Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The general election betting moves to LAB since the arrival of Truss – politicalbetting.com

1235710

Comments

  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612
    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    If you give me two more Democratic senators, and Democrats keep the House, I promise you we will codify Roe v. Wade.

    We will once again make Roe the law of the land.

    We will once again protect a woman’s right to choose.

    https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1573361187491921920
  • EPG said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    OK so Z jr has just scored a distinction in a Masters in economics from a top 5 UK university. Have lunch with him and ask his plans. He says I am going to go and live in Bedford for a year because a mate has got a house there at a really good rent, was going to go to London but my house in Earlsfield fell through. Maybe get a bar job.

    Insane that rentability of bedrooms in shit houses determines life decisions even for people like him.

    Guess where we just bought!

    Congratulations to your son, a smart cookie clearly like his father
    This was a rental, but 4 beds so he had to fill up the other 3 and his mates were saying Naah, too far out for us mate. WTF? Even in my day people thought Earlsfield was liveable. 15 min to Waterloo is it?
    Yes, part of the problem does seem to be that generation we-pay-too-much is also generation I'd-never-live-THERE.
    Even when homes were affordable on average middle-class salaries, London's commuter belt spread through outer London to the Home Counties. There were cheapish flats in Central London 40 or 50 years ago but even then, you had to share with a bunch of mates unless you were seriously rich.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,438
    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881

    pigeon said:

    Polite disagreements in the EU today around Russians fleeing conscription. The EU Council president has urged member states to open their borders to them. Poland and the Baltic States (with Finland soon to follow suit, it seems,) say no.

    I'm with the border states on this one (whom, AIUI, are still accepting genuine political refugees.) Draft dodgers, like most Russians, are only reacting now that the war affects them. They should be told to sod off.

    Simply put, the more badly trained and equipped Russian cannon fodder that gets turned into sunflower fertiliser by the Ukrainian army, the greater the likelihood that the Russian population will get off its arse in large enough numbers actually to threaten Putin's hold on power. We can't get rid of him, the revolution is their business - which is why locking the Russian people inside their wretched country and making them suffer the privations of this conflict has to be a priority. Letting them run away and squat here, whilst their dictator goes about his bloody business, undermines the West's entire strategy.

    What do you make of this chap then?

    I’m PhD student in Russia, Saint-Petersburg and also a dermatologist in practice with experience in R, Python and bioinformatics. I’m at risk of being mobilised into Russian army. I’m in a search for a funded PhD position in epi/stats/bioinf + derm #PhDposition #derm #epi

    https://twitter.com/tonyzhelonkin/status/1573362264966823936?s=21&t=a-C5IM2e-GWe5M32RS1iqw
    40 years ago, Iranian PhDs were scrabbling around for postdocs to avoid being sent to fight Iraq. One thing Russia's neighbours are said to be worried about is KGB sleepers among the would-be asylum seekers driving across the borders.
    Anyone who left Russia six months ago or longer, saying "not in my name" I could have had some respect for.

    Anyone who did nothing as their nation waged war, then only looked to move once it looked like the war would affect them ... I
    don't have much sympathy for them I'm afraid.
    Maybe but if you think about the lack of access to outside news how many of these guys knew what was really going on?

    If you are from a Russian Stan and your only news is Russian TV or snippets from unblocked sites the war is actually a “special military action” and until you get the draft papers you have no idea that this shot is serious. They have been gaslighted by the Russian gov and just realising.

    The masses in the US didn’t get agitated about Vietnam until the draft came in as they thought it was a small war in a far away place and until they saw their brothers and sons drafted. Should Canada have refused those who crossed the border?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    Exactly. The gulf states build and they will come approach has worked pretty well despite their awful climate and dodgy human rights records.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,926
    edited September 2022
    Another banking cock-up. Barclays sold billions more "instruments" than they could.

    Barclays shareholders sue in U.S. over $17.6 billion debt sale blunder
    ... big snip ...
    The complaint said Barclays made "materially false and misleading" assurances in its annual reports that its internal controls over financial reporting were effective.

    https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/barclays-shareholders-sue-us-over-176-bln-debt-sale-blunder-2022-09-23/
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    No, now they’re “the woke National Trust” for their exhibits about slavery like “the woke RNLI” who pick up migrants in boats.

