Newcastle is Peru...

[madras]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

[Guest Knightrider]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

[indi]

At the end of the day people do have to take some responsibility for their own actions - or inactions - it can't be all down to the state to do  everything for them. I'm all for giving people as many chances as possible, but they have to be the ones to take those chances, you can't force them to or they won't buy into it and you'll be wasting your time and money, neither of which are unlimited.

[Guest Knightrider]

Btw, if we were in government, "no idea" isn't good enough councilor Madras. Think of the votes

[madras]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

[madras]

Btw, if we were in government, "no idea" isn't good enough councilor Madras. Think of the votes

i'm president,took over in a coup,trying to be a benevolent dictator..........your mates lucky he hasnt got a hole in the back of his head.

[Guest Knightrider]

At the end of the day people do have to take some responsibility for their own actions - or inactions - it can't be all down to the state to do  everything for them. I'm all for giving people as many chances as possible, but they have to be the ones to take those chances, you can't force them to or they won't buy into it and you'll be wasting your time and money, neither of which are unlimited.

 

Ultimately I agree. But by planting good seeds, hopefully a few trees will grow to use a really naff analogy. Or better still: help my mate to a better life and you help his future kid who in the future will repay back the free ride his dad enjoyed kind of idea thanks to the benevolence of society?

[Guest Knightrider]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

 

Can you expand?

[madras]

At the end of the day people do have to take some responsibility for their own actions - or inactions - it can't be all down to the state to do  everything for them. I'm all for giving people as many chances as possible, but they have to be the ones to take those chances, you can't force them to or they won't buy into it and you'll be wasting your time and money, neither of which are unlimited.

 

Ultimately I agree. But by planting good seeds, hopefully a few trees will grow to use a really naff analogy. Or better still: help my mate to a better life and you help his future kid who in the future will repay back the free ride his dad enjoyed kind of idea thanks to the benevolence of society?

first thing is tell him not to have a kid till he can aford to give it the life he wants for it.

[Guest Knightrider]

At the end of the day people do have to take some responsibility for their own actions - or inactions - it can't be all down to the state to do  everything for them. I'm all for giving people as many chances as possible, but they have to be the ones to take those chances, you can't force them to or they won't buy into it and you'll be wasting your time and money, neither of which are unlimited.

 

Ultimately I agree. But by planting good seeds, hopefully a few trees will grow to use a really naff analogy. Or better still: help my mate to a better life and you help his future kid who in the future will repay back the free ride his dad enjoyed kind of idea thanks to the benevolence of society?

first thing is tell him not to have a kid till he can aford to give it the life he wants for it.

 

What if he can't get to that kind of level where he could afford the life he wants for it? Doesn't he have a right to father a child still? How safe are condoms anyway? That's another thing we'll have to look into.

[madras]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

 

Can you expand?

education,give headteachers some strength in acting with the parents. pay the wages to get in teachers who have the ability to teach rather than those who see it as a cushy number. i'd rather help your mate by providing his kid with a breakfast and free school uniform(compulsary and identical to the other kids). decent after school care for those whose parents are in work. work on programmes getting the parents activly involved with the schools to engineer some pride in their community.just off the top of my head

[Guest Knightrider]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

 

Can you expand?

education,give headteachers some strength in acting with the parents. pay the wages to get in teachers who have the ability to teach rather than those who see it as a cushy number. i'd rather help your mate by providing his kid with a breakfast and free school uniform(compulsary and identical to the other kids). decent after school care for those whose parents are in work. work on programmes getting the parents activly involved with the schools to engineer some pride in their community.just off the top of my head

 

I like it and can't disagree. I'm loathe to pick on teachers because it's a tough job and a specialist job in my opinion, but if education standards are falling, then those at the top need to be asked questions of. Teaching used to be a profession, now it's a "hey, I like kids, I can do that" kind of job.

