etc and your streets are not used as rat runs.

Why is that so threatening? 

That my freedom to choose is being taken away.

If I want to travel 40 minutes to my favourite restaurant then I will do that.

If my local furniture store does not sell any sofas that are to my preference then I want to travel an hour away to the next nearest one to see what choice of sofas they have.

Maybe there is only one supermarket where I live and their prices are double or treble what the next nearest one 35 minutes away charges. In that instance I will travel to the supermarket 35 minutes away.

That's capitalism. FREEDOM TO CHOOSE.

Both the customer and the entrepreneur can choose what business they want to use and where they want their business to be situated and what size building they want their business to be operating from.

You start creating 15 minute cities then those choices have to be restricted or limited. That's communism or slavery or whatever you want to call it but is is not freedom or capitalism.

[The Angry Capitalist]

14 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

Are Britain's planned 15-minute cities effectively 15-minute control grids?
 

No. 

But we don't need them.

You can move to a city TODAY and choose to live in an area where everything you need is within close range.

[The Angry Capitalist]

5 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

You are starting to sound paranoid. 

For the last 30 years we have been building estates where people have no local services forcing them to rely on cars for almost everything. The aim behind 15 minute cities is to give people better choices than they have today.  

     

 

Nobody is forcing them to live in those estates.

Are they not choosing to live there and choosing to use a car?

That's the market.

If there was a market or demand for estates to have everything within that specific area don't you think builders would have built them already?

If there is that much demand for them then the properties will sell for a higher price compared to estates that don't have all the local amenities so we don't need the authorities to create them do we?

The free market will actually take care of it by itself as there is an incentive for the market to do so.

In fact, there is a "sustainable" 15 minute type estate being built near where I live in the city of Plymouth called Sherford.

It is a very ambitious project that eventually will be its own town of 15,000 people living in it and when completed will have everything that community will need including schools, doctors surgery and everything else you can think of.

So the free market is already getting on with it and all the people that like that idea can move there and choose that lifestyle if they wish.

[The Angry Capitalist]

12 hours ago, The Spaniard said:

MEP Christine Anderson warns us that the planned 15-minute cities are primarily about control of the population and have very little to do with climate change.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/UDDw2fqEkeS7/

“This whole COVID madness, it was really just a test balloon — a test balloon to see how far they could go,” concluded MEP Christine Anderson. “And the lesson they wanted to learn from this was to find out what needed to be done to get free individuals in free and democratic societies to actually consent to being forced into compliance.”

“And the next thing we will see is the establishment of so-called 15-minute cities. I would, however, urge you not to call them 15-minute cities. They are 15 minute-ghettos,” she warned. “It has nothing to do with this [convenience]. Nothing whatsoever. It's about control. It's about pretty much imprisoning people in their assigned area.”

“Take a good look at your government,” MEP Anderson urged, “And do not assume for a single second just because they were 'democratically' elected, they will not inflict the worst atrocities on you. Do not believe that for one second. So, please stand up. Get up and fight already. Do it now.”

Is she a brave whistleblower or is she one of the 'right wing conspiracy theorists' targeted in this recent supportive Timeout article?

https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/the-small-english-city-at-the-centre-of-the-global-15-minute-city-storm-022023

Will you be happy to live in such a city in a few years time?

 

 

I didn't answer your thread question.

Yes. They are.

[Confusion of VIs]

16 minutes ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

 

Nobody is forcing them to live in those estates.

Are they not choosing to live there and choosing to use a car?

That's the market.

If there was a market or demand for estates to have everything within that specific area don't you think builders would have built them already?

If there is that much demand for them then the properties will sell for a higher price compared to estates that don't have all the local amenities so we don't need the authorities to create them do we?

The free market will actually take care of it by itself as there is an incentive for the market to do so.

In fact, there is a "sustainable" 15 minute type estate being built near where I live in the city of Plymouth called Sherford.

It is a very ambitious project that eventually will be its own town of 15,000 people living in it and when completed will have everything that community will need including schools, doctors surgery and everything else you can think of.

