Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After what’s been described as Trump’s worst week yet the bett

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited July 30 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After what’s been described as Trump’s worst week yet the betting stays with the president surviving

Betdata.io

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 7,264
    First
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439
    Second! Like Corbyn, Remain, Yes & SCon.....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 29,950
    Demoted to third, like Scottish Labour.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,276
    It is very troubling to have such a bozo as President of the US at such a difficult time. It is amazing that Trump hasn't worked out that what he does for business doesn't do for politics.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,391
    Fifth!
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 2,591
    Fix!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310

    It is very troubling to have such a bozo as President of the US at such a difficult time. It is amazing that Trump hasn't worked out that what he does for business doesn't do for politics.

    There’s none so blind as them as won’t see!

    I’d be a lot more hopeful if the Dems showed any signs of learning from last year, though. At the moment the ‘opposition’ seems to be largely principled Republicans and the discontented on the streets.
    Where’s the successor to the junior Senator from Illinois?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952
    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,426
    The opposition to Donald Trump has been more about his wickedness than his wrongness. The Democrats should be reversing the emphasis.

    The Republicans seem to have no appetite for positively opposing the president. So betting on him surviving looks like the value bet.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,984
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: the group C market is down from Ladbrokes. I checked and my initial bet/tip (Vandoorne to beat the Toro Rossos and Grosjean at 10) remains in place, odds unchanged.

    Overnight I did wonder if they'd accidentally got Kvyat and Vandoorne's odds mixed up, something I never considered when I was actually looking at the bet.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,363

    It is very troubling to have such a bozo as President of the US at such a difficult time. It is amazing that Trump hasn't worked out that what he does for business doesn't do for politics.

    There’s none so blind as them as won’t see!

    I’d be a lot more hopeful if the Dems showed any signs of learning from last year, though. At the moment the ‘opposition’ seems to be largely principled Republicans and the discontented on the streets.
    Where’s the successor to the junior Senator from Illinois?
    Early days, but this guy might be worth keeping an eye on:
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/28/seth-moulton-congressman-run-president-2020-profile-215428
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,426

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    The opposition to Donald Trump has been more about his wickedness than his wrongness. The Democrats should be reversing the emphasis.

    The Republicans seem to have no appetite for positively opposing the president. So betting on him surviving looks like the value bet.

    Trump approval ratings are still above 50% in 17 states:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-approval-rating-11-us-states-he-won-presidential-election-inauguration-republican-a7862386.html

    I cannot help but wonder what is needed to get it down to zero.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439
    The SNP government have been caught telling fibs about one of the issues they berate 'evil Tories' for:

    The Scottish Government do unquestionably have the power to provide direct financial assistance to WASPI women in Scotland. The FOI also shows that the SNP Social Security Minister Jeane Freeman acknowledges and accepts that these powers exist. The SNP have been playing fast and loose with the truth on this issue, at times outright lying, and leading Scottish voters, WASPI women and the Scottish Parliament on a merry dance. This blog explains how and why.

    http://rwbblog.blogspot.co.id/2017/07/the-great-waspi-cover-up-part-2-smoking.html
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    I doubt the figures too, but Momentum do seem to be keeping their momentum (!) going. You cannot fatten a pig on market day, and they are going to be ready when this government falls.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    Back in 2008, I met the then owner of a house my grandmother sold in Salcombe, in 1979, for £39,000, which he estimated at £1.3 m. But, Salcombe is exceptional.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310
    Nigelb said:

    It is very troubling to have such a bozo as President of the US at such a difficult time. It is amazing that Trump hasn't worked out that what he does for business doesn't do for politics.

    There’s none so blind as them as won’t see!

    I’d be a lot more hopeful if the Dems showed any signs of learning from last year, though. At the moment the ‘opposition’ seems to be largely principled Republicans and the discontented on the streets.
    Where’s the successor to the junior Senator from Illinois?
    Early days, but this guy might be worth keeping an eye on:
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/28/seth-moulton-congressman-run-president-2020-profile-215428
    Yes, interesting, long-ish shot.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310
    Sean_F said:

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    Back in 2008, I met the then owner of a house my grandmother sold in Salcombe, in 1979, for £39,000, which he estimated at £1.3 m. But, Salcombe is exceptional.
    Just checked on the part of Castle Point where I used to live. Doesn’t apply there.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million.
    I bought my first house in 1981 for £21,000, Zoopla currently estimate its value around £154,000......(adjusted for earnings £21,000 would be £104,000) but that's the North East for you.......they just don't get it.....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,984
    A house?

