Being high up. Mad. Paying good money to go up to the top of the Shard or any other tall building is mad. You can get basically the same view from thousands of office windows. And that view is usually rubbish. You are so high up that you see very little.
Personally I think I get a much better view from my own kitchen window. You can see the details of the trees and features. You can sometimes see little animals.
The only reason that so many people think the view from the tall towers is great is because they have allowed so many other tall towers. Basically they block off light forcing new ones to be even higher.
Yes it is all about us vs them. If all other buildings around you were two storeys high, you would get a much better view and a much better life from a four storey block than you would from a twenty storey block in the midst of other twenty storey blocks.
The density argument is rubbish too. Central Kensington is one of the most densely populated areas in Britain and central Amsterdam is one of the most densely populated cities in Europe – both have strict planning laws restricting height, yet they have some of the most desirable housing in the world.
Most families want a house with a garden. Surveys prove that. But developers make more money from massive apartment blocks and try to convince you that the view is great.
Showing posts with label population. Show all posts
Showing posts with label population. Show all posts
Thursday, September 25, 2014
Friday, November 07, 2008
Burying Bridges
There were once-in-a-generation news headlines this week. The presidential election (RB wins). The drastic cut in interest rates (RB loses). These massive stories are a chance for political cowards to bury bad news.
That's what Boris Johnson and his gang seems to have done. For all the pre-mayoral-election talk of needing to regenerate and improve London's infrastructure, yesterday there was a little announcement that ten major capital projects have been scrapped.
Now some cuts I could understand. But one particular cancellation is just wrong. I have been driving around London for much of the last twenty years. Travel is often difficult bordering on impossible. But (in my opinion) the single worst bottleneck in the entire city is the Blackwall Tunnel.
The western stretch of the Thames has bridges every few hundred yards. Yet between the central Tower Bridge and the Essex-Kent QEII bridge, covering at least ten miles of river with high population density on both sides, there is nothing else. Well almost nothing, another ancient tunnel that has only one narrow winding lane each way, and a single unreliable ferry. But this is obviously not enough, as each of these crossings is still at full capacity. Even the costly Dartford crossing. And that approach should solve the cost conundrum. There is so much pent-up demand that any new bridge would surely pay for itself, as much as any new road anywhere in the world possibly could. It is just madness to go ahead with the massive Thames Gateway housebuilding project unless there is a corresponding Thames Gateway infrastructure project.
Three disclaimers: I cross the river frequently; I accept marginal traffic charges; and did I mention that I like bridges?
That's what Boris Johnson and his gang seems to have done. For all the pre-mayoral-election talk of needing to regenerate and improve London's infrastructure, yesterday there was a little announcement that ten major capital projects have been scrapped.
Now some cuts I could understand. But one particular cancellation is just wrong. I have been driving around London for much of the last twenty years. Travel is often difficult bordering on impossible. But (in my opinion) the single worst bottleneck in the entire city is the Blackwall Tunnel.
The western stretch of the Thames has bridges every few hundred yards. Yet between the central Tower Bridge and the Essex-Kent QEII bridge, covering at least ten miles of river with high population density on both sides, there is nothing else. Well almost nothing, another ancient tunnel that has only one narrow winding lane each way, and a single unreliable ferry. But this is obviously not enough, as each of these crossings is still at full capacity. Even the costly Dartford crossing. And that approach should solve the cost conundrum. There is so much pent-up demand that any new bridge would surely pay for itself, as much as any new road anywhere in the world possibly could. It is just madness to go ahead with the massive Thames Gateway housebuilding project unless there is a corresponding Thames Gateway infrastructure project.
Three disclaimers: I cross the river frequently; I accept marginal traffic charges; and did I mention that I like bridges?
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
K K Konquered
There has apparently been a major election recently. You might have heard about it, it's been on the news. There is a new president on the block.
I used to live there, so I take more of an interest than much of the world. Yet I don't really have a strong opinion on this one. Without knowing the details, the new president seems a decent choice. It seems a good thing that the more internationalist more educated professional economist beat the more populist darling of the redneck community, though it was a very close race.
