Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:12am Wed 9 Apr 08
Ha Ha to Mr Fox - he should have took the money when he was offered, he didn't so now he'll get a pittance in return for trying to be smart!
His property in one of the shabbiest in that area, doubt he'll get much for it!
Ha Ha to Mr Fox - he should have took the money when he was offered, he didn't so now he'll get a pittance in return for trying to be smart!
His property in one of the shabbiest in that area, doubt he'll get much for it!
Posted by: FMJ, Glasgow on 11:15am Wed 9 Apr 08
The difference between the 'hideous' old design and the new, approved one was probably the addition of a tasteful brown envelope. And compulsory purchase orders are simply robbery by the state. Can't Glasgow City Council even be bothered to burn inconvenient buildings down any more?
The difference between the 'hideous' old design and the new, approved one was probably the addition of a tasteful brown envelope. And compulsory purchase orders are simply robbery by the state. Can't Glasgow City Council even be bothered to burn inconvenient buildings down any more?
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 11:17am Wed 9 Apr 08
Alex Glass, betrayer of Pollok Park and the people of Pollok, if you're going to talk [bold]intelligible nonsense[/bold] kindly limit your cosy wee blog, where you embarrass yourself on a daily basis.
Alex Glass, betrayer of Pollok Park and the people of Pollok, if you're going to talk
intelligible nonsense kindly limit your cosy wee blog, where you embarrass yourself on a daily basis.
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:18am Wed 9 Apr 08
I was on the wee mans side for standing up for the small folks.But he was offered well over and above its worth and more.So he really has shot himself and his family in foot.he was being offered a shop in a busier area.OOPs
I was on the wee mans side for standing up for the small folks.But he was offered well over and above its worth and more.So he really has shot himself and his family in foot.he was being offered a shop in a busier area.OOPs
Posted by: FMJ, Glasgow on 11:22am Wed 9 Apr 08
I'm sure all the hookers who work in and around that area will appreciate the red glass in the lower windows - easy landmark so tourists can recognise the red light district.
I'm sure all the hookers who work in and around that area will appreciate the red glass in the lower windows - easy landmark so tourists can recognise the red light district.
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:25am Wed 9 Apr 08
FMJ where did you say that they worked! :P
FMJ where did you say that they worked! :P
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 11:29am Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote]East Centre councillor Frank Docherty said: "This area has been [bold]on its knees for 30 years[/bold] but this is a fantastic design and good for the city."[/quote]
It's been on its knees for 30 years (like most of Glasgow) because [bold]mediocre, selfish[/bold] councillors like Mr Docherty are quite happy to sit back and do nothing ... one silly hotel, which will spoil the existing architecture, is not going to change that!
East Centre councillor Frank Docherty said: "This area has been on its knees for 30 years but this is a fantastic design and good for the city."
It's been on its knees for 30 years (like most of Glasgow) because
mediocre, selfish councillors like Mr Docherty are quite happy to sit back and do nothing ... one silly hotel, which will spoil the existing architecture, is not going to change that!
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:33am Wed 9 Apr 08
Its being built on site of Old Job centre Thats good enough for me.
Its being built on site of Old Job centre Thats good enough for me.
Posted by: Meep, Shawlands on 12:12pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. [bold]Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.[/bold]
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city.
Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that. Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 12:24pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. [bold]Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.[/bold] [/quote] Meep I usually stay away from the great big hotel debate, because I believe they are good for Glasgow especially when we have large events. Sex tourists are people who are from Glasgow as well as those who come from afar however with regards to being an alienated city... I spotted this on a website.
The currently picture of poverty is 'offensive' to certain Officials and to the Glasgow Council as a whole in having to admit that within their cleverly crafted selling and advertising campaigns into just how 'good' Glasgow has become, and with a whole set
of new images of a modern Glasgow, there still exists so much poverty, that people still rummage around for secondhand items of clothing etc, just to help live a slighter better life but these people are in no way able to keep up with those who have comfortable lives.