[indi]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

 

Can you expand?

education,give headteachers some strength in acting with the parents. pay the wages to get in teachers who have the ability to teach rather than those who see it as a cushy number. i'd rather help your mate by providing his kid with a breakfast and free school uniform(compulsary and identical to the other kids). decent after school care for those whose parents are in work. work on programmes getting the parents activly involved with the schools to engineer some pride in their community.just off the top of my head

 

I like it and can't disagree. I'm loathe to pick on teachers because it's a tough job and a specialist job in my opinion, but if education standards are falling, then those at the top need to be asked questions of. Teaching used to be a profession, now it's a "hey, I like kids, I can do that" kind of job.

 

The actual problem is that no-one with any sense wants to be a teacher anymore. They get fucked over all the time, it's a shit job, you can't win, you have to deal with obnoxious little shits all day every day and that's just the parents. You get blamed for other people's (the government) fuck-ups, you don't know whether you're coming or going because they're continually changing the curriculum. If exam results go up it's not because you've worked your arse off and done a fantastic job and so have the kids, it's because exams are a piece of piss nowadays. If they go down, then it's not because they're harder or the kids are just stupid knuckle-dragging ignoramuses, it's because teachers aren't doing their jobs right. All my family are in education, but there's no fucking way I'm doing it, I'd rather stack shelves!!

 

My Mam is head of English at a rough-arse school, god knows why she stays there, she could be working at some nice school that's well financed and has kids that actually want to learn - it's not like she hasn't been offered the chance numerous times before - but she stays there because she likes making a difference. For her, getting one of her kids to read a book, or take even the slightest interest in a bit of Shakespeare, let alone through a GCSE with pass grade, is worth infinitely more than a 90% A-C pass-rate. There's not many like her out there though, especially the new teachers, I don't blame them why the fuck would you want to work in a school like that and take all the shit my Mam has to put up with when you can go down the road and get a job at a "decent" school. There's simply not enough people who want to be teachers, for understandable reasons, so the rougher schools end up having to scrape the bottom of the barrel and pretty much employ anyone who shows an interest, that's if there is anyone, which most of the time there isn't.

[ChezGiven]

Forgive me for keeping my own debate with you alive, you've certainly said nothing in the ensuing time that has changed my view that your initial outburst was wrong and thats what prompted you to question my roots and my ability to understand the place where i grew up and spend a lot of time in. Not sure why your subsequent ramblings should preclude me from challenging you on those posts.

 

"Too wide for those games Chez man"

 

Not really as you then subsequently answer the question at hand. Which is what the OP was about and is at the heart of the whole debate. Not sure why you cant connect the dots (well i have an idea).

 

Re-read the posts man, you were perfectly happy challenging me on the whole run down communities and regeneration points which dominated our debate, until a post or two back where you decided to jump back to the OP for some reason. Of course regeneration as a whole covers city centre and run down estates (and a whole lot more that hasn't been discussed) but were we not talking about specific issues of one nature, and not the other or the whole? I was anyway, actually prompted by your responses to my comments.

 

Otherwise why the hell did you ask me to post some ideas as to how I would deal with run down areas and the issues that revolve around them?

 

Going through the thread you have ignored many of the points I've raised not just in general, but in direct response to your own, now you ask me to basically clarify things FOR YOU, or to justify my views, many views you assumed of me (i.e. assuming I'm against cultural regeneration). If I'm not connecting the dots, you're not returning the ball.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I have answered all your points, or debated all the issues, you have flip flopped on the otherhand and tried (in vain) to get back to a point - the cultural regeneration of the city centre - which you feel you have the upper hand in having lost out to my superior knowledge and experience of city slum regeneration. An imaginary upper hand I might add, given that in now way have I said that I am against city centre cultural regeneration or whatever it is you call it.

 

In short, you're debating against an imaginary foe my friend because as I have since posted, I am actually not against it.

 

Get back to me when you want to rejoin the evolved debate. Or if you insist on going all the way back to the OP then I think I've answered your points above to be honest if you check and therefore wish you a pleasant evening sir, your debate is now concluded.

 

Onto Madras...

 

 

If you cant see how the OP, your statements about cultural investment and alternative approaches to managing regeneration are all linked together in one debate then you really are stupid.