Yes, in Zambia, according to BBC news this week, Mr Rupiah Banda has been sworn in as president, just hours after officials said he had narrowly won Thursday's election.
Meanwhile, in America, at least, at last, there is hope.
I used to live there, so I take more of an interest than much of the world. Yet I don't really have a strong opinion on this one. Without knowing the details, the new president seems a decent choice. It seems a good thing that the more internationalist more educated professional economist beat the more populist darling of the redneck community, though it was a very close race.
Yes, in Zambia, according to BBC news this week, Mr Rupiah Banda has been sworn in as president, just hours after officials said he had narrowly won Thursday's election.
Meanwhile, in America, at least, at last, there is hope.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Light and Sound
Discussed at lunchtime today - the less controversial subject: I generally think people should keep their music to themselves, leakage from home or vehicle is just noise pollution.
Insight is sometimes simply finding a new relationship between old variables. So like Jessica Hagy with her Indexed cards:
Insight is sometimes simply finding a new relationship between old variables. So like Jessica Hagy with her Indexed cards:
Monday, October 20, 2008
For better or for purse
Last week I dropped my wallet at a market in a notorious Essex town. Five things that were in there:
1. Credit Card - I've heard that all its details may already be on sale in pubs across the land, but it would still be disconcerting to lose it.
2. Driving Licence - we don't actually need to carry this in the UK, but it's habit from my US days, and some form of Photo Id often comes in useful
3. Oyster Card - loads of free travel on the London public transport system for the lucky finder.
4. Agency access pass for the client site - sounds trivial, but it's one of the things I'd "miss" the most in the short term while corporate bureaucracy grinds away at a replacement
5. AA card. I don't have a drink problem, and wouldn't spout that quasi-religious crap even if I did, but I do think it's worth keeping roadside breakdown membership.
That leaves out various loyalty cards, cash cards and cash itself (no coins) together with random receipts. They are not in my top five.
However, despite the best efforts of the Daily Hatemail (no street is safe, thieving immigrants are everywhere) and of the Real Hustle (trust nobody, they're all out to scam you), within a few seconds a lady walked up to me and returned it. Everything still there.
There is such a thing as society.
1. Credit Card - I've heard that all its details may already be on sale in pubs across the land, but it would still be disconcerting to lose it.
2. Driving Licence - we don't actually need to carry this in the UK, but it's habit from my US days, and some form of Photo Id often comes in useful
3. Oyster Card - loads of free travel on the London public transport system for the lucky finder.
4. Agency access pass for the client site - sounds trivial, but it's one of the things I'd "miss" the most in the short term while corporate bureaucracy grinds away at a replacement
5. AA card. I don't have a drink problem, and wouldn't spout that quasi-religious crap even if I did, but I do think it's worth keeping roadside breakdown membership.
That leaves out various loyalty cards, cash cards and cash itself (no coins) together with random receipts. They are not in my top five.
However, despite the best efforts of the Daily Hatemail (no street is safe, thieving immigrants are everywhere) and of the Real Hustle (trust nobody, they're all out to scam you), within a few seconds a lady walked up to me and returned it. Everything still there.
There is such a thing as society.
Friday, October 17, 2008
One Bold Act to Solve the Financial Crisis
We appear to be on the brink of global economic meltdown. The government needs to be bold and decisive. One simple Act would have these major benefits:
1. Increase financial stability.
2. Increase innovation, entrepeneurial spirit and small business development.
3. Promote equal opportunity.
4. Increase charitable donations.
5. Reduce poverty.
I've mentioned it before. Simply raise inheritance tax to 100%.
1. The government needs to get closer to balancing its books. Living people don't like being taxed. Dead people don't care.
2. People will need to earn a living, even the children of successful rich entrepreneurs cannot just sit on their arses.
3. So who does not think that aiming for equal opportunity is a good thing?
4. Even Gates and Buffett agree. Charitable donations have always been tax-exempt.
5. Charities often tend to benefit the poor. And so do higher tax revenues.
I could add a potential surge in retail sales and consumer confidence too as people decide to spend for their families now while they are still alive. And a huge immediate boost for solicitors and will writers. But that's short term. I'm talking of one simple act to provide a long term radical overhaul to the entire national economy.
