[NickPollard]

I live near the Bethnal Green gas holders and I run at least once a week down the canal past them. They're quite interesting to look at but they're also in prime London real-estate, and the capital has a huge housing shortage. It's frankly inconceivable to keep them, that land is worth millions and there are people who need a place to live.

As much as it is nice to cherish our past, it seems it's OK for the haves to say let's keep it, when the have nots are struggling with ridiculous rents.

[learnstats2]

I came here to make a tangential point:

I have run past the same gasometers and I found them fascinating and inspiring for the same reason: a tiny part of the city where the space and skyline is reserved for a unique part of our history that isn't simply converted into modern urban sprawl.

Is it a good idea to convert them into new flats which are 90% landlord owned, if not owned by Chinese investors who leave them empty so they can't support local business - the typical fate of new property in London? How does it help your 'have nots' with their rent? Aren't you just stripping out all the cultural and local heritage?

[tankenmate]

A good reason for 'use it or sell it' laws; not just for land, but habitable properties as well. If no one has lived in it for 2 years the government should be able to force you to sell it.

[learnstats2]

Sure.

The goal of capitalism is that stuff is used in an economically efficient way, and capitalism is a bit broken when that doesn't happen.

'Use it or sell it' is needed but dangerous: applied naively, this creates false incentives.