 

Its money that can be used to invest in the region, which you insisted i knew nothing about and a debate about alternative means of deploying that investment (which you have struggled to say anything coherent on). All of it is relevant.

 

To understand why i've kept my personal debate with you going: You talked shit, i said have a word, you insist i know nothing about the region, i challenge you on your views regarding how to use that money instead and then you move away from the original shit that you talk refusing to acknowledge that you were talking through your arse (again).

 

Popping in phrase like 'flip-flopping' shows that you dont really understand what you are talking about. I believe that areas outside of the city will benefit from investments in it. Take Mumbai for example, where extreme poverty in the suburbs has been ameliorated by economic growth in the city which was then used by the council to subsidise a loss-making local rail network that kept communities in touch with the regeneration in the city centre. Intelligent, long-term thinking bringing benefits to the wider community. I dont think you've answered one single question i've posed to you and if you are now saying something completely at odds with your first post then it is you that are 'flip-flopping' (which you're either too stupid to notice or were hoping that long rambling posts would hide this fact).

 

Anyway, until 6 months ago you were an unemployed web-developer, now you're Amartya Sen?

 

 

 

[madras]

he has no get up and go,isn't the sharpest tool in the box...why ?

 

the waiveing of rent makes him £55 better off,but the council £55 worse off.no doubt you'll rattle off  a few things where money can be saved or is wasted then i'll come back with a few where money should be spent or is deesperatly needed  instead of giving your mate a free ride.

 

What would you do with my mate then?

no idea......one thing i would be doing is focusing on those who could turn out that way,starting froma young age.

 

Well that's kind of my idea, but in a different context. I would be trying to prevent another dole waller or even a future criminal/benefit cheat now rather than much earlier as you have proposed. Although I have to say though, yours makes more sense and is the correct area to work on for sure. Could we not do both though, if I can be greedy here? Remember, my mate could end up on the dole and have a kid so you could just be perpetuating the issue further down the line somewhere. Kind of like plugging one hole, only for another leak to spring elsewhere.

if it was affordable maybe,but theres lots of places i'd like to see money spent first i'm afraid.

 

Can you expand?

education,give headteachers some strength in acting with the parents. pay the wages to get in teachers who have the ability to teach rather than those who see it as a cushy number. i'd rather help your mate by providing his kid with a breakfast and free school uniform(compulsary and identical to the other kids). decent after school care for those whose parents are in work. work on programmes getting the parents activly involved with the schools to engineer some pride in their community.just off the top of my head

 

I like it and can't disagree. I'm loathe to pick on teachers because it's a tough job and a specialist job in my opinion, but if education standards are falling, then those at the top need to be asked questions of. Teaching used to be a profession, now it's a "hey, I like kids, I can do that" kind of job.

 

The actual problem is that no-one with any sense wants to be a teacher anymore. They get f***** over all the time, it's a s*** job, you can't win, you have to deal with obnoxious little shits all day every day and that's just the parents. You get blamed for other people's (the government) f***-ups, you don't know whether you're coming or going because they're continually changing the curriculum. If exam results go up it's not because you've worked your arse off and done a fantastic job and so have the kids, it's because exams are a piece of piss nowadays. If they go down, then it's not because they're harder or the kids are just stupid knuckle-dragging ignoramuses, it's because teachers aren't doing their jobs right. All my family are in education, but there's no f****** way I'm doing it, I'd rather stack shelves!!

 

My Mam is head of English at a rough-arse school, god knows why she stays there, she could be working at some nice school that's well financed and has kids that actually want to learn - it's not like she hasn't been offered the chance numerous times before - but she stays there because she likes making a difference. For her, getting one of her kids to read a book, or take even the slightest interest in a bit of Shakespeare, let alone through a GCSE with pass grade, is worth infinitely more than a 90% A-C pass-rate. There's not many like her out there though, especially the new teachers, I don't blame them why the f*** would you want to work in a school like that and take all the s*** my Mam has to put up with when you can go down the road and get a job at a "decent" school. There's simply not enough people who want to be teachers, for understandable reasons, so the rougher schools end up having to scrape the bottom of the barrel and pretty much employ anyone who shows an interest, that's if there is anyone, which most of the time there isn't.

re-read my post.