Yes, as people earn huge salaries and live in big shiny apartments, I can imagine that it then becomes easy to forget how the other half live, or if indeed anything is being done for them to escape the clutches of other people's attitude and their abuse!
Meep wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.
Meep I usually stay away from the great big hotel debate, because I believe they are good for Glasgow especially when we have large events. Sex tourists are people who are from Glasgow as well as those who come from afar however with regards to being an alienated city... I spotted this on a website.
The currently picture of poverty is 'offensive' to certain Officials and to the Glasgow Council as a whole in having to admit that within their cleverly crafted selling and advertising campaigns into just how 'good' Glasgow has become, and with a whole set
of new images of a modern Glasgow, there still exists so much poverty, that people still rummage around for secondhand items of clothing etc, just to help live a slighter better life but these people are in no way able to keep up with those who have comfortable lives.
Yes, as people earn huge salaries and live in big shiny apartments, I can imagine that it then becomes easy to forget how the other half live, or if indeed anything is being done for them to escape the clutches of other people's attitude and their abuse!
Posted by: Anabelle, glasgow on 12:53pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Bring on the dirty-tanned sex tourists! They'll be a welcome step-up from the lardy pasty-faced odious locals scrambling amongst odd shoes down Paddy's Market.
Bring on the dirty-tanned sex tourists! They'll be a welcome step-up from the lardy pasty-faced odious locals scrambling amongst odd shoes down Paddy's Market.
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 12:56pm Wed 9 Apr 08
If this was a hospital or something else that was desperately needed, then I would back the compulsory purchase orders.
But this is a BUSINESS venture, therefor there should be NO CPO`s allowed. Its a business that no one actually seems to want, and one that Glasgow doesn`t need!!!!!!!
The "brown envelope" comment seems to say it all, and if we are honest, we all probably feel the same way. Corruption and state thuggery seem to be the mark of Labour these days.
I have to wonder just how many Glaswegians will be employed on this unwanted project??? Any bets that the City Fathers didnt bother to get ANY assurances on this matter, or is that what the SECOND brown envelope was for? to stop embarrassing questions?
Its more than likely that it will be built by mainly Poles/Romanians etc. Seems appropriate that it`ll be built on an old Job Centre, doesn`t it?
If Politics equals corruption, then Labour equals TOTAL and BLATANT corruption.
If this was a hospital or something else that was desperately needed, then I would back the compulsory purchase orders.
But this is a BUSINESS venture, therefor there should be NO CPO`s allowed. Its a business that no one actually seems to want, and one that Glasgow doesn`t need!!!!!!!
The "brown envelope" comment seems to say it all, and if we are honest, we all probably feel the same way. Corruption and state thuggery seem to be the mark of Labour these days.
I have to wonder just how many Glaswegians will be employed on this unwanted project??? Any bets that the City Fathers didnt bother to get ANY assurances on this matter, or is that what the SECOND brown envelope was for? to stop embarrassing questions?
Its more than likely that it will be built by mainly Poles/Romanians etc. Seems appropriate that it`ll be built on an old Job Centre, doesn`t it?
If Politics equals corruption, then Labour equals TOTAL and BLATANT corruption.
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 12:59pm Wed 9 Apr 08
By the way, I nearly peed myself when I saw THIS comment:-
"Senior planner Alistair MacDonald told councillors: "We do realise it's a challenging proposal but this conservation area is undergoing significant change."
WHAT EXACTLY ARE THEY CONSERVING HERE?????????
By the way, I nearly peed myself when I saw THIS comment:-
"Senior planner Alistair MacDonald told councillors: "We do realise it's a challenging proposal but this conservation area is undergoing significant change."
WHAT EXACTLY ARE THEY CONSERVING HERE?????????
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 1:04pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. [bold]Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.[/bold] [/quote] You keep coming up with this 'Glasgow will rise against tourists' rubbish. Bit mental to my way of thinking as Glasgow plainly [italic]is[/italic] a tourist city. I'm all for tourists personally and I'm frequently a tourist myself.
What exactly do you mean by 'dirty-tanned'?
Meep wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.
