- cross-posted to:
- uk_politics
- cross-posted to:
- uk_politics
You must log in or register to comment.
That is such a neoliberalism thing that even the museum would be proud.
The museum is not pro-neoliberalism, though in that light if it does succeed in finding a new location it seems like a guarantee that this news article will become an exhibit in it
Oh. Still, the next exhibit they should have is dentures of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan kissing each other.
I’m pretty sure the actual museum of neoliberalism is in Cambodia
hmmm… surprisingly self-consistent. I guess stopped clock and all that.
“luxury apartments” will never cease to sound like an oxymoron to me, it’s like “low-budget castle”
A new apartment building is going up in the middle of my small town. It’s “luxury” apartments.
Big black “stylish” (see also: identical to every other luxury apartment building in the last 5 years) building on top of a hill in the middle of a low-cost and simple rural community. It’s so ridiculous. It stands out horribly, and looks terrible. And it’s right next to a gas station… so it looks even more ridiculous. I doubt they will get a lot of renters for it.
About a decade back there was a push to build luxury apartments in the town over. They built them all (few hundred units) right next to the landfill. I’ve driven past said landfill in summer and nearly throw up. I can’t imagine living next to that, and calling my place luxury…
What part is an oxymoron?
the idea an apartment can be luxurious, ostensibly
Because the only way to be “luxurious” is to spread out on a massive amount of land with your car.
I think the key criticism of OP is the rent. Maybe proletarians don’t understand luxury but for me the idea of luxury is owning a modest home, be that a single home or a flat in a building, working a couple days a week to cover essentials, spending the rest of my time with loved ones and self improving.
that people would construct and buy luxury apartments, when you could instead spend that money on building luxury lower density housing that rich people actually want.
Rich people generally want to show off their wealth, which isn’t very easy with apartments. They also tend to want lots of space, which of course is also difficult with apartments.
Rich people live in mansions, not fucking apartments.
I don’t know, maybe this is an American thing, but I can tell you that in my country (Spain) it’s generally more expensive to have a luxury flat in the centre of a rich neighborhood of a big city, than it is to have a big detached house in the outskirts. Why would rich people want to live in bumfuck when they can live surrounded by luxury restaurants and services? Rich people live for the most part in big-ass flats in the centre, and then they go to the countryside on weekends to an even bigger-ass villa or something.
well yeah but that’s not a luxury apartment, that’s just expensive land. This is in fucking lewisham next to a sainsbury’s and they’re building more than 500 apartments, somehow i don’t think this is “luxury apartments”, what rich people want to live in a random part of lewisham?
Rich New Yorkers beg to differ. This is dumb overgeneralization. Some people genuinely want to live in high-density communities, and some of them are disgustingly wealthy.
Wtf, it’s a real place??
deleted by creator
The only thing that would be more fitting is Thatcher’s grave catching on fire because of reduced safety standards, and no one’s able to put it out because they ran out of piss
Thatcher-roofed cottages
deleted by creator