 

i address (though briefly) the problems you raise.

 

people do want to teach but either the pay is too low or they get fucked about by parents,government as you say...thats why i say give the head teacher the strength/power to take them on and the only way to get the tea\chers you want is to make it worth their while (cash). for the most part i agree with you in the way things are....it needs to change if we are to try and stop the next wave of shit coming through.

[indi]

I wasn't arguing with you, or anyone else, just ranting for on apparent reason.

[Benwell Lad]

I've been scanning this thread for the last few days and trying to bite my tongue.

 

The article contrasting the differences between Cowgate and the "wine bars" could have been written about any major city in the developed world.  In my opinion Newcastle's west end is a better place than it was decades ago.  Tension between "locals" and ethnic groups are mentioned - just one of those human things I'm afraid - before there were any significant immigrant groups - there was plenty of aggro between rival parishes, schools - even streets. Sadly it happens.

As a white working class Geordie born in the west end - I think a lot of the "new arrivals" have added something positive to the area and the city.

 

Talking about "poverty" in Cowgate or other parts of the UK - there is NO poverty in the UK. We're a world leading economy which looks after all it's people and provides opportunity to all.

Some are less well off than others BUT there is no poverty. Go to parts of Africa, Asia or S.America if you need to know what poverty is.

 

The people I feel sorry for in Cowgate and other similarly "deprived" areas are the good honest decent people who's daily lives are made miserable by those who's behaviour is nothing more than malice or evil nastiness. Not poverty, not lack of opportunity, not political frustration - just old fashioned malice and evil.

 

Newcastle as a city is doing good and show casing certain positive aspects helps build confidence, attracts investment and ultimately helps all. The west end is improving - albeit it still has big problems - but let's face it is never going to be Jesmond or Gosforth.

 

The problems have not been caused by lack of money but in some cases by handing out too much, and mollycoddling fit able people who should be looking after themselves rather than spending their state handouts on tabs, booze, phones etc and then pleading poverty, at the same time spurning education and other opportunities while always looking for someone else to blame for what has happened to them.

[madras]

benwell lad....yes and no.

 

for every 20yr old you think should be able to help himself,you'll see a 6 month old child and you'll look at the parents and think "what chance has he got...i know exactly how he'll turn out" and you'll probably be right.for the 20yr old he has himself to blame, but not for the child

 

your idea on poverty is right in absolutist terms but when a kid from cowgate sees others with flash cars and big houses,expensive hols etc he does feel the psychological effects of poverty,just like in those places you talk of it's relative to some extent.

[ChezGiven]

I've been scanning this thread for the last few days and trying to bite my tongue.

 

The article contrasting the differences between Cowgate and the "wine bars" could have been written about any major city in the developed world.  In my opinion Newcastle's west end is a better place than it was decades ago.  Tension between "locals" and ethnic groups are mentioned - just one of those human things I'm afraid - before there were any significant immigrant groups - there was plenty of aggro between rival parishes, schools - even streets. Sadly it happens.

As a white working class Geordie born in the west end - I think a lot of the "new arrivals" have added something positive to the area and the city.

 

Talking about "poverty" in Cowgate or other parts of the UK - there is NO poverty in the UK. We're a world leading economy which looks after all it's people and provides opportunity to all.

Some are less well off than others BUT there is no poverty. Go to parts of Africa, Asia or S.America if you need to know what poverty is.

 

The people I feel sorry for in Cowgate and other similarly "deprived" areas are the good honest decent people who's daily lives are made miserable by those who's behaviour is nothing more than malice or evil nastiness. Not poverty, not lack of opportunity, not political frustration - just old fashioned malice and evil.