You keep coming up with this 'Glasgow will rise against tourists' rubbish. Bit mental to my way of thinking as Glasgow plainly
is a tourist city. I'm all for tourists personally and I'm frequently a tourist myself.
What exactly do you mean by 'dirty-tanned'?
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 1:06pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Anabelle[/bold] wrote:
Bring on the dirty-tanned sex tourists! They'll be a welcome step-up from the lardy pasty-faced odious locals scrambling amongst odd shoes down Paddy's Market.[/quote] Remember to keep a mouth full of saliva handy when you pass each one of the lardy pasty-faced odius locals.
Then it would be good to see how fast you can run or how quick you can dodge a flying bottle.
Amazing how people can say things on here that they just wouldn't get way with when dealing with such people face to face!
Anabelle wrote:
Bring on the dirty-tanned sex tourists! They'll be a welcome step-up from the lardy pasty-faced odious locals scrambling amongst odd shoes down Paddy's Market.
Remember to keep a mouth full of saliva handy when you pass each one of the lardy pasty-faced odius locals.
Then it would be good to see how fast you can run or how quick you can dodge a flying bottle.
Amazing how people can say things on here that they just wouldn't get way with when dealing with such people face to face!
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 1:22pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Bring on the tourists (however tanned)! Glasgwegians like tourists, it's one of the reasons they come here. Still a mingin' design though.
Forgive my innocence but what exactly are "sex tourist" coming to Glasgow for? What do they do here? And is that different from elsewhere?
Bring on the tourists (however tanned)! Glasgwegians like tourists, it's one of the reasons they come here. Still a mingin' design though.
Forgive my innocence but what exactly are "sex tourist" coming to Glasgow for? What do they do here? And is that different from elsewhere?
Posted by: toro loco, glasgow on 1:37pm Wed 9 Apr 08
A more inappropriate design for this part of Jamaica Street cannot be imagined, the proposal lacking in both scale and context, the two fundamental elements of urban desgn. The regeneration of tired parts of the city, which this is, requires comprehensive and contextual interventions or it will end up being a jigsaw with mismatched pieces.
A more inappropriate design for this part of Jamaica Street cannot be imagined, the proposal lacking in both scale and context, the two fundamental elements of urban desgn. The regeneration of tired parts of the city, which this is, requires comprehensive and contextual interventions or it will end up being a jigsaw with mismatched pieces.
Posted by: Big Al, Glasgow on 1:45pm Wed 9 Apr 08
I see that the architects took great inspiration from Glasgow architecture. Its just a pity that they have based their design on the 1960s buildings that GHA are now trying to pull down. As toro loco said, totally inappropriate in terms of scale and design for Glasgow.
I see that the architects took great inspiration from Glasgow architecture. Its just a pity that they have based their design on the 1960s buildings that GHA are now trying to pull down. As toro loco said, totally inappropriate in terms of scale and design for Glasgow.
Posted by: Grindero, glasgow on 2:15pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Mr Fox has been ripping off the poor people of Glasgow for years with his legitimised loan shark business. He's tried to bite off more than he can chew here so HA HA!!!!
Mr Fox has been ripping off the poor people of Glasgow for years with his legitimised loan shark business. He's tried to bite off more than he can chew here so HA HA!!!!
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 3:24pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Don't worry, Mr Fox will do very well out of this deal - he'll get MARKET value (and this land now has the market value of a "six-star" hotel), not CURRENT USE value (a scabby pawn shop). I suspect he knew what he was doing.
Don't worry, Mr Fox will do very well out of this deal - he'll get MARKET value (and this land now has the market value of a "six-star" hotel), not CURRENT USE value (a scabby pawn shop). I suspect he knew what he was doing.
Posted by: Murraymint, Kilbarchan on 3:45pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]toro loco[/bold] wrote:
A more inappropriate design for this part of Jamaica Street cannot be imagined, the proposal lacking in both scale and context, the two fundamental elements of urban desgn. The regeneration of tired parts of the city, which this is, requires comprehensive and contextual interventions or it will end up being a jigsaw with mismatched pieces.[/quote] Excellent post!