1. Increase financial stability.
2. Increase innovation, entrepeneurial spirit and small business development.
3. Promote equal opportunity.
4. Increase charitable donations.
5. Reduce poverty.
I've mentioned it before. Simply raise inheritance tax to 100%.
1. The government needs to get closer to balancing its books. Living people don't like being taxed. Dead people don't care.
2. People will need to earn a living, even the children of successful rich entrepreneurs cannot just sit on their arses.
3. So who does not think that aiming for equal opportunity is a good thing?
4. Even Gates and Buffett agree. Charitable donations have always been tax-exempt.
5. Charities often tend to benefit the poor. And so do higher tax revenues.
I could add a potential surge in retail sales and consumer confidence too as people decide to spend for their families now while they are still alive. And a huge immediate boost for solicitors and will writers. But that's short term. I'm talking of one simple act to provide a long term radical overhaul to the entire national economy.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
iconomics
Supply versus demand. Price correction versus rationing. Three current examples.
Firstly, crude oil. Those ostriches and optimists who think that the high price of oil is just a temporary blip caused by "speculation" in the futures market should face reality. Our lifestyles will change. For some of the economics, Paul Krugman.
Secondly, petrol. Not the long term year on year price increase caused by the point above, but the refusal to change prices in the face of temporary supply restriction. For an example of the madness, my post here.
Thirdly, the iPhone. In this case, scarcity is deliberate strategy. And I think a bad strategy. Apple could have managed this so much better. As usual, Seth Godin has some suggestions for how.
Firstly, crude oil. Those ostriches and optimists who think that the high price of oil is just a temporary blip caused by "speculation" in the futures market should face reality. Our lifestyles will change. For some of the economics, Paul Krugman.
Secondly, petrol. Not the long term year on year price increase caused by the point above, but the refusal to change prices in the face of temporary supply restriction. For an example of the madness, my post here.
Thirdly, the iPhone. In this case, scarcity is deliberate strategy. And I think a bad strategy. Apple could have managed this so much better. As usual, Seth Godin has some suggestions for how.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Room to breathe
Despite my respect for the originator of the quote, I don't buy the cliché that the UK and US speak very differently. There are probably far more differences between regional accents just within England than there are between English and Americans. At least in the business world, perhaps unfortunately, we sound very similar.
However across Europe, things sound very different. Yet they look broadly the same. Old buildings, little roads, people on the streets. But it's weird, people are talking incomprehensively. In America, you can understand the language perfectly, but the look of the place is completely different. Not because they have fundamentally different goals and aspirations from Europeans. But because they have more space.
However across Europe, things sound very different. Yet they look broadly the same. Old buildings, little roads, people on the streets. But it's weird, people are talking incomprehensively. In America, you can understand the language perfectly, but the look of the place is completely different. Not because they have fundamentally different goals and aspirations from Europeans. But because they have more space.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Fuely Truckers
Sorry for the spoonerism. But clearly I don't go with the flow here.
As the tanker strike wound on yesterday, the enterprising owner of a fuel station changed forecourt price to align demand with the change in supply. It was exactly the same procedure that he had been doing for the other 364 days of the year. Exactly the same procedure that every other fuel station manager also does all the time. Exactly what every businessman needs to do to survive.
But fuel price watchdog petrolprices.com put out the nonsensical statement: "Putting the price up so much at a time when drivers in the South West are being hit worst by strikes is inexcusable."
The tabloids deliberately stoked up the hysteria, then did everything possible to prevent sensible mitigation of its consequences.
The undercover economist got it right. The nation got it wrong.
As the tanker strike wound on yesterday, the enterprising owner of a fuel station changed forecourt price to align demand with the change in supply. It was exactly the same procedure that he had been doing for the other 364 days of the year. Exactly the same procedure that every other fuel station manager also does all the time. Exactly what every businessman needs to do to survive.
But fuel price watchdog petrolprices.com put out the nonsensical statement: "Putting the price up so much at a time when drivers in the South West are being hit worst by strikes is inexcusable."