    I dream of living in a house. It'd be like a palace to me. Dwelling in a rotting shed, and grateful for it!
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 772
    Even money for Trump to last the distance would appear value to me, it's constitutionally very hard to shift a sitting president that cares nothing for public opinion.

    Tying up money for 3 years is another matter...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,984
    Mr. Johnstone, yeah, tying up cash at evens for that long is a bit off-putting.

    Rare to have F1 bets that last a long time. I remember, before Vettel won his first title, Coulthard being asked by someone who'd backed him to win five titles whether it'd come off. Coulthard thought it would. However, that must be 8 years or so ago, so even at reasonable odds, that's quite a long time to keep money waiting on a bet.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,276

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million.
    I bought my first house in 1981 for £21,000, Zoopla currently estimate its value around £154,000......(adjusted for earnings £21,000 would be £104,000) but that's the North East for you.......they just don't get it.....
    My first house in Sussex cost 27,000 in 1981 Its now estimated at 384,000.. Momentum talking bollocks... just like Corbyn over his student loans promise
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,385

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    The unacceptable face of capitalism....

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/25/leasehold-houses-and-the-ground-rent-scandal-all-you-need-to-know
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,981
    Roger said:


    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    The unacceptable face of capitalism....

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/25/leasehold-houses-and-the-ground-rent-scandal-all-you-need-to-know
    those are Alistairs cleints
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 1,846
    It varies a lot. Sean_F's example wasn't far off.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million.
    I bought my first house in 1981 for £21,000, Zoopla currently estimate its value around £154,000......(adjusted for earnings £21,000 would be £104,000) but that's the North East for you.......they just don't get it.....
    The 2 bed flat I bought in Wimbledon for £36 000 with my brother in 1985 would sell for about £850 000 at the moment. I sold my share to him in 1990 when I went to the antipodes. Even allowing for inflation, I reckon that is an eightfold increase.

    My brother sold it and bought a 3 bed house on Wimbledon Common, worth probably £1.5 million now. A nice spot, but no way could he get a mortgage on anything like it were he 30 again.

    While the facts in the video are wrong the truth is there, albeit a little exaggerated.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 7,233
    Sandbanks? That attack video is effective, if not a little nasty.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,053
    Ah, in the those good old days, you could leave a job on Friday night and walk into another one on a Monday morning.

    As long as you were prepared to do hard physical labour, turn up on time and do what you're told. Those jobs are gone now. I had a summer job loading 1cwt bags of fertilizer onto tractor trailers without the benefit of pallets or forklift trucks. Manual handling regulations would no longer allow it.

    But aren't Labour now the party of the ABC1s anyway - particularly in London?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247
    edited July 30
    Just read Paris' negative piece from yesterday - the new headbangers have lost; when will they get it? Europeanist neo-liberalism has been roundly rejected - move on man!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439
    edited July 30

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million.
    I bought my first house in 1981 for £21,000, Zoopla currently estimate its value around £154,000......(adjusted for earnings £21,000 would be £104,000) but that's the North East for you.......they just don't get it.....
    While the facts in the video are wrong the truth is there, albeit a little exaggerated.
    A little?

    While some areas have seen big increases in value - none have seen multiples like Momentum quote - and the areas where you could buy a house for £20,000 in 1980 aren't them.....in one area - where I bought, Momentum are out by a factor of ten

    Anyway - good of Momentum to highlight the iniquities of nepotism, eh Messer's Corbyn & McDonnell?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247
    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952
    Mortimer said:

    Just read Paris' negative piece from yesterday - the new headbangers have lost; when will they get it? Europeanist neo-liberalism has been roundly rejected - move on man!

    Sounds interesting. Do you have a link?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886

    It varies a lot. Sean_F's example wasn't far off.

    Salcombe has seen just about the biggest rise in the UK, though.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952
    CD13 said:

    Ah, in the those good old days, you could leave a job on Friday night and walk into another one on a Monday morning.

    As long as you were prepared to do hard physical labour, turn up on time and do what you're told. Those jobs are gone now. I had a summer job loading 1cwt bags of fertilizer onto tractor trailers without the benefit of pallets or forklift trucks. Manual handling regulations would no longer allow it.

    But aren't Labour now the party of the ABC1s anyway - particularly in London?

    Plenty of jobs coming available shortly if you don't mind getting up early:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/29/eu-workers-fifth-labour-force-18-sectors-britain-economy
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247

    Mortimer said:

    Just read Paris' negative piece from yesterday - the new headbangers have lost; when will they get it? Europeanist neo-liberalism has been roundly rejected - move on man!

    Sounds interesting. Do you have a link?
    Yesterday's Times... I have only a hard copy I'm afraid...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886
    Mortimer said:

    Just read Paris' negative piece from yesterday - the new headbangers have lost; when will they get it? Europeanist neo-liberalism has been roundly rejected - move on man!