Glasgow planners seem to have learned absolutely nothing from the disasters of the past few years, and seem determined to obliterate any traces of the city's rich architectural heritage. It seems to be the case that as long as a proposed development meets building regulations it will be approved, and to hell with appropriateness as to site or quality of design.
The list of obscenities scarring the city centre is almost limitless, and I can hardly think of any building of merit erected in the recent past.
So much for the former "City of Architecture and Design", a misnomer if ever there was one.
toro loco wrote:
A more inappropriate design for this part of Jamaica Street cannot be imagined, the proposal lacking in both scale and context, the two fundamental elements of urban desgn. The regeneration of tired parts of the city, which this is, requires comprehensive and contextual interventions or it will end up being a jigsaw with mismatched pieces.
Excellent post!
Glasgow planners seem to have learned absolutely nothing from the disasters of the past few years, and seem determined to obliterate any traces of the city's rich architectural heritage. It seems to be the case that as long as a proposed development meets building regulations it will be approved, and to hell with appropriateness as to site or quality of design.
The list of obscenities scarring the city centre is almost limitless, and I can hardly think of any building of merit erected in the recent past.
So much for the former "City of Architecture and Design", a misnomer if ever there was one.
Posted by: emma, Glasgow on 3:54pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Bringing the area out of the doldrums - how about cleaning it so it doesnt stink, chasing the wee neds that hang about mcd's and the under18s club screetching at each other. More lighting too would be good. As for the architecture, iconic is good, when its designed for the place it sits in. Hopefully this will make the other owners look at their backyards and clean up their act regarding the eyesore that is the journey into central station
Bringing the area out of the doldrums - how about cleaning it so it doesnt stink, chasing the wee neds that hang about mcd's and the under18s club screetching at each other. More lighting too would be good. As for the architecture, iconic is good, when its designed for the place it sits in. Hopefully this will make the other owners look at their backyards and clean up their act regarding the eyesore that is the journey into central station
Posted by: Ian, Glasgow on 4:48pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. [bold]Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.[/bold] [/quote] Meep, I knew you'd be on here with your pish about 1. Not wanting hotels in Glasgow. 2. Not encouraging sex tourists. 3. Glaswegians not welcoming or wanting tourists in the city.
Firstly, Glasgow NEEDS more hotels. The occupancy levels in the city are now very high and we need to expand the availability.
Secondly 'Sex tourists' are just in your imagination and prostitution is no more prevalent in Glasgow than any other major city in the world and if you believe otherwise you are sorely mistaken!
Lastly, Glasgow and her people want more tourists to come to the city. They spend big money, create numerous jobs, encourage investment, make the place more diverse and interesting and generate thousands of £ for the local economy. [bold]Glaswegians of all hues WANT tourism. Bring them on![/bold]
Meep wrote:
Just what Glasgow doesnt need: More hotels bringing in more dirty-tanned sex tourists. glasgow is not a tourist city , and these hotles will do is alienate Glaswegians in a already alienated city. Glasgow is not a tourist playground. And Glaswrgians all of all hues will see to that.
Meep, I knew you'd be on here with your pish about 1. Not wanting hotels in Glasgow. 2. Not encouraging sex tourists. 3. Glaswegians not welcoming or wanting tourists in the city.
Firstly, Glasgow NEEDS more hotels. The occupancy levels in the city are now very high and we need to expand the availability.
Secondly 'Sex tourists' are just in your imagination and prostitution is no more prevalent in Glasgow than any other major city in the world and if you believe otherwise you are sorely mistaken!
Lastly, Glasgow and her people want more tourists to come to the city. They spend big money, create numerous jobs, encourage investment, make the place more diverse and interesting and generate thousands of £ for the local economy.