The tabloids deliberately stoked up the hysteria, then did everything possible to prevent sensible mitigation of its consequences.
The undercover economist got it right. The nation got it wrong.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Future Planning
Paul Krugman is a columnist for the New York Times, and he looked back today. Back in 1996, for the centenary of the NYT magazine, he was asked to write an article imagining that he was in 2096 looking back on the world of one hundred years ago.
He had just five main points. Quoting directly:
1. Soaring Resource Prices
The first half of the 1990's was an era of extraordinarily low prices for raw materials. In retrospect, it is hard to see why anyone thought that situation would last.
The first half of the 1990's was an era of extraordinarily low prices for raw materials. In retrospect, it is hard to see why anyone thought that situation would last.
2. The Environment as Property
in a world where billions of people can afford cars, vacations and food in plastic packages, the limited carrying capacity of the environment had become perhaps the single most important constraint on the standard of living.
in a world where billions of people can afford cars, vacations and food in plastic packages, the limited carrying capacity of the environment had become perhaps the single most important constraint on the standard of living.
3. The Rebirth of the Big City
...urban density favored personal interaction, which turned out to be essential.
...urban density favored personal interaction, which turned out to be essential.
4. The Devaluation of Higher Education
These days, jobs that require only 6 or 12 months of vocational training -- paranursing, carpentry, household maintenance and so on -- pay nearly as much as if not more than a job that requires a master's degree, and pay more than one requiring a Ph.D.
These days, jobs that require only 6 or 12 months of vocational training -- paranursing, carpentry, household maintenance and so on -- pay nearly as much as if not more than a job that requires a master's degree, and pay more than one requiring a Ph.D.
5. The Celebrity Economy
The fans attend these concerts not to appreciate the music (they can do that far better at home), but for the experience of seeing their idols in person. In short, instead of becoming a knowledge economy we became a celebrity economy.
The fans attend these concerts not to appreciate the music (they can do that far better at home), but for the experience of seeing their idols in person. In short, instead of becoming a knowledge economy we became a celebrity economy.
Excellent. The big issue is that there are limited natural resources. The last point is a consequence of information becoming free. Remember he wrote all that back in 1996 imagining the vastly different world of 2096. The future is coming a lot faster than we think.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Diversity Cold Play
I like diversity. That is not management consulting political correctness, it is a statement of fact about my feelings for humanity. And of course, life reflects cricket and cricket reflects life.
Obviously I cannot help but support my home team, and my unfortunate affection for the mighty Kolkata has been noted elsewhere. But aside from the Knight Riders, my favourite players tend to be those who are the most diverse. As a supporter I want to see the best bowlers, batters and fielders, I don't want every team full of bits-and-pieces allrounders. And I am not alone.
Why is Monty Panesar cheered so loudly whenever he strokes a boundary or takes a catch, even more so than when he takes a wicket? It is not just for his childish enthusiasm, nor for his skin colour. It is because he is so inept at batting and fielding.
There is an old common term used in cricket for the worst batsmen, they are called bunnies, presumably after the stereotype image of the rabbit caught in the headlights. The New Zealand number eleven is a ferret, he goes in after the rabbits.
Phil Tufnell. Courtney Walsh. Devon Malcolm. Chris Martin. We salute you.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Sex With Vegetables
There are some things that I like about Ken Livingstone. Of course there are some things that I dislike too, for example his reputed association with religious bigots and his general support for incongruous skyscrapers.
But despite many practical difficulties with the implementations and pricing of his policies, his general attitudes to transport, housing and personal liberty have much to commend them.
However he has now crossed the line. While defending his decision to refuse to discuss his three children from earlier relationships, and making sure that the BBC beat the Mail to the exclusive story, he said that you should be free to do whatever you want in your private life "as long as you don't involve children, animals or vegetables"
Vegetables? So it is ok to abuse tomatoes then?
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Immigration
In countless economics journals over the years, and from the BBC today:
So I think The House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs has finally pointed out that this particular emperor is not wearing any clothes:
The use of GDP as the measure of immigration's economic contribution was "irrelevant and misleading".