    Parris has lost it, since he wrote that famous piece denouncing the people of Clacton.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,002
    Mortimer said:

    Just read Paris' negative piece from yesterday - the new headbangers have lost; when will they get it? Europeanist neo-liberalism has been roundly rejected - move on man!

    I haven't read the piece but I am pretty sure Europeanist liberalism isn't dead (although it has taken a knock). I also hope not.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952
    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    I was most interested to know where you could buy a house in 1981 that cost £20,000 then and is now worth £1.5million. My parents paid more than that in 1978 for a house that sold last year for £345,000.

    The video makes a good job of showing the self-serving hypocrisies that the elderly use to justify themselves. It doesn't try to show why Jeremy Corbyn offers any kind of answer for the young, who have hypocrisies of their own.
    I knew a police driver who bought a (very small) house in Back Lane in Hampstead in about 1980. That's probably worth more than £1m today, although I suspect he paid more than £20,000 for it then.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310
    CD13 said:

    Ah, in the those good old days, you could leave a job on Friday night and walk into another one on a Monday morning.

    As long as you were prepared to do hard physical labour, turn up on time and do what you're told. Those jobs are gone now. I had a summer job loading 1cwt bags of fertilizer onto tractor trailers without the benefit of pallets or forklift trucks. Manual handling regulations would no longer allow it.

    But aren't Labour now the party of the ABC1s anyway - particularly in London?

    In 1986 my son, having finished his A levels and having not applied to Uni, went up to London the Monday morning after leaving school, went round the agencies and landed a job the next morning.
    Mind, he’s regarded in the family as having, as the saying goes, more front than Blackpool!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083

    Even money for Trump to last the distance would appear value to me, it's constitutionally very hard to shift a sitting president that cares nothing for public opinion.

    Tying up money for 3 years is another matter...

    Agreed: it's a c. 20% chance of a health issue, plus 5% chance of impeachment, plus a maximum of 10% leaves for some other reason (i.e. possible impeachment).

    He should be 66% to go the distance.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    But what too many people (including on here) are forgetting is that at the last election the question was 'how big will Mrs May's majority' be; not who should be PM.

    In that context, the quinoa eating virtue signallers cannot win.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,322
    Morning all :)

    On topic, I'm finding America confusing at the moment. I agree with OGH this will be seen as a missed opportunity by Republicans in years to come. The mid terms next year will be illuminating and I wonder how many Democrats are considering a Presidential bid for 2020.

    Off topic - property in the south east, the veritable golden egg for a generation or more. I bought a 2-bedroom flat brand new off plan in 1996 for £58,500 and sold in 2005 for £145,000.

    Two generations of Londoners have done phenomenally well out of property (including former council house owners who bought theirs for a song in the early 80s and still sing the praises of the Blessed Margaret (and rightly so)).

    That certainty of a strong return on asset value also allowed people to keep spending and consuming and not worrying too much about pensions and savings. Why bother saving ? The house value is going up 10% year on year. I can take the profit when I downsize and that will be my retirement capital.

    Others saw property as an investment - why bother with stocks and shares ? Property is a guaranteed winner - buy a property, rent it out, take the profit and use that. To be fair, that won't be so easy from now on but as a method of making money, property in London is absurdly egalitarian. Whether you have a small flat in Barking or a five bedroom house in Beckenham, no matter. It's not money in the bank, it IS the bank.


  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 17,816
    CD13 said:

    Ah, in the those good old days, you could leave a job on Friday night and walk into another one on a Monday morning.

    As long as you were prepared to do hard physical labour, turn up on time and do what you're told. Those jobs are gone now. I had a summer job loading 1cwt bags of fertilizer onto tractor trailers without the benefit of pallets or forklift trucks. Manual handling regulations would no longer allow it.

    But aren't Labour now the party of the ABC1s anyway - particularly in London?

    "Ah, in the those good old days ..."

    They haven't gone. My nephew's nineteen, and despite getting good grades, decided not to go to university and instead enter the wonderful world of work. He got a job fairly immediately, and he appears to be loving it. He's travelling all over the country, and the company's keen for him to gain qualifications as he works.

    I've said passim that I think the idea that we have to go to university to succeed is a fallacy that hurts our youngsters. I also think it's a fallacy that there are not opportunities for youngsters who eschew university or higher education. But if you don't go to university, you need to ensure you have life skills to compensate.