Glaswegians of all hues WANT tourism. Bring them on! Posted by: Meep, Shawlands on 5:57pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Ian the point you raised about tourism bringing more money into the city is a misnomer. Yeas money is coming into the city, but a large percentaqge of Glaswegians do not benefit. The only thing that tourism has done to glasgow is to alienate Glaswegians who wonder when the benefits of tourism are going to come to them. Cause has far has they see there hasnt been any benefit to Glasgow has a whole. Just pockets in the city centre. So the "benefits" of tourism havent filtered down to the man on the street. Are they better off? No. Do they have more money? No. Are the streets safer? No.Tourism hasnt benefited Glasgow or glaswegians in anyway. If so Ian then prove it. [bold] No more hotels.[/bold]
Ian the point you raised about tourism bringing more money into the city is a misnomer. Yeas money is coming into the city, but a large percentaqge of Glaswegians do not benefit. The only thing that tourism has done to glasgow is to alienate Glaswegians who wonder when the benefits of tourism are going to come to them. Cause has far has they see there hasnt been any benefit to Glasgow has a whole. Just pockets in the city centre. So the "benefits" of tourism havent filtered down to the man on the street. Are they better off? No. Do they have more money? No. Are the streets safer? No.Tourism hasnt benefited Glasgow or glaswegians in anyway. If so Ian then prove it.
No more hotels. Posted by: Big Al, Glasgow on 6:15pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Ian the point you raised about tourism bringing more money into the city is a misnomer. Yeas money is coming into the city, but a large percentaqge of Glaswegians do not benefit. The only thing that tourism has done to glasgow is to alienate Glaswegians who wonder when the benefits of tourism are going to come to them. Cause has far has they see there hasnt been any benefit to Glasgow has a whole. Just pockets in the city centre. So the "benefits" of tourism havent filtered down to the man on the street. Are they better off? No. Do they have more money? No. Are the streets safer? No.Tourism hasnt benefited Glasgow or glaswegians in anyway. If so Ian then prove it. [bold] No more hotels.[/bold] [/quote] Meep, how many Glaswegians are employed in the hotel industry. How many Glaswegians are employed in tourism-related businesses?
Without a doubt Glasgow and Scotland needs tourism. It has not only provided jobs and income but also provided us with new facilities, shops, restaurants, businesses that wouldn't be possible otherwise.
Meep wrote:
Ian the point you raised about tourism bringing more money into the city is a misnomer. Yeas money is coming into the city, but a large percentaqge of Glaswegians do not benefit. The only thing that tourism has done to glasgow is to alienate Glaswegians who wonder when the benefits of tourism are going to come to them. Cause has far has they see there hasnt been any benefit to Glasgow has a whole. Just pockets in the city centre. So the "benefits" of tourism havent filtered down to the man on the street. Are they better off? No. Do they have more money? No. Are the streets safer? No.Tourism hasnt benefited Glasgow or glaswegians in anyway. If so Ian then prove it. No more hotels.
Meep, how many Glaswegians are employed in the hotel industry. How many Glaswegians are employed in tourism-related businesses?
Without a doubt Glasgow and Scotland needs tourism. It has not only provided jobs and income but also provided us with new facilities, shops, restaurants, businesses that wouldn't be possible otherwise.
Posted by: Meep, Shawlands on 8:12pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 8:52pm Wed 9 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.[/quote] Have to side with MEEP on this one.
My sister used to work for Norwich Union, now India based.
She then applied for a job as a cleaner in the hospitals ... Chinese, Phillipino and Eastern Europe.
Hotel jobs, mainly Eastern Europeans now.
M&Ds at Strathclyde Park .... Eastern Europeans.
Councils, NHS even the Police are advertising for immigrants now!!!
Glaswegians don`t have a chance anymore. Very few will even get a chance at a job BUILDING the flaming thing!!!!!!!!!
Meep wrote:
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.
Have to side with MEEP on this one.
My sister used to work for Norwich Union, now India based.
She then applied for a job as a cleaner in the hospitals ... Chinese, Phillipino and Eastern Europe.
Hotel jobs, mainly Eastern Europeans now.
M&Ds at Strathclyde Park .... Eastern Europeans.
Councils, NHS even the Police are advertising for immigrants now!!!