So the free market is already getting on with it and all the people that like that idea can move there and choose that lifestyle if they wish.

So what's the problem? 

 

[The Angry Capitalist]

13 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

So what's the problem? 

 

 

The problem is government or the authorities have no right to dictate if we should have 15 minute cities or not.

If the population want that then the market will provide it.

It's none of their business!!

[Riedquat]

Having most of what you need nearby - good. Making it awkward to get anywhere else - bad. Isolating different parts of the same city from each other does not seem like a good idea at all.

[Bob8]

3 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Having most of what you need nearby - good. Making it awkward to get anywhere else - bad. Isolating different parts of the same city from each other does not seem like a good idea at all.

Yes. But it is a hard trade off. A city that means you require a car to get places is pretty bad. we went through a time of designing towns for cars rather than people, which led to people depending on their car more than ever and hence defending them ("war on the motorist"). Two car families, or several car families should be very rare, else it suggests that people are having to spend huge amounts of money on cars to conduct their day.

[Smith]

6 hours ago, 14stFlyer said:

Are Britain's planned 15-minute cities effectively 15-minute control grids?
 

No. 

This.

[Smith]

5 hours ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

 

Nobody is forcing them to live in those estates.

Are they not choosing to live there and choosing to use a car?

That's the market.

If there was a market or demand for estates to have everything within that specific area don't you think builders would have built them already?

If there is that much demand for them then the properties will sell for a higher price compared to estates that don't have all the local amenities so we don't need the authorities to create them do we?

The free market will actually take care of it by itself as there is an incentive for the market to do so.

In fact, there is a "sustainable" 15 minute type estate being built near where I live in the city of Plymouth called Sherford.

It is a very ambitious project that eventually will be its own town of 15,000 people living in it and when completed will have everything that community will need including schools, doctors surgery and everything else you can think of.

So the free market is already getting on with it and all the people that like that idea can move there and choose that lifestyle if they wish.

Are you seriously suggesting that we can rely on developers to provide what people need? Aside from the very exceptional example you cite, do you see any evidence of this from the last 20 years? Developers cram in as many properties as they can possibly get away with and then cut and run with their huge profits. The idea that people then "choose" in any meaningful sense to live on the estates that have resulted from this is comical. People live where they can (just about) afford to.

[Gbob]

6 hours ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

That my freedom to choose is being taken away.

Maybe there is only one supermarket where I live and their prices are double or treble what the next nearest one 35 minutes away charges. In that instance I will travel to the supermarket 35 minutes away.

That's capitalism. FREEDOM TO CHOOSE.

Yes. This is the point most people are missing.

The principle of 15 minute cities is a good one. Especially when planning new towns or villages. Trying to retro fit Britain's existing archaic towns and cities to fit that model is a lot more difficult. But the underlying issue that is a problem for me is the plan to restrict people's car use into, across or out of the city by charging or effectively giving fines for leaving your zone, and the monitoring and opportunity for control that would go alongside this.  For sure, provide all the services someone needs near their home so they can choose to ditch their car and stay local but don't put people into a position where they effectively can't afford to leave their zone. Also, what effect will this have on people who want to live outside a designated zone but need to work inside one. Not everyone wants to live inside a city but taken to the extreme this could leave poorer people worse off. Can't afford to move to the city because house prices are too high and cant afford to commute in because congestion/pollution/zone charges are too high too. You can bet public transport wont be improved or expanded at the same time.

[Bob8]

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

Yes. But it is a hard trade off. A city that means you require a car to get places is pretty bad. we went through a time of designing towns for cars rather than people, which led to people depending on their car more than ever and hence defending them ("war on the motorist"). Two car families, or several car families should be very rare, else it suggests that people are having to spend huge amounts of money on cars to conduct their day.

 

8 minutes ago, Glenn said:

Yes. This is the point most people are missing.