    An anecdote: the interview was in a light industrial building, and he was the third scheduled for that day. The first was seen waiting outside, and did not even go in through the anonymous-looking exterior door (with just a sign above it). The second made it in through the door, but waited in an unstaffed waiting area without ringing the bell on the desk to summon anyone to come!
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952
    edited July 30
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,322
    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,981

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    Hmm

    the Empire Loyalists are long gone

    today the largest self deception is the those Europhiles who think they can just walk back in and take up from where they left.

    The UK is damaged goods, suspect in every way, and can never be at the heart of Europe.

    stop kidding yourself
  • http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    The Conservatives gained five in Scotland from the SNP, which had been Labour in 2010. The other 15 are in England.

    There is much of the country (some of it places Labour must win, like North Kent) which has no time for Corbyn.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083
    Re housing. Where I lived (until very recently) in Hampstead is seeing an astonishing number of new flats being built. Within five minutes walk of my home, I can think of five big new developments - with some having as many as 200 new homes.

    https://www.mountanvil.com/our-london-homes/hampstead-manor/
    https://www.barratthomes.co.uk/new-homes/greater-london/h418401-kidderpore-green/
    Then there are three developments on Finchley Road - one at the bottom of Hermitage Lane, and another two by Heath Drive.

    That's a staggering amount of new development, albeit in an area well served by public transport (buses down Finchley Road), and mostly to people without children (as these are largely two bedroom flats).

    If you want to make some money, I would own restaurant, bar and retail space on the Finchley Road around the Childs Hill area. A lot of new (well off) people coming to an area with relatively few amenities like that. (West Hampstead is five to ten minute walk, and Hampstead Village is more like 15.)
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886
    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    I don't particularly object to controls on leasehold houses, but people really should read the documents before they buy.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    10/16 for me...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    I also got 11 :smile:
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    Hmm

    the Empire Loyalists are long gone

    today the largest self deception is the those Europhiles who think they can just walk back in and take up from where they left.

    The UK is damaged goods, suspect in every way, and can never be at the heart of Europe.

    stop kidding yourself
    I think that you are right about the UK being damaged goods. We shat on our own doorstep.

    You have me wrong though, I back hard Brexit and just want some decent planning for it. We are woefully unprepared for its consequences, hence all the talk of prolonged transition periods. For example:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/29/uk-border-customs-chaos-hit-hard-brexit

    Play nicely people, off out shortly. :)
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 6,688
    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    First thing we should sort out is our borders unless you get control of the numbers coming here,you can not plan for the future.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,952

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    Just spotted that my autocorrect converted isam to Islam.

    Apologies isam! but a certain irony...
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247
    rcs1000 said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    I also got 11 :smile:
    12 for me - pretty bad given a nearly photographic memory...
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,319
    OT: Kicking out Trump [ or any President ] will not be easy. Impeachment is relatively easy but not with this HoR. Even if it is a Democrat HoR after 2018, getting 2/3rds in the Senate 67 votes will be impossible.

    The only possibility could be if something comes out of Trump's financial dealings with Russia or Russian bankers which apparently Mueller is broadening his investigation into.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    10/16 for me...
    Snap!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,319
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    The Conservatives gained five in Scotland from the SNP, which had been Labour in 2010. The other 15 are in England.

    There is much of the country (some of it places Labour must win, like North Kent) which has no time for Corbyn.
    Labour could win 17 seats from the SNP with only a 3.5% swing. It is quite possible. I think Labour could get 30 seats at the next election. There is a part of the electorate now who did not vote in the last 20 years.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,322


    First thing we should sort out is our borders unless you get control of the numbers coming here,you can not plan for the future.

    To a point, yes but even within the UK there is a huge migratory pull toward London and the South East which any Government needs to consider in terms of economic balance and housing provision.

  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,322
    rcs1000 said:

    Re housing. Where I lived (until very recently) in Hampstead is seeing an astonishing number of new flats being built. Within five minutes walk of my home, I can think of five big new developments - with some having as many as 200 new homes.

    https://www.mountanvil.com/our-london-homes/hampstead-manor/
    https://www.barratthomes.co.uk/new-homes/greater-london/h418401-kidderpore-green/
    Then there are three developments on Finchley Road - one at the bottom of Hermitage Lane, and another two by Heath Drive.

    That's a staggering amount of new development, albeit in an area well served by public transport (buses down Finchley Road), and mostly to people without children (as these are largely two bedroom flats).

    If you want to make some money, I would own restaurant, bar and retail space on the Finchley Road around the Childs Hill area. A lot of new (well off) people coming to an area with relatively few amenities like that. (West Hampstead is five to ten minute walk, and Hampstead Village is more like 15.)