Glaswegians don`t have a chance anymore. Very few will even get a chance at a job BUILDING the flaming thing!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: trench, possilpark on 9:53pm Wed 9 Apr 08
the motto for glasgow is...LET GLASGOW FLOURISH, more positive thinking i say, the people of glasgow have quite a few places of interest, go onto the glasgow website and there is nothing fake, either tans or otherwise (we are all a bit 'peely wally' so would anybody be if they did not get sunburned on most days! nobody is lonely in glasgow someone is eager to tell you their life stories, been like that for ages lets educate our visitors on all the inventions by scots mostly from old glasgow, i asked a young american how he would manage without his mobile and he answered "i dont know" i told him it was a scot who invented the phone, he was quite amazed and i told him to look up the scottish inventors on the computer,FLY THE FLAG.
the motto for glasgow is...LET GLASGOW FLOURISH, more positive thinking i say, the people of glasgow have quite a few places of interest, go onto the glasgow website and there is nothing fake, either tans or otherwise (we are all a bit 'peely wally' so would anybody be if they did not get sunburned on most days! nobody is lonely in glasgow someone is eager to tell you their life stories, been like that for ages lets educate our visitors on all the inventions by scots mostly from old glasgow, i asked a young american how he would manage without his mobile and he answered "i dont know" i told him it was a scot who invented the phone, he was quite amazed and i told him to look up the scottish inventors on the computer,FLY THE FLAG.
Posted by: leesome, Glasgow on 10:29pm Wed 9 Apr 08
Looked at that building and forgot which city I was in. What else to add; imagine the youth of tomorrow, they'll grasp worthless from that building. Pixel city, dots away!
Looked at that building and forgot which city I was in. What else to add; imagine the youth of tomorrow, they'll grasp worthless from that building. Pixel city, dots away!
Posted by: Big Al, Glasgow on 9:31am Thu 10 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Meep[/bold] wrote:
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.[/quote] Can you actually provide these UN figures please... I'd be interested to read them.
So you're actual gripe is not with tourism in Glasgow, but with the influx with foreign workers. In that case, then there's a hell of a lot more industries that aren't benefiting Glasgow then in your book. I mean, how is the construction industry helping Glasgwegians?
Meep wrote:
Big Al i will ask you the same thing. how has tourism given Glasgow more jobs? A fair percentage of hotels use cheaply paid eastern europeans. How is that a benefit? Secondly Glasgow has always had better shopping than Edinburgh, so you cant claim that shopping has gained because of tourism. This tourism hasnt benfited Glasgow and the UN figures for Glasgow prove this. So either put up verifiable facts or or admit that tourism hasnt helped to better Glasgow.
Can you actually provide these UN figures please... I'd be interested to read them.
So you're actual gripe is not with tourism in Glasgow, but with the influx with foreign workers. In that case, then there's a hell of a lot more industries that aren't benefiting Glasgow then in your book. I mean, how is the construction industry helping Glasgwegians?
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 9:59am Thu 10 Apr 08
Meep, you are talking nonsense. There are no UN figures which prove anything of the sort.
Sure, not all tourism jobs are held by locals - nor in any other industries. And what about those jobs (most of them) which are/will be held by locals? Should we ban more hotels because only some jobs are held by locals? Should we close down existing hotels?
There are fewer immigrants in Glasgow than, say, Edinburgh simply because there are more locals here able to take jobs. Nobody knows for sure but it's reckoned that there are 30k-40k Poles in Edinburgh (which needs more workers); 3-4 times more than in (more populous) Glasgow, which has plenty spare labour. We are not being swamped.
Official surveys suggest that around £700m comes to Glasgow from tourism each year and that over 30,000 in the city are in tourism-related posts (ABI): www.scotexchange.net
/_glasgow_city_2006-
3.pdf. Now some of that £700m won't touch the ground in Glasgow - it'll go straight to corporate HQ - but that's also the same for every other industry. Tourism is quite labour intensive, so a larger share of the money goes on wages and local sourcing than in many other industries. Tourism is also an export-earner since it attracts money from outside the area.