The principle of 15 minute cities is a good one. Especially when planning new towns or villages. Trying to retro fit Britain's existing archaic towns and cities to fit that model is a lot more difficult. But the underlying issue that is a problem for me is the plan to restrict people's car use into, across or out of the city by charging or effectively giving fines for leaving your zone, and the monitoring and opportunity for control that would go alongside this.  For sure, provide all the services someone needs near their home so they can choose to ditch their car and stay local but don't put people into a position where they effectively can't afford to leave their zone. Also, what effect will this have on people who want to live outside a designated zone but need to work inside one. Not everyone wants to live inside a city but taken to the extreme this could leave poorer people worse off. Can't afford to move to the city because house prices are too high and cant afford to commute in because congestion/pollution/zone charges are too high too. You can bet public transport wont be improved or expanded at the same time.

I live in a nation with ID cards. I am going to make the assumption that you are not in favour of such things? Please, indulge me in this.

Once ID cards are introduced, they become necessary to live within the society, go to the doctor, library, register, etc and it is essential and convenient. To the extent that being against ID cards seems stupid, as they are essential to living a reasonable life. People confuse the dependence with help.

There is something similar with cars. I own a car and it is great. That said, I am likely moving in September to a place where I can live well without having a car at all (a small town). That is great, but would be very rare in the UK. 

Much like ID cards in Denmark, towns have been designed with cars in mind. We accept it is not really safe for kids to play in the street and that people who cannot drive are isolated unless they live in city centres. Once cars arrived, local shops started to disappear and you needed a car. The transport network became a road network, and if you did not have a car, getting services can take a day. 

Much like Danes would hate to lose their Health Card, trying to change the way transport is set up is depicted as a "War on the Motorist". 

We now have the orthodoxy that the best way to help society are fast roads and trains to suck labour to rich areas where working people can get to rich areas, work to make then richer, and then go back as quickly as possible to dead boring areas. With the money they have, they can be transported to the same areas to spend the money to return it as soon as possible.

[14stFlyer]

6 hours ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

But we don't need them.

You can move to a city TODAY and choose to live in an area where everything you need is within close range.

Why all these fruit-loop responses?  

We have been promoting car use and long distance travel to do anything of interest in the U.K. for decades. These 15 min city and similar proposals promote walking and cycling and localism.  This will improve our communities significantly, especially for the kids.  

Those that want to use cars and go long distances will still be able to chose to do so, it will just be less convenient.  It will be more convenient for most to stay local and so most will stay local for most of the time.  

This is not a conspiracy, just a change for the better in public policy.  

[onlooker]

7 hours ago, The Angry Capitalist said:

 

How can you have "everything you need" within a 15 minute time-frame? Isn't everyone different in society?

What one person regards as essential another person does not.

Who decides on what "you need"?

Or are you expecting every kind of store under the sun in your 15 minute zone or expect all the people living in that area to have the same needs and wants and tastes etc?

Are entrepreneurs just going to say "Oh I will open a butchers shop in that 8 story building in that 15 minute zone because there is not one currently there"?

What type of restaurants will operate there? 1 Italian, 1 French bistro and 1 Chinese? What if you think all their prices are too expensive? Are you going to travel 30 minutes away to eat in a burger place because you want a burger and don't fancy an Italian or Chinese etc?

That would make you a hypocrite wouldn't it?

Furthermore, if it is a 15 minute city don't you think there will be a lack of competition in that zone? Or are you expecting a choice of 3 supermarkets, 2 furniture stores, 5 restaurants and 6 hairdressers etc?

Good luck with that.

If you are living within a 15 minute city you are going to have monopolies and very little choice. Plain and simple. You're goods and services are going to be expensive as there inevitably will be exploitation by the companies operating there.

Or are you expecting the councils to set price controls?

Or do you think a new entrepreneur will open a second or third store in that 15 minute zone and offer lower prices than the monopolist? In a 15 minute zone where there will not be many people living I highly doubt it. There might not be any property available even if they wanted to operate there.