    Indeed but perhaps that's the nub of the problem. Perhaps we shouldn't see housing simply in terms of "making money" but that's all it is for a lot of people.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083
    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 12,909
    rcs1000 said:

    Re housing. Where I lived (until very recently) in Hampstead is seeing an astonishing number of new flats being built. Within five minutes walk of my home, I can think of five big new developments - with some having as many as 200 new homes.

    https://www.mountanvil.com/our-london-homes/hampstead-manor/
    https://www.barratthomes.co.uk/new-homes/greater-london/h418401-kidderpore-green/
    Then there are three developments on Finchley Road - one at the bottom of Hermitage Lane, and another two by Heath Drive.

    That's a staggering amount of new development, albeit in an area well served by public transport (buses down Finchley Road), and mostly to people without children (as these are largely two bedroom flats).

    If you want to make some money, I would own restaurant, bar and retail space on the Finchley Road around the Childs Hill area. A lot of new (well off) people coming to an area with relatively few amenities like that. (West Hampstead is five to ten minute walk, and Hampstead Village is more like 15.)

    I think when I move back to the UK I'll probably go to Hampstead. I miss living in Swiss Cottage, I'm staying with a friend who lives there right now.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 6,688
    rcs1000 said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    I also got 11 :smile:
    12
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,981
    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    10/16 for me...
    Only 9 I’m afraid.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310
    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    I don't particularly object to controls on leasehold houses, but people really should read the documents before they buy.
    There’s a role for solicitors and conveyancers here, isn’t there?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,276
    rcs1000 said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    I also got 11 :smile:
    9/16
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,525
    Mortimer said:

    rcs1000 said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    I also got 11 :smile:
    12 for me - pretty bad given a nearly photographic memory...
    And for me also, disgusting. Some of them are very hard though - number two looked exactly like Merkel.

    While waiting on the latest idiocy from the Donald, PBers may care to watch the Momentum Dinner Party video, reputedly 500 000 shares in 5 hours:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/28/they-just-dont-get-it-video-upset-corbyn-deniers-labour-momentum?CMP=fb_gu

    Worth remembering the rather more accurate 'Corbyn is an IRA supporter' got shared eight times as often. It didn't make a lot of difference but it did confirm people who supported him or were thinking of doing so that his opponents were nasty pieces of work. That's the real risk for Momentum of behaving that way.

    However, the really amusing irony of that video is that somebody as limited in intellect and imagination as Corbyn would certainly never have got into politics, never mind Parliament, had his father not been (a) very wealthy and (b) a big man in the trade union movement.

    On that subject:

    The opposition to Donald Trump has been more about his wickedness than his wrongness. The Democrats should be reversing the emphasis.

    The Republicans seem to have no appetite for positively opposing the president. So betting on him surviving looks like the value bet.

    Could somebody please screenshot that and email it to CCO with a huge caption underneath 'For Trump, read Corbyn?' It would I think be helpful if they grasped this simple message, assuming they are capable of doing so.

    I hope to be back part-time tomorrow but I have a busy summer ahead of me so I won't (or at least, shouldn't) be commenting regularly. I hope everyone is enjoying the weather and remembering the more rain we get the less at risk of drought we are...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886
    surbiton said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    The Conservatives gained five in Scotland from the SNP, which had been Labour in 2010. The other 15 are in England.

    There is much of the country (some of it places Labour must win, like North Kent) which has no time for Corbyn.
    Labour could win 17 seats from the SNP with only a 3.5% swing. It is quite possible. I think Labour could get 30 seats at the next election. There is a part of the electorate now who did not vote in the last 20 years.
    There are three blocs in Scottish politics. One is centre-right, unionist, eurosceptic, and they now have a viable party.

    Another is left wing and unionist, and they now have a viable party.

    The third is everyone who supports independence, who will do well on 35% + of the vote, but whose support is spread quite evenly, and who will suffer if their vote dips much below that level.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,319
    edited July 30
    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    On topic, I'm finding America confusing at the moment. I agree with OGH this will be seen as a missed opportunity by Republicans in years to come. The mid terms next year will be illuminating and I wonder how many Democrats are considering a Presidential bid for 2020.

    Off topic - property in the south east, the veritable golden egg for a generation or more. I bought a 2-bedroom flat brand new off plan in 1996 for £58,500 and sold in 2005 for £145,000.

    Two generations of Londoners have done phenomenally well out of property (including former council house owners who bought theirs for a song in the early 80s and still sing the praises of the Blessed Margaret (and rightly so)).

    That certainty of a strong return on asset value also allowed people to keep spending and consuming and not worrying too much about pensions and savings. Why bother saving ? The house value is going up 10% year on year. I can take the profit when I downsize and that will be my retirement capital.