New workers are important to a city like Glasgow which had declining population for decades. Sure they take some jobs but they also create more: every Pole needs somewhere to live; to eat; to travel; etc. Your aversion seems more based on xenophobia than anything else.
Tourism isn't the be-all-and-end-all; it's just part of a healthy industrial mix. This is just the most basic economics. I imagine you prefer your nasty prejudices though.
Meep, you are talking nonsense. There are no UN figures which prove anything of the sort.
Sure, not all tourism jobs are held by locals - nor in any other industries. And what about those jobs (most of them) which are/will be held by locals? Should we ban more hotels because only some jobs are held by locals? Should we close down existing hotels?
There are fewer immigrants in Glasgow than, say, Edinburgh simply because there are more locals here able to take jobs. Nobody knows for sure but it's reckoned that there are 30k-40k Poles in Edinburgh (which needs more workers); 3-4 times more than in (more populous) Glasgow, which has plenty spare labour. We are not being swamped.
Official surveys suggest that around £700m comes to Glasgow from tourism each year and that over 30,000 in the city are in tourism-related posts (ABI): www.scotexchange.net
/_glasgow_city_2006-
3.pdf. Now some of that £700m won't touch the ground in Glasgow - it'll go straight to corporate HQ - but that's also the same for every other industry. Tourism is quite labour intensive, so a larger share of the money goes on wages and local sourcing than in many other industries. Tourism is also an export-earner since it attracts money from outside the area.
New workers are important to a city like Glasgow which had declining population for decades. Sure they take some jobs but they also create more: every Pole needs somewhere to live; to eat; to travel; etc. Your aversion seems more based on xenophobia than anything else.
Tourism isn't the be-all-and-end-all; it's just part of a healthy industrial mix. This is just the most basic economics. I imagine you prefer your nasty prejudices though.
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 10:03am Thu 10 Apr 08
It's also the case that places that are good to visit also tend to be good to live in. I want to live in a place that is sufficiently appealing that other people want to come see it too.
Meep, perhaps you should move somewhere miserable, like Shotts or New Cumnock, where you'll be safe from all those "sex tourists" and immigrants who want to steal all the jobs that aren't there anyway.
It's also the case that places that are good to visit also tend to be good to live in. I want to live in a place that is sufficiently appealing that other people want to come see it too.
Meep, perhaps you should move somewhere miserable, like Shotts or New Cumnock, where you'll be safe from all those "sex tourists" and immigrants who want to steal all the jobs that aren't there anyway.
Posted by: thistlemad, Ayrshire on 8:51pm Thu 10 Apr 08
Brad
Just exactly what planet do you live on???
First, the 700 million you talk about mainly goes to big business. eg hotel chains, restraunt chains etc etc many of whom are foreign owned. Benefit to Glaswegians .... zero. Low paid, long hours, generally poor conditions.
As for the tourism "local sourcing" . garbage.
Most souveniers are made abroad.
Poles need somewhere to sleep, eat etc. Tried to get a council house lately??? Poles, Romanians and asylum seekers are deemed a higher priority than actual Glaswegians.
Scotland in general is begining to lose its national identity, same as England has finally realised (pardon the grammar, but you all know what I mean).
Xenophobia????? Is that a similie for protectionism? (sarcasm).
Multiculturism has NEVER worked. Its been directly responsible for the downfall of evry civilisation in mans history, from the Byzantian Empire to the British one.
Why can`t mankind EVER learn from history????? We are heading full tilt to another world war. All the signs that have proceeded every major conflict are in place.
Food prices up 40%, fuel up over 100% in 2 years, unemployment, economic recession, bordering on collapse, general worldwide unrest over almost everything.
Wars coming my friends ..... time to kiss your erchie goodbye.
AND ALL OVER A FECKIN HOTEL IN GLASGOW!!!!!!!!
Brad
Just exactly what planet do you live on???
First, the 700 million you talk about mainly goes to big business. eg hotel chains, restraunt chains etc etc many of whom are foreign owned. Benefit to Glaswegians .... zero. Low paid, long hours, generally poor conditions.