Or are you expecting the councils to build an adequate supply of property for the companies to move in and cater to every persons whims in the 15 minute zone? There's going to be limited space for companies to operate in so we are going to have to build some mighty tall buildings.

Who is going to pay for all those mighty skyscrapers?

Some areas might work due to having the appropriate local wage salaries and adequate property available for businesses and residents but it will be impossible to implement on any large or significant scale. You would probably have bad ghettos in poorer 15 minute zones too as not all 15 minute cities will be equal.

15 minute cities is COMMUNISM. Plain and simple. It's a command economy.

It would be mighty inefficient despite the utopian propaganda.

If you want to live or like the idea of a 15 minute city then you can now TODAY go find a job in a city and move near to that job where I am sure you will have most amenities close at hand and not need to travel too far to have what you need especially in places like London. You don't need any authority to dictate to you to live in one or build one for you because you are now FREE TO CHOOSE that option for yourself TODAY.

No? You can't do that? Will that be impractical because London is expensive and there might not be any jobs there that you like or can do in your chosen profession?

Then what are you expecting in a 15 minute city???

Do you think that all the housing in that area will just magically have rental prices in line with your wage from working there?

People commute far to where they work for many reasons and despite what the commies running our country are saying it is efficient. It's not perfect and yes our system is broken at the moment for obvious reasons but that is capitalism.

I was going to make many of the same points, but I don’t need to now.

Travel enables competition, and without freedom to travel, bad monopolies will develop. This applies as much to bad local government monopolies as it does to bad private enterprises.

Edited May 19, 2023 by onlooker

[Smith]

8 minutes ago, onlooker said:

I was going to make many of the same points, but I don’t need to now.

Travel enables competition, and without freedom to travel, bad monopolies will develop. This applies as much to bad local government monopolies as it does to bad private enterprises.

Why do you think this policy will reduce freedom to travel? Do you have any evidence of this?

[Bob8]

17 minutes ago, onlooker said:

I was going to make many of the same points, but I don’t need to now.

Travel enables competition, and without freedom to travel, bad monopolies will develop. This applies as much to bad local government monopolies as it does to bad private enterprises.

There is a difference between banning travel and not setting things up so that there is no choice.

[winkie]

24 minutes ago, 14stFlyer said:

Why all these fruit-loop responses?  

We have been promoting car use and long distance travel to do anything of interest in the U.K. for decades. These 15 min city and similar proposals promote walking and cycling and localism.  This will improve our communities significantly, especially for the kids.  

Those that want to use cars and go long distances will still be able to chose to do so, it will just be less convenient.  It will be more convenient for most to stay local and so most will stay local for most of the time.  

This is not a conspiracy, just a change for the better in public policy.  

Not better for everyone.......sure you might get a high price corner shop, but would you have a doctor's surgery or hospital or both primary and secondary schools or even a pub.....as mentioned, freedom to roam, move and travel.....choices.......more freedom less control.

 

Even when living with everything about you to cover needs including a job, will still want to travel to villages further away, places further a way more than once a week.....who wants to up sticks and move house every time they move jobs.

[regprentice]

19 hours ago, Up the spout said:

What a complete loon.

She is an east german who was 20 years old when they pulled down the Berlin Wall. 

Andersen has legitimate personal experience to be cautious of people telling her she should be "segregated" into a small self-contained part of Germany for her own good. 

A lot of the discussion in this thread is nuts and perhaps Andersen is a loon, ive never heard of her before, but theres a legitimate chance here that shes a mature, intelligent, politician trying to pass on a lesson from history. i had no idea how fresh some of europes communist/fascist past was in some peoples minds til a 20 year old spaniard at work ran off in tears after somone made a comment about General Franco. i'd never even heard of him. 

Edited May 19, 2023 by regprentice

[mynamehere]

After all, are not zoned areas for parks, public transport, listed buildings, libraries, museums, essentially forms of control?

I'm happy for market forces to not direct city planning personally. 

Local Democracy being broken is a slightly seperate issue