    RSPB just the latest national treasure to find itself on the opposite side of the Tory culture war, though the woke label is harder to stick on them. NIMBY is more likely (and to be fair birdwatchers have not historically been averse to a bit of nimbyism).
  • I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).
  • Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    Or what Britain used to do with new towns. That would be a plan. The umpteenth test of zones with tax advantages playing beggar my neighbour is not a plan. It is what governments have tried for decades.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    The Saudis have just this week announced their first licenced hotel!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/18/saudi-arabia-serve-alcohol-beach-resort-first-kingdom/

    UAE announced its first “Gaming Resort” a few months ago.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/casino-operator-wynn-plans-resort-with-gaming-facilities-in-uae
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    Sure but bear in mind this is a pure unadulterated proxy for nimbyism: never mind my house price, Won't Someone Think Of The Birdies?

    Personally I am with the nimbies, not because my house price matters to me but because I want to see what very little is left of rural England protected and I don't give a fuck if poor people have nowhere to live as a consequence. But that is what this is all about.

    Also seems to be wrong, Plymouth plus all Dartmoor is in the frame but not shown on the map.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279
    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
  • TimS said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    No, now they’re “the woke National Trust” for their exhibits about slavery like “the woke RNLI” who pick up migrants in boats.

    RSPB just the latest national treasure to find itself on the opposite side of the Tory culture war, though the woke label is harder to stick on them. NIMBY is more likely (and to be fair birdwatchers have not historically been averse to a bit of nimbyism).
    Reading that thread it absolutely sounds like NIMBYism to me.

    If Truss tells the NIMBYs to go to hell then she'll be a legend in my eyes. 👍
  • I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    This increase in low-level theft was predictable and predicted, even if you might suspect not all thieves are equally deserving.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    The Saudis have just this week announced their first licenced hotel!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/18/saudi-arabia-serve-alcohol-beach-resort-first-kingdom/

    UAE announced its first “Gaming Resort” a few months ago.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/casino-operator-wynn-plans-resort-with-gaming-facilities-in-uae
    Bugger, I always had Saudi down as the place I would have to move to if a doctor told me “one more drink and you are dead”. It’s going to be like Magaluf in a couple of years now.

  • Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
  • Anyone got a dehumidifier recommendation?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    But the UAE built Dubai, and the UK built… Milton Keynes!

    Joking aside, yes its a good idea, and something on the scale of another MK is what’s needed. Pick a 5 mile mile square on the HS2 line half way to Birmingham, and go for it.
  • TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Yep that seems sensible to me. Certainly, the plan we have followed for the last century of simply increasing the size of existing towns and villages has been environmentally and socially disastrous. It has destroyed much precious and endangered habitat and has failed to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the increased numbers. New towns seems a far more sensible idea.

    As I mentioned last week they plan on putting new solar farms on 10,000 acres of farmland in North Lincolnshire. At the same time plans were announced earlier this week for a new reservoir in Lincolnshire covering 4,500 acres to provide water to Cambridge. That is 14,500 acres of land. (which for reference is an area larger than Swindon or Ipswich or Peterborough) The main reason being quoted for putting these facilities in Lincolnshire is that the land is cheaper than elsewhere further south.

    So I would suggest some of that land towards the Lincolnshire coast would be well suited to a big new development like you describe.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    This increase in low-level theft was predictable and predicted, even if you might suspect not all thieves are equally deserving.
    A neighbour in our road had her car stolen overnight. Ours was stolen in July. Police not bothered.
  • Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    The Saudis have just this week announced their first licenced hotel!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/18/saudi-arabia-serve-alcohol-beach-resort-first-kingdom/

    UAE announced its first “Gaming Resort” a few months ago.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/casino-operator-wynn-plans-resort-with-gaming-facilities-in-uae
    American operators looking to expand as China becomes more restrictive in places like Macau?
  • Sandpit said:

    boulay said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    boulay said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    OK so Z jr has just scored a distinction in a Masters in economics from a top 5 UK university. Have lunch with him and ask his plans. He says I am going to go and live in Bedford for a year because a mate has got a house there at a really good rent, was going to go to London but my house in Earlsfield fell through. Maybe get a bar job.