    Others saw property as an investment - why bother with stocks and shares ? Property is a guaranteed winner - buy a property, rent it out, take the profit and use that. To be fair, that won't be so easy from now on but as a method of making money, property in London is absurdly egalitarian. Whether you have a small flat in Barking or a five bedroom house in Beckenham, no matter. It's not money in the bank, it IS the bank.

    The demise of the property market of London has been exaggerated. And it will remain so as long as our Planning permission rules remain the same. The prices are indeed artificial but so are the planning laws.

    I bought my first house in West London for £135k in 1990. Today , it will be close to £1.2m, I guess.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 18,886

    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    I don't particularly object to controls on leasehold houses, but people really should read the documents before they buy.
    There’s a role for solicitors and conveyancers here, isn’t there?
    Yes, but I suspect lots of people don't read the reports on title their solicitors send them. Solicitors get loads of work out of people not reading things before signing them.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,319

    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html

    C'mon Merkel. Europe's greatest leader for a long, long time.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,981
    surbiton said:

    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html

    C'mon Merkel. Europe's greatest leader for a long, long time.
    it was Emperor Macron the First last month

  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,322
    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.

    I think there are other consequences. Other forms of saving have been neglected as have other forms of investment (proportion of British people owning stocks and shares directly versus the same in America ?).

    The building societies and banks were appalling in the provision of 100% (and beyond) mortgages in the 1980s and with very low interest rates, a new generation has been lured into over borrowing and when rates go back up, there will be a lot of pain.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,319

    surbiton said:

    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html

    C'mon Merkel. Europe's greatest leader for a long, long time.
    it was Emperor Macron the First last month

    He has been there only two months now ! Angela is forever !
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083
    stodge said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.

    I think there are other consequences. Other forms of saving have been neglected as have other forms of investment (proportion of British people owning stocks and shares directly versus the same in America ?).

    The building societies and banks were appalling in the provision of 100% (and beyond) mortgages in the 1980s and with very low interest rates, a new generation has been lured into over borrowing and when rates go back up, there will be a lot of pain.
    Of course, inflation and high interest rates are just a form of accelerated repayment. If interest rates are 10% because inflation is 12%, then you are effectively paying back more than a tenth of the value of your mortgage back in real terms.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 8,842
    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.

    Do you know what the proportions of housing capital and stock market capital in 1997 and what they are now ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 15,981
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html

    C'mon Merkel. Europe's greatest leader for a long, long time.
    it was Emperor Macron the First last month

    He has been there only two months now ! Angela is forever !
    it will be fun watching how she handles the german car industry scandal

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 25,342

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    Those Con gain seats were mostly from the SNP if I am right.

    Comparing with 2010 is comparing to the pre Corbyn era.

    Mortimer's Australian article is well worth reading. It touches on many of the class and race interplay issues that I was discussing with Islam yesterday afternoon. It also shows how Australia is changing. There is no going back to the Anglosphere so beloved of the PB league of Empire Loyalists.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sunil060902/sandbox
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.

    Do you know what the proportions of housing capital and stock market capital in 1997 and what they are now ?
    Off the top of my head, no.

    But I would bet that - given stock markets have barely budged in the last 20 years, while house prices (especially in London) have gone through the roof - there has been a big swing from stock market to housing.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439

    surbiton said:

    Meanwhile away from the PB Brexit fixation there's an election in Germany

    CDU 40%
    SPD 23%
    Afd 9%
    Greens, FDP, Linke all on 8%

    so much for Martin Schulz, it remains to be seen in Merkel can avoid screwing up a CDU led government again

    http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/f-a-z-wahlbarometer-so-wollen-die-deutschen-waehlen-14406977.html

    C'mon Merkel. Europe's greatest leader for a long, long time.
    it was Emperor Macron the First last month

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/29/emmanuel-macron-divine-aura-fades-jupiter-france
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 10,187

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    15 out of 16 I'm slightly ashamed to say.

    A more jowly than remembered John Major did me in.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 730
    Regarding comments on housing.

    It is really, really tiring hearing the same criticisms of planning rehearsed endlessly, by otherwise educated and intelligent people.

    Planning has become a whipping boy for thirty plus years of public policy failure

    It is a myth that you can 'relax planning' and solve everything, but it is a convenient answer. The government have, to all extents and purposes, actually relaxed planning rules almost as much as it is concievably possibly to do. Under the current rules, if a local authority don't allocate enough land or deliver enough housing, then a developer can in theory build almost anywhere as long as it is not a green belt or a protected landscape.

