“isnt this a 2 year old story just like the gedling one ? talked about in the days when gordon said we needed more houses for immigrant families ,so we must ignore brownbelt and build on the green belt land ?, i cant wait for tomorrows episode,
"stadium to be built at gamston if developers will take a punt"”

“It's out-of-town developments like these (in the UK, USA, Ireland, Spain) which are largely responsible for the credit crunch and our ongoing economic problems. Huge speculative developments costing billions to build (all financed on debt), not built where housing is in demand (places like The Park, Radford etc) but built on cheap out-of-town land under the hope of "build it and they will come".

This is what these companies do, rather than building homes where needed (where land is obviously a premium), they try to increase profit margins by building them on cheap edge-of-town & middle-of-nowhere land sites.

As petrol prices increase (most economists agree we will be very lucky if they only double over the coming decade!) such out-of-town estates will become less and less sustainable. However, as usual, when the next housing crash comes, it will be taxpayers once again picking up the bill.”

“I think we may have to agree to disagree on this subject, however I have enjoyed the debate.
I would like to apologise to other readers and correspondents for going somewhat off the point.

NB: I hope they manage to prevent the development but I don't hold out much hope.”

“You may be right, though I suspect that those whose own ideology leans to the right are more likely to see or at least take note of hypocrisy arising from those on the left, while those who are from the left are more likely to notice hypocrisy from the right, so I am not sure you could ever determine in an objective way where the greatest volume of hypocrisy lay.

But surely the point is that there are also people who lack hypocrisy right across the spectrum. The fact that hypocrisy is then demonstrably not an intrinsic part of any ideology means that any apparent association of the two is not a reason to reject any ideology out of hand.”

“Some good points there I'll grant you, although why would you promote ethnic diversity whilst not actually living in, or wanting to ever reside in, a diverse area? If not blatant hypocrisy, it does smack of PC ideology taking preference over one's actual yearnings. Again, if diverse areas are more desirable, as surely someone who promotes diversity must believe, why on earth would you NOT want to live in one? Lower house prices or higher crime perhaps? Or maybe simply not practising what one preaches?
I agree 100% that there are two faced hypocrites on all sides, however, in my opinion, the PC left has far more of these individuals than any other group, and they are considerably more vocal about the causes they claim to espouse, despite the contradictions.
One final point, a left leaning friend of the family who always was, and still is, a supporter of diversity, moved house when her area became a little too diverse for her liking. Obviously, a different reason was cited for the move, which would've been slightly more plausibly, had she not moved to an almost all white area only a couple of miles down the road!”

“I was simply commenting on your broad-brush statement that anyone from the left should no longer be taken seriously because of your simplistic perception of hypocrisy. I would suggest that implying it is a failing of the left would indicate that you haven't either thought about what values they hold, nor taken a similar look at the right, which has plenty of hypocrisy of its own.

One example of each, since I don't have that long:

The fact that someone who promotes ethnic diversity currently lives in a mainly white neighbourhood does not imply hypocrisy. It would only be hypocritical if they tried to prevent anyone from a different ethnicity from moving into the neighbourhood, which I don't believe I have ever encountered in any of my lefty-er friends and acquaintances. In fact, when it has arisen they have welcomed such incomers.

Now take a look at the same issue and how the right-wing deals with it. Plenty of those from this ideology, including a number of friends, would try to prevent people of the wrong colour moving into their neighbourhood. This truly is hypocrisy coming from an ideology in which everyone should be treated as an individual judged on the merits of how hard they work to get on in life, etc, not where their grandparents happened to have been born.

Of course, this is too simplistic as well: I am sure there are plenty who lean to the right who really do embrace its ideology of respecting the individual and who would accordingly welcome a successful businessman of a different colour as a next-door neighbour, and I am sure there are plenty who espouse left-wing policies while secretly hoping that their neighbourhood stays "nice" and white.

In fact, my point was exactly that; the only truly stupid arguments are those that run "left good; right bad," or vice-versa.”

“Please, you are all missing the point once the green areas have been tarmaced over where can we go to walk, cycle or just enjoy the countryside. MDC do not care as long as they can be seen to be doing something no matter what damage is done to the environment.”

“Again, what has this got to do with hypocrites holding multiple contradictory beliefs? Beliefs, so contradictory in fact, they make no sense whatsoever to anyone outside their own bizarre clique!
I suggest it's you Sir that hasn't thought things through thoroughly enough and fail to see the blindingly obvious, even when it's staring you in the face.
Neither left nor right have the perfect answer to everything, I never claimed they did, and I have no issue with anyone who holds strong beliefs, provided they actually believe in it, stick to it and defend it.
The problem I have with snivelling PC lefties is they say one thing to Peter, whilst relaying a completely different story to Paul. They try desperately to appease all sides, yet actually manage to antagonise virtually everyone. This indicates, to moronic uneducated individuals such as myself, they don't actually believe in anything, other than what their masters tell them. PC should be defined in the dictionary as someone who is incapable of deep, clear or rational thought.
Now please, for the last time, and if it's not too much trouble, tell me what has "economical natural selection" got to do with being a hypocrite?”

“Actually, I pointed out in a fairly succinct way that anyone who actually thinks about it for a moment can see quite easily that neither left nor right have an obviously better solution to the World's ills.

The fact that you cannot see this then implies that you have not thought about it for a moment. I do not presume to know whether this is a wilful act on your part or reflects an inability to do so.”

“And who will be able to afford these Houses?
It will not be people working in Mansfield, (there are not many £50,000 pound per year jobs in Mansfield as I know of.
I will tell you who will be able to buy them anyone living south of Watford were a three bed semi sells for £500,000. plus.
They can then buy a house in our beautiful countryside and travel up and down the M1 each day to work
This nonesence will not bring 1 job to Mansfield when the houses have been built”