    Insane that rentability of bedrooms in shit houses determines life decisions even for people like him.

    In my moments of fantasy wondering what I would do if I had Elon Musk type money I’ve always thought of setting up a scheme where I would buy loads of tower blocks in cities and allow school/Uni leavers, who have their potential held back by not having access to money themselves, to live there for say three to five years where they pay their rent but the rent is saved for them and given back for purposes of a deposit when they are ready to get a mortgage.

    Would be subject to behaviour clauses and time limited to keep giving others a chance etc but I feel that it would take that sort of massive charitable input to break the crazy situation where people like Z jr cannot potentially fulfil his potential by not being able to live nearest the optimal places for his skills and career.

    Now I will go back to inventing some internet thing to make that money even though I can barely use and I-phone!
    good plan, but Z jr's parents are - how to put this? - not in the most capital starved decile of the population, and could probably score him an Earlsfield flat in exchange for a token rent. The mentality has pervaded him
    when it doesn't have to.
    Fair enough - we have a huge problem here where so many local kids are leaving because they haven’t a hope of getting on the housing ladder which is sad as they get educated here then off to university and don’t come back (there are of course other reasons for them not coming back) but you are losing all that human capital that the place has invested in but also a place can lose it’s identity when most people are “outsiders” as they have no in built connection with the quirks and what makes a place unique.

    The gov screwed things over the last few decades by allowing foreign buyers to buy development properties to rent and added to this by removing the ban on those who moved here on special tax agreements to buy properties other than their main home which has supercharged the property market. I look at younger children/young adults here and feel for them as they are terrified of not getting on the housing ladder so spend 500k plus on crap one bedroom flats etc.

    But it would be a great thing to be able to find ways to break that and allow them to save for deposits near where there are jobs when they don’t have the world’s largest horse dealer for a father!
    All solutions involve building a lot more houses!

    Being outside the EU, does now give the opportunity to raise significant taxes on property owned by non-resident foreigners, many of which are unoccupied for most of the year or used as weekly rentals. Even 2-3% per year raises a few billion.
    Punitive increases in taxes on non resident foreign ownership and second homes. Get some of the 700,000 second homes and 250,000 homes owned by non residents back on the market. That is close to 1 million homes.
    Won't happen as the Tories would balk at it and Labour appears to have no intention of diverging from the EU.
    Oh I agree. I have no faith in any of our political leaders doing anything practical and sensible. Too many vested interests and ideological reasons not to.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Quite easy to escape and blend into the crowds by New Cross Gate station from there. Out the door, turn right, up the ramp and disappear. I can imagine it’s a bit of a hotspot.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881
    edited September 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    No, now they’re “the woke National Trust” for their exhibits about slavery like “the woke RNLI” who pick up migrants in boats.

    RSPB just the latest national treasure to find itself on the opposite side of the Tory culture war, though the woke label is harder to stick on them. NIMBY is more likely (and to be fair birdwatchers have not historically been averse to a bit of nimbyism).
    Reading that thread it absolutely sounds like NIMBYism to me.


    If Truss tells the NIMBYs to go to hell then she'll be a legend in my eyes. 👍
    Lizzie "no sun farms on sheep farms and let's pump house prices by fucking with stamp duty" Truss?

    If you looked for two seconds at her utterances and actions your hard on for her would detumesce like a birthday balloon attacked with a chainsaw.
    Words 9,10 and 11 of second para are probably redundant.

  • The stamp duty cut is totally moronic. All it does is create yet more demand.

    The solution Liz is simple.

    BUILD MORE HOUSES
  • IshmaelZ said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    No, now they’re “the woke National Trust” for their exhibits about slavery like “the woke RNLI” who pick up migrants in boats.

    RSPB just the latest national treasure to find itself on the opposite side of the Tory culture war, though the woke label is harder to stick on them. NIMBY is more likely (and to be fair birdwatchers have not historically been averse to a bit of nimbyism).
    Reading that thread it absolutely sounds like NIMBYism to me.

    If Truss tells the NIMBYs to go