    The trouble is that when you look at these sites in the open countryside they are completely unsuitable for housebuilding and there are very good reasons why they should not be developed. The principal reason is that there is no infrastructure to support new communities and the occupants of new houses will simply have to drive miles and miles to access even the most basic services, nevermind schools, hospitals etc. People will of course move to these new houses, but this just creates congestion on countryside roads that are often unsafe and were never designed to take large amounts of traffic. The benefits of the housing being provided is nearly always outweighed by harm to the wider community, when you get beyond the bluster of the argument that the need to provide more housing overrides everything else.

    When you talk to serious people in the development industry it becomes apparent that the fundamental problem is actually to do with how infrastructure is delivered. Since the government privatised large parts of infrastructure delivery from the 1980's onwards, the cost of providing new infrastructure necessary to support new development has increased to the point where it is just not viable for many new developments. In many cases the total value of the new housing being built is not sufficient to support the infrastructure necessary to deliver it. And then you have the problem that land ownership is heavily fragmented and the associated wrangling over who has to foot the bill for the supporting infrastructure.

    There have been many attempts to solve this problem but they have been mostly unsuccessful. Normally by the government declaring some sort of initiative to build new towns/ eco towns/ garden suburbs etc etc, and then banging peoples heads together to make the project work. But they haven't really changed the underlying flaws of the system or delivered much.

    It makes little sense that we have this problem, whereas no other country in northern Europe does.



  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 25,439

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    15 out of 16 I'm slightly ashamed to say.

    A more jowly than remembered John Major did me in.
    Well done! (Or not!)

    Major's jowls threw me too....
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 8,842
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, we in the UK are far too invested in property. If you look at net worth by asset type, for the vast majority of people in the UK, it's their home. And that's largely a consequence of rising house prices over the last 40 years.

    We all save in the Bank of Bricks and Mortar - and why not, it's been by far the best place to put money for a long, long time.

    Unfortunately, this has had two terrible consequences. Firstly, there are millions of people who can no longer afford to buy their own property. Secondly, there is a generation of people in their late 40s, 50s and 60s, who's entire wealth is tied up in their property.

    If we bring housing prices down to help the former group, we destroy the savings of the older one. If housing prices remain high, then the oldies continue to benefit at the expense of the young.

    Managing this transition will be extremely challenging.

    Do you know what the proportions of housing capital and stock market capital in 1997 and what they are now ?
    Off the top of my head, no.

    But I would bet that - given stock markets have barely budged in the last 20 years, while house prices (especially in London) have gone through the roof - there has been a big swing from stock market to housing.
    That was my assumption as well.

    This has led to the problem that the wealth of people is now more dependent upon the performance of property prices than the performance of business. Consequently there's a lot less interest in economic and business issues - notice how little they were mentioned in the election and how wealth creation is of no interest to Corbyn.

    I can remember in the 1990s whenever a news program said "the biggest financial asset people have is their home" my dad would say "no its not, its their pension".

    That will be apply to a lot less people now than then.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,247

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    15 out of 16 I'm slightly ashamed to say.

    A more jowly than remembered John Major did me in.
    Well done. Was convinced that was Fallon!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 21,694

    A house?

    I dream of living in a house. It'd be like a palace to me. Dwelling in a rotting shed, and grateful for it!

    Speak to Pulpstar. His house looks fantastic value to me.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 21,694
    rcs1000 said:

    Even money for Trump to last the distance would appear value to me, it's constitutionally very hard to shift a sitting president that cares nothing for public opinion.

    Tying up money for 3 years is another matter...

    Agreed: it's a c. 20% chance of a health issue, plus 5% chance of impeachment, plus a maximum of 10% leaves for some other reason (i.e. possible impeachment).

    He should be 66% to go the distance.
    I've taken the 5/6 on Betvictor for 2020 or later.

    Of course, that means he only has to survive until 1st January 2020, which would be a term just under 3 years at that point.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 9,496
    edited July 30
    Went to see Dunkirk last night - glad I saw it, a remarkably convincing, unsentimental, pictures of people under extreme stress with a dramatic national backdrop (there's very little about the battle per se, and I suspect some young people will struggle to work out the context). The plot is minimal, though, and the characters not really explored in great depth. I must admit to preferring the sentimental, propagandist Mrs Miniver (would be interested in Casino's view?), but that was about rallying spirits and this is about individuals at a moment of extreme crisis.

    There's a very interesting discussion of the soundtrack here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/dunkirk-music-christopher-nolan-hans-zimmer-2017-7

    - I noticed something going on with the music, but didn't grasp the exact intention (which is probably intended to be subconscious).
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 21,694
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    The British aren't socialist. They are believers in fair play, waiting your turn, championing the underdog and otherwise minding your own business.

    Right now, a good chunk of the population think the under 40s have a raw deal, whilst the over 60s have a pretty good one.