 

Newcastle as a city is doing good and show casing certain positive aspects helps build confidence, attracts investment and ultimately helps all. The west end is improving - albeit it still has big problems - but let's face it is never going to be Jesmond or Gosforth.

 

The problems have not been caused by lack of money but in some cases by handing out too much, and mollycoddling fit able people who should be looking after themselves rather than spending their state handouts on tabs, booze, phones etc and then pleading poverty, at the same time spurning education and other opportunities while always looking for someone else to blame for what has happened to them.

 

Spot on.

[Guest alex]

When you look at projects like the Sage, the Baltic and the Angel of the North etc. I think it's easy to sneer, say they're minority 'arty farty' schemes and that the money could have been better spent but I think that's an oversimplification. The same goes for the regeneration of Grainger Town and the Quayside and city centre in general. You can point at areas like Walker, Benwell, and so on and say the money should have gone there but you have to remember that a lot of the money was Government and European funding that has been specifically set aside for arts and the like. If the money hadn’t been spent here it wouldn’t have gone towards building a new school or hospital in the area – it would have gone on arts / regeneration projects in other parts of the UK or Europe. In that sense we should all be happy that it was Newcastle / Gateshead where the money was spent. Now, a lot of people in Newcastle may not appreciate all of these changes and when you look at places like Gateshead Town Centre you can understand why people think the money lavished on the Gateshead Quays could have at least been distributed a little bit wider. Fair comment too. That said though, as others have pointed out, the changes to the City Centre have brought in extra visitors, which in turn have created extra jobs (on top of those jobs in construction etc. which the projects created) and overall, I think you have to say that is a good thing for the city. It is also probably doing things in the right order, i.e. creating wealth and jobs by concentrating on the city centre. The heavy industry is never going to come back and cities like Newcastle have to change and adapt with the times to survive and you have to ask yourself (even if the stag dos do get on your tits) what would you rather have? – a city listed in countless ‘must see’ lists that is attractive to visitors or the Vladivostok clone 12 miles down the coast.

I don’t think any of the above should be at the expense of supporting the less well-off communities by the way but it already has been of benefit to them too in part.

 

[madras]

When you look at projects like the Sage, the Baltic and the Angel of the North etc. I think it's easy to sneer, say they're minority 'arty farty' schemes and that the money could have been better spent but I think that's an oversimplification. The same goes for the regeneration of Grainger Town and the Quayside and city centre in general. You can point at areas like Walker, Benwell, and so on and say the money should have gone there but you have to remember that a lot of the money was Government and European funding that has been specifically set aside for arts and the like. If the money hadn’t been spent here it wouldn’t have gone towards building a new school or hospital in the area – it would have gone on arts / regeneration projects in other parts of the UK or Europe. In that sense we should all be happy that it was Newcastle / Gateshead where the money was spent. Now, a lot of people in Newcastle may not appreciate all of these changes and when you look at places like Gateshead Town Centre you can understand why people think the money lavished on the Gateshead Quays could have at least been distributed a little bit wider. Fair comment too. That said though, as others have pointed out, the changes to the City Centre have brought in extra visitors, which in turn have created extra jobs (on top of those jobs in construction etc. which the projects created) and overall, I think you have to say that is a good thing for the city. It is also probably doing things in the right order, i.e. creating wealth and jobs by concentrating on the city centre. The heavy industry is never going to come back and cities like Newcastle have to change and adapt with the times to survive and you have to ask yourself (even if the stag dos do get on your tits) what would you rather have? – a city listed in countless ‘must see’ lists that is attractive to visitors or the Vladivostok clone 12 miles down the coast.

I don’t think any of the above should be at the expense of supporting the less well-off communities by the way but it already has been of benefit to them too in part.

 

have to agree with that,except you may get some poisoned e-mail from the good folk of vladivostock.

[Guest Knightrider]

Forgive me for keeping my own debate with you alive, you've certainly said nothing in the ensuing time that has changed my view that your initial outburst was wrong and thats what prompted you to question my roots and my ability to understand the place where i grew up and spend a lot of time in. Not sure why your subsequent ramblings should preclude me from challenging you on those posts.