As for the tourism "local sourcing" . garbage.
Most souveniers are made abroad.
Poles need somewhere to sleep, eat etc. Tried to get a council house lately??? Poles, Romanians and asylum seekers are deemed a higher priority than actual Glaswegians.
Scotland in general is begining to lose its national identity, same as England has finally realised (pardon the grammar, but you all know what I mean).
Xenophobia????? Is that a similie for protectionism? (sarcasm).
Multiculturism has NEVER worked. Its been directly responsible for the downfall of evry civilisation in mans history, from the Byzantian Empire to the British one.
Why can`t mankind EVER learn from history????? We are heading full tilt to another world war. All the signs that have proceeded every major conflict are in place.
Food prices up 40%, fuel up over 100% in 2 years, unemployment, economic recession, bordering on collapse, general worldwide unrest over almost everything.
Wars coming my friends ..... time to kiss your erchie goodbye.
AND ALL OVER A FECKIN HOTEL IN GLASGOW!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 10:43am Fri 11 Apr 08
I can only bow to your superior knowledge of economics, world affairs and history...
I can only bow to your superior knowledge of economics, world affairs and history...
Posted by: Scott, Airdrie on 11:54am Fri 11 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Sydney Meriwether[/bold] wrote:
Alex Glass, betrayer of Pollok Park and the people of Pollok, if you're going to talk [bold]intelligible nonsense[/bold] kindly limit your cosy wee blog, where you embarrass yourself on a daily basis. [/quote] Pot......kettle.
Sydney Meriwether wrote:
Alex Glass, betrayer of Pollok Park and the people of Pollok, if you're going to talk intelligible nonsense kindly limit your cosy wee blog, where you embarrass yourself on a daily basis.
Pot......kettle.
Posted by: Southsider71, East Ren, Glasgow on 12:14pm Fri 11 Apr 08
If this new building improves the area then it should be welcomed, certainly better than whats there at present...
If this new building improves the area then it should be welcomed, certainly better than whats there at present...
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 1:46pm Fri 11 Apr 08
Southsider71, can't you read...? Don't you learn? There can be NO benefit!
Southsider71, can't you read...? Don't you learn? There can be NO benefit!
Posted by: Southsider71, Glasgow on 2:24pm Fri 11 Apr 08
LOL, i know what you mean...maybe it would be better to bulldoze everything built after 19 oatcake...or the entire city, then we can keep the tourists away and play victim till our hearts content...
LOL, i know what you mean...maybe it would be better to bulldoze everything built after 19 oatcake...or the entire city, then we can keep the tourists away and play victim till our hearts content...
Posted by: cheesemonster, Glasgow on 9:38am Mon 14 Apr 08
As the proposed 20 storey hotel clearly does not fit in with the surrounding buildings, I propose knocking down everything else in site and replacing with a dozen more 'dramatic' hotels, since that is apparently what Glasgow needs. Then, I think we should add an extension from the St.Enoch Centre that joins up with each of these hotels so that the guests can shop with the immense satisfaction of being able to buy whisky and haggis whilst staying dry. It might also be an idea to build a new motorway so that the guests can get in and out quicker, preferably one that bulldozes as many listed buildings as is humanely possible. It will then probably be an idea to flatten the lot in 30 years time when none of it proves to be a success and put up over-priced flats instead.
As the proposed 20 storey hotel clearly does not fit in with the surrounding buildings, I propose knocking down everything else in site and replacing with a dozen more 'dramatic' hotels, since that is apparently what Glasgow needs. Then, I think we should add an extension from the St.Enoch Centre that joins up with each of these hotels so that the guests can shop with the immense satisfaction of being able to buy whisky and haggis whilst staying dry. It might also be an idea to build a new motorway so that the guests can get in and out quicker, preferably one that bulldozes as many listed buildings as is humanely possible. It will then probably be an idea to flatten the lot in 30 years time when none of it proves to be a success and put up over-priced flats instead.
Comment | Read Comments (39)