Something approaching conventional wisdom has suggested that immigration brings net benefits to the economy.
Various pieces of research have tended to back up this thinking, but the Lords Committee robustly takes issue with that.
And despite being an immigrant myself, I take issue too. Because however much I would like certain things to be true, I know that some variables make more sense than others.So I think The House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs has finally pointed out that this particular emperor is not wearing any clothes:
The use of GDP as the measure of immigration's economic contribution was "irrelevant and misleading".
Instead, GDP per capita - or income per head of the population - would be a better measure.
That seems blatantly obvious to me. Of course overall gross domestic product is likely to rise if the population increases, but what surely matters is the welfare of the people, not the number of people.Wednesday, January 23, 2008
The Dark Night
The star of A Knight's Tale had just finished filming a new Batman movie in which he plays The Joker, surely the ultimate scary clown. He died young.
Many blogs seem to have a periodic "random factoid", often once per week. Today, in this link, something horrific ...
But in a blog as holistic as this, nothing published is really random. My last four posts:
One day ago: I used to live in Zambia
Two days ago: Some African animals are in trouble
Three days ago: I no longer fear clowns
Four days ago: "39"
Factoid: The average life expectancy in Zambia is 38 years for men and 37 years for women.
Friday, January 04, 2008
Norovirus
Hospitals in Britain are shutting their doors to all non-emergency cases.
Why? Because there is a high chance that you will get sick if you go there.
Today it's more true than ever. There are two possible explanations:
a) this proves that modern healthcare should be completely replaced by alternative medicine - and you are crazy
b) viruses are constantly evolving and they are easily transmitted when people live and work in close proximity - and much of this crowded island is a human zoo
Why? Because there is a high chance that you will get sick if you go there.
Today it's more true than ever. There are two possible explanations:
a) this proves that modern healthcare should be completely replaced by alternative medicine - and you are crazy
b) viruses are constantly evolving and they are easily transmitted when people live and work in close proximity - and much of this crowded island is a human zoo
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
The Hannibal Lecture
I maintain that this blog is holistic - however, all roads lead to roam. So prompted by a recent comment about animal rights, this note is going to return to the theme started in the horrific accident.
Obviously I am not a cannibal. In fact, I share with the rest of humanity an instinctive, almost inexplicable, disgust at the very idea.
However, back to other animals, I said before that we should be perfectly happy to eat animal protein if it were harvested and eaten safely. This could basically be like farming animal cells instead of farming plant cells. But if we were growing cells that were unconnected to any nervous system, let alone to any seat of consciousness, then would there be any moral issue if the DNA in those cells had been derived from humans instead of from sheep?
I think that only religious fundamentalists and those who want a regression to a hunter-gatherer society should answer yes to that.
Obviously I am not a cannibal. In fact, I share with the rest of humanity an instinctive, almost inexplicable, disgust at the very idea.
However, back to other animals, I said before that we should be perfectly happy to eat animal protein if it were harvested and eaten safely. This could basically be like farming animal cells instead of farming plant cells. But if we were growing cells that were unconnected to any nervous system, let alone to any seat of consciousness, then would there be any moral issue if the DNA in those cells had been derived from humans instead of from sheep?
I think that only religious fundamentalists and those who want a regression to a hunter-gatherer society should answer yes to that.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Stay indoors and shut the windows
This week the government recommended that a small village to the west of London should be erased and the volume of air traffic at Heathrow should be nearly doubled. Now I am not trying to speak for a thousand residents of Sipson. But I am trying to speak for a million people who live under the flight path.
The Baa-brigade say that planes are getting quieter. True, but a big plane is still bloody loud. And the number of those planes is increasing. And they want to scrap the runway alternation agreement that spares people from being under the landing path for half the day.
But are the current noise guidelines really acceptable? Should we really aim for a city where so many people do not open their windows or relax in the gardens? The standard of air pollution required today is not the same as 50 years ago thanks to the clean air act. It did not freeze the regulation at "this is today's level, don't get worse". It tried to make lives better. Where is the equivalent for noise?