    I think they have a point.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 21,694
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    I don't particularly object to controls on leasehold houses, but people really should read the documents before they buy.
    There’s a role for solicitors and conveyancers here, isn’t there?
    Yes, but I suspect lots of people don't read the reports on title their solicitors send them. Solicitors get loads of work out of people not reading things before signing them.
    Can you blame them though?

    Well, for that I can. A very important purchase where the issues are usually well explained, and relatively concise. But most "terms and conditions" you are supposed to read, prior to agreeing to them, are dozens and dozens of pages long.

    No-one ever reads them.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 20,083

    rcs1000 said:

    Even money for Trump to last the distance would appear value to me, it's constitutionally very hard to shift a sitting president that cares nothing for public opinion.

    Tying up money for 3 years is another matter...

    Agreed: it's a c. 20% chance of a health issue, plus 5% chance of impeachment, plus a maximum of 10% leaves for some other reason (i.e. possible impeachment).

    He should be 66% to go the distance.
    I've taken the 5/6 on Betvictor for 2020 or later.

    Of course, that means he only has to survive until 1st January 2020, which would be a term just under 3 years at that point.
    That's a terrific value bet: he only has to survive another two and a half years.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,984
    Mr. Royale, I think Mr. Pulpstar might take it amiss if I seek to claim his house by right of conquest.

    Anyway, I do have Castle Dancer. And the genetic research laboratory beneath it.

    Time for me to be off. Somewhat nervous of the race.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 7,233

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    An Aussie friend posted this on fb yesterday - could well apply to the left in this country:

    https://meanjin.com.au/essays/in-defence-of-the-bad-white-working-class/

    Corbyn doesn't speak the language of Labour's Old base, as well as scaring the Tory horses. It is what gives me confidence he will never be PM.

    The swings in the June election would suggest that Corbyn can get the old Labour base out.

    Con take Bolsover? Or Lab take Canterbury and Kensington? Which was the truth?
    The Cons have taken 20 seats that voted Labour in 2010, and 36 have gone the other way, suggesting there's truth in both viewpoints.
    The British aren't socialist. They are believers in fair play, waiting your turn, championing the underdog and otherwise minding your own business.

    Right now, a good chunk of the population think the under 40s have a raw deal, whilst the over 60s have a pretty good one.

    I think they have a point.
    The British aren't conservative either. We're a beautiful mix of contradictions.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 1,846

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40742706
    Some harmless fun for Sunday morning. I managed 11 out of 16. I'm sure other PBers will knock that for six.

    15 out of 16 I'm slightly ashamed to say.

    A more jowly than remembered John Major did me in.
    I am going to admit to a Theresa May like performance here - I was expecting about 14 or 15/16 but ended up with a frankly pathetic 7/16.

    It's all my fault but I am going to carry on anyway.

    On the plus side I don't have to do that quiz again until 2022 now!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 9,310

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    There is a serious debate to be had about housing but no one wants or is able to have it.

    Too many people have too strong a vested interest in the status quo to do anything serious about the situation. Pledges to build thousands of new homes will regrettably remain pledges.

    Housing isn't just about houses (there's a surprise). It's about defining and shaping communities. In my part of London, it's all about flats on brownfield sites. Build 500 flats - easy - but that means at least an extra 1000 - 1200 people moving in to an area. That beings pressure on transport, medical services and a range of other infrastructural aspects little of which is picked up by the developer through the absurd Section 106 arrangements.

    Further out, new estates of houses (not all the same one hopes but a mix of dwellings to reflect the myriad familial structures from single people to six bedroom houses) creating new communities requiring roads, shops, schools, doctors and the like but how much green do we want to lose ? Should the priorities not be the developer land-banks and public sector unused land ? I don't know.

    It shouldn't be about Bellway or Persimmon coining it in either - building has to involve both freehold and leasehold - I know Conservatives love the idea of home ownership but there's an argument for a strong private rental sector but that needs proper regulation as we're seeing with the evolution of the new slums in parts of London with the kind of overcrowding in properties we thought had been left behind in the 1930s.

    I don't particularly object to controls on leasehold houses, but people really should read the documents before they buy.
    There’s a role for solicitors and conveyancers here, isn’t there?
    Yes, but I suspect lots of people don't read the reports on title their solicitors send them. Solicitors get loads of work out of people not reading things before signing them.
    Can you blame them though?

    Well, for that I can. A very important purchase where the issues are usually well explained, and relatively concise. But most "terms and conditions" you are supposed to read, prior to agreeing to them, are dozens and dozens of pages long.

    No-one ever reads them.
    Surely solicitors should emphasise important features of the contract. Although my family’s recent experience of solicitor conveyancing is not of the best.
This discussion has been closed.