 

"Too wide for those games Chez man"

 

Not really as you then subsequently answer the question at hand. Which is what the OP was about and is at the heart of the whole debate. Not sure why you cant connect the dots (well i have an idea).

 

Re-read the posts man, you were perfectly happy challenging me on the whole run down communities and regeneration points which dominated our debate, until a post or two back where you decided to jump back to the OP for some reason. Of course regeneration as a whole covers city centre and run down estates (and a whole lot more that hasn't been discussed) but were we not talking about specific issues of one nature, and not the other or the whole? I was anyway, actually prompted by your responses to my comments.

 

Otherwise why the hell did you ask me to post some ideas as to how I would deal with run down areas and the issues that revolve around them?

 

Going through the thread you have ignored many of the points I've raised not just in general, but in direct response to your own, now you ask me to basically clarify things FOR YOU, or to justify my views, many views you assumed of me (i.e. assuming I'm against cultural regeneration). If I'm not connecting the dots, you're not returning the ball.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I have answered all your points, or debated all the issues, you have flip flopped on the otherhand and tried (in vain) to get back to a point - the cultural regeneration of the city centre - which you feel you have the upper hand in having lost out to my superior knowledge and experience of city slum regeneration. An imaginary upper hand I might add, given that in now way have I said that I am against city centre cultural regeneration or whatever it is you call it.

 

In short, you're debating against an imaginary foe my friend because as I have since posted, I am actually not against it.

 

Get back to me when you want to rejoin the evolved debate. Or if you insist on going all the way back to the OP then I think I've answered your points above to be honest if you check and therefore wish you a pleasant evening sir, your debate is now concluded.

 

Onto Madras...

 

 

If you cant see how the OP, your statements about cultural investment and alternative approaches to managing regeneration are all linked together in one debate then you really are stupid.

 

Its money that can be used to invest in the region, which you insisted i knew nothing about and a debate about alternative means of deploying that investment (which you have struggled to say anything coherent on). All of it is relevant.

 

To understand why i've kept my personal debate with you going: You talked shit, i said have a word, you insist i know nothing about the region, i challenge you on your views regarding how to use that money instead and then you move away from the original shit that you talk refusing to acknowledge that you were talking through your arse (again).

 

Popping in phrase like 'flip-flopping' shows that you dont really understand what you are talking about. I believe that areas outside of the city will benefit from investments in it. Take Mumbai for example, where extreme poverty in the suburbs has been ameliorated by economic growth in the city which was then used by the council to subsidise a loss-making local rail network that kept communities in touch with the regeneration in the city centre. Intelligent, long-term thinking bringing benefits to the wider community. I dont think you've answered one single question i've posed to you and if you are now saying something completely at odds with your first post then it is you that are 'flip-flopping' (which you're either too stupid to notice or were hoping that long rambling posts would hide this fact).

 

Anyway, until 6 months ago you were an unemployed web-developer, now you're Amartya Sen?

 

 

 

 

They are all linked together, yes, obviously. However the debate moved on, we were talking specifics (city slums), then you go right back on yourself and indeed me and started blabbing on about my original comments which I have already covered and you should know amount to a rant more than anything, i.e. "fuck the city centre" when in actual reality I acknowledge the benefits city centre regeneration bring to the city.

 

Where you and I differ however is the effects and impact it has had and will have on urban regeneration in terms of the people which is an area of discussion you were losing hands down hence your u-turn all the way back to my OP in a vain attempt to get the discussion into an area where you are a lot more knowledgeable and experienced in and I am not.

 

I don't mind admitting that though or rather conceding that hey, where city centre regeneration is concerned, you do know what you're talking about (or claim to) and perhaps, to paraphrase you, I'm just talking out of my arse with regards to that specific area of discussion.

 

You though, you give the impression that you know it all regarding this issue in full, when in reality you know only half of it (city centre regeneration) and only know of the other half (urban regeneration). You are like this in many debates btw, all knowing.