It's obvious, but the electorate needs to evaluate "quality of life" as well as the simple claims of national GDP effects. Sorry, does that sound too green? Then let us build a new hub somewhere else.
The Baa-brigade say that planes are getting quieter. True, but a big plane is still bloody loud. And the number of those planes is increasing. And they want to scrap the runway alternation agreement that spares people from being under the landing path for half the day.
But are the current noise guidelines really acceptable? Should we really aim for a city where so many people do not open their windows or relax in the gardens? The standard of air pollution required today is not the same as 50 years ago thanks to the clean air act. It did not freeze the regulation at "this is today's level, don't get worse". It tried to make lives better. Where is the equivalent for noise?
It's obvious, but the electorate needs to evaluate "quality of life" as well as the simple claims of national GDP effects. Sorry, does that sound too green? Then let us build a new hub somewhere else.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Life on Earth
The BBC have been looking for a successor to the legendary Sir David Attenborough as he gradually slides towards retirement, while one of the cable documentary channels has been playing his classic series back to back all weekend.
Now it would be sacrilege to criticise him, many feel that he is a national treasure and candidate for greatest living Englishman. And for once I agree with the many. But I never write here to echo them. For I have a criticism. Not of the man himself, of course.
However, I was struck by the tone of some of those early programmes. It was all done with courage, enthusiasm and knowledge. But they had little sense of history or of future - they seemed struck by the wonder of now. The tone often seemed to be to describe how "ideally" adapted all these amazing organisms seemed to be. The wing on a sycamore seed was "perfect" to carry it far from the tree. The teeth of carnivores were "perfect" for tearing flesh and bone.
But that is not quite true. All the evidence around us is of organisms that are barely better than competitors. There are some genetic patterns that are replicating well and others that are not. Within us, within nature, there are countless examples of things that do not work very well, that could work better. Some "species" are always doing a good job of dying out regardless of human intervention.
I still think diversity is good. But remember there is no "ideal" in nature.
Now it would be sacrilege to criticise him, many feel that he is a national treasure and candidate for greatest living Englishman. And for once I agree with the many. But I never write here to echo them. For I have a criticism. Not of the man himself, of course.
However, I was struck by the tone of some of those early programmes. It was all done with courage, enthusiasm and knowledge. But they had little sense of history or of future - they seemed struck by the wonder of now. The tone often seemed to be to describe how "ideally" adapted all these amazing organisms seemed to be. The wing on a sycamore seed was "perfect" to carry it far from the tree. The teeth of carnivores were "perfect" for tearing flesh and bone.
But that is not quite true. All the evidence around us is of organisms that are barely better than competitors. There are some genetic patterns that are replicating well and others that are not. Within us, within nature, there are countless examples of things that do not work very well, that could work better. Some "species" are always doing a good job of dying out regardless of human intervention.
I still think diversity is good. But remember there is no "ideal" in nature.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Size matters
At one time, every large human group was a small human group. What are factors that could have made it grow faster than other groups?
While in a minority in a region, it could encourage isolation from competing ideas. Within families, the group could discourage contraception and encourage large numbers. It could encourage conversion into the group.
It could discourage dissent. Alternative groups could be suppressed by removing competing ideas or by removing competing individuals.
But total numbers in the group will not rise if people leave at the same rate that they are joining. So it could be made difficult to leave the group. Once any group has taken control of land and business, there will inevitably be social pressure on others to conform. Or penalties for leaving the group could be made even more explicit.
Many of these factors could apply to any group that is growing. But does the fact that something is growing mean that we should encourage it?
While in a minority in a region, it could encourage isolation from competing ideas. Within families, the group could discourage contraception and encourage large numbers. It could encourage conversion into the group.
It could discourage dissent. Alternative groups could be suppressed by removing competing ideas or by removing competing individuals.
But total numbers in the group will not rise if people leave at the same rate that they are joining. So it could be made difficult to leave the group. Once any group has taken control of land and business, there will inevitably be social pressure on others to conform. Or penalties for leaving the group could be made even more explicit.
Many of these factors could apply to any group that is growing. But does the fact that something is growing mean that we should encourage it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
