Garden Bridge

sjac wrote:

... I ... would expect that the silent majority are strongly in favour.

Rationalwiki.org/Argumentum ad populum

"...The term "silent majority" is often invoked by people who decide to fall back on argumentum ad populum without any actual evidence that their view is at all popular. The flaw with the phrase is obvious: if the majority is silent, then how can one identify its views?"

Sandgrown Dave wrote:

sjac wrote:

... I ... would expect that the silent majority are strongly in favour.

Rationalwiki.org/Argumentum ad populum

"...The term "silent majority" is often invoked by people who decide to fall back on argumentum ad populum without any actual evidence that their view is at all popular. The flaw with the phrase is obvious: if the majority is silent, then how can one identify its views?"

Meh. I know that I'm more likely to complain if I don't like something that's proposed, rather than find a way to actively express my approval or indifference (unless it's VERY important to me). Perhaps because it's easier for a small group of people to derail a project than for a small group of people to build true positive momentum?

Most of my friends like the Garden Bridge, but I don't expect that any of them are overly vocal in their approval, and I wouldn't have started a thread voicing my approval of the bridge. Admittedly just a small sample size, but there you go...

sjac wrote:

Meh...

Most of my friends like the Garden Bridge...

Well, I stand corrected.

Karen007 wrote:

Thank you for the link to the Lambeth planning application. Does anyone have one for Westminster? Refusal by either council would stop the bridge happening...?

Might be one of these:

http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

There is a certain degree of apathy all round when it comes to voting for something important. The 'silent minority' can in no way indicate support for the bridge; there is no evidence to support this - it's merely an assumption.

However the fact that there is a campaign to stop it means that there are a few brave souls who are prepared to speak out when something feels intrinsically wrong.

It's a nice idea and in a better economic climate I'd support it - elsewhere. If I was given £60m to donate something to the to the nation, it certainly wouldn't all go to the garden bridge. My local hospitals and schools would come first. I'd house the poor. I'd give firefighters their jobs back...maybe reinstate ticket office staff at Tfl - after all, Tfl donated £30m of our money without our permission so that we could dream our way across the Thames...

qwerty wrote:

There is a certain degree of apathy all round when it comes to voting for something important. The 'silent minority' can in no way indicate support for the bridge; there is no evidence to support this - it's merely an assumption.
However the fact that there is a campaign to stop it means that there are a few brave souls who are prepared to speak out when something feels intrinsically wrong.

Or, rather than apathy, there simply are a lot of people like me who like the idea of a garden bridge, in spite of the concerns you raise. What exactly is brave about speaking out about is issue? What are the dangers and risks you face that make it an act of bravery? It's hardly Euromaidan, is it.

Dear Edward, once again, you have risen to the occasion. Your vitriol does you proud. We thank you for your kind comments; so well thought out and reasoned. Bravo.

My main concern is not how much the bridge will cost and how this money could otherwise be used. I am concerned about the location of this bridge, and whether the bridge will actually achieve what is intended. The area leading to the site of the landing platform when approaching from the Tait, is very narrow, especially in front of the Oxo building and the bit near the pier. Additionally, the stairway up to the landing stations runs diagonally across the embankment which will be fine when ascending, but when visitors come down the stairs they will be walking diagonally in front of people who just wish to walk up the embankment. This will prevent a smooth flow of people who do not wish to get onto the bridge. The bridge is supposed to be add to the green space of the Southbank but in order to build the bridge and the landing station, a largish piece of lawn will disappear as will about 21 mature trees on the Southbank. I haven't been over to Temple to see if any green space will be lost there. The green space gained by installing the bridge is actually quite minimal. I'm all for greening London but not at a great cost to the environment, which this will be. I think a much better idea would be to build more piers like the one near the Oxo tower and green these. Each one could be themed, are relatively cheap to build and will not reduce current green space. It really isn't a functional bridge, if it were, it would be open 24 hours a day; it is a tourist attraction and the Southbank doesn't really need another attraction. I think the bridge looks incredible on the drawings, and a fantastic way of increasing green spaces in built up areas where the ground has been taken up by other structures. Just imagine bridges like this over motorways. Would look wonderful. Unfortunately that's far too practical and environmentally beneficial and this particular bridge is just for show. And fame.

Well said Karen. For anyone still wishing to promote the cause for stopping the already overcrowded South Bank from being turned into Disney-on-Thames (without toilets) please sign here and pass the petition on. Many thanks for your kind support.
http://www.change.org/p/lambeth-council-planning-david-smith-lambeth-council-put-the-garden-bridge-where-it-s-needed

well said qwerty....the manner in which you put your point across makes me more in favour of the garden bridge than I ever was before