 

You argue that city centre regeneration is good for all, I argue it isn't. You waffle away, I post facts and real life experiences.

 

I said wind your neck in because you can't possibly relate to me and my grievances and you took offence at that but hey it's OK for you but I have to have a word with myself when I rant away about an issue that has effected me personally on a few levels and will do so for years to come...

 

OK...

 

 

Like fuck I will.

 

I'm not having some fucker telling me to shut up about something they clearly don't have a clue in where as I at least have some kind of clue.

 

As for Mumbai. I don't give a fuck about what happened over there to be honest. All I know is that while my City centre booms (false economy?), the area I grew up in as a kid and areas like it continue to suffer. And to back my own argument, historically, regeneration attempts have all failed. Otherwise they wouldn't be tearing down these areas and dispersing people. Regeneration maybe the answer to the City but it's not the answer to the likes of Scotswood. This isn't about land, housing, art, culture, tourism or business, this is about people.

 

I do see your bigger picture model btw, I know the likes of the Sage will pay for itself and that selling the City to outsiders helps the economy and all that etc. etc., but you are very naive if you think it will help areas like Scotswood and more importantly the people of these areas, very naive.

 

Although I'd be happy to hear you explain how, where and when. (Edit: For the benefit of the thread in general, I can't be arsed with it.)

 

BTW I never said you know nothing about the region in a literal sense, which is the crux of your problem (aye?) with my post and why you've been stalking me in other threads, I said you can't possibly comment on my grievances with regeneration when applied to my own circumstances giving that you aren't from where I am from or live there. Not in those words maybe but that's the jist of my "wind your neck in" line.

 

You just assumed I meant something more, as you always do these days (see your response to my "KK will see something of himself in Milner" post which translated in your mind as me saying KK was a similar player to Milner. Aye, that's exactly what I said!)

 

Anyway, I can't be arsed debating with you any more, I think we'd just be going over old ground and we clearly disagree on certain things and I'll be fucked if I'm going to keep rectifying your own assumptions of me and my views because that's no way to debate. Debate clear points by all means but debate made up points or assumed points of views which is exactly what you've been doing for the best part of this debate between me and you, and clearly getting vexed about it hence the one or two personal snipes? You carry on. I'm out.

[madras]

after school in the park.......barney...BARNEY.

[Guest Knightrider]

When you look at projects like the Sage, the Baltic and the Angel of the North etc. I think it's easy to sneer, say they're minority 'arty farty' schemes and that the money could have been better spent but I think that's an oversimplification. The same goes for the regeneration of Grainger Town and the Quayside and city centre in general. You can point at areas like Walker, Benwell, and so on and say the money should have gone there but you have to remember that a lot of the money was Government and European funding that has been specifically set aside for arts and the like. If the money hadn’t been spent here it wouldn’t have gone towards building a new school or hospital in the area – it would have gone on arts / regeneration projects in other parts of the UK or Europe. In that sense we should all be happy that it was Newcastle / Gateshead where the money was spent. Now, a lot of people in Newcastle may not appreciate all of these changes and when you look at places like Gateshead Town Centre you can understand why people think the money lavished on the Gateshead Quays could have at least been distributed a little bit wider. Fair comment too. That said though, as others have pointed out, the changes to the City Centre have brought in extra visitors, which in turn have created extra jobs (on top of those jobs in construction etc. which the projects created) and overall, I think you have to say that is a good thing for the city. It is also probably doing things in the right order, i.e. creating wealth and jobs by concentrating on the city centre. The heavy industry is never going to come back and cities like Newcastle have to change and adapt with the times to survive and you have to ask yourself (even if the stag dos do get on your tits) what would you rather have? – a city listed in countless ‘must see’ lists that is attractive to visitors or the Vladivostok clone 12 miles down the coast.

I don’t think any of the above should be at the expense of supporting the less well-off communities by the way but it already has been of benefit to them too in part.

 

 

Good post and I have to say, hard to argue with.

[Guest Knightrider]

after school in the park.......barney...BARNEY.

 

I'd win. I'm from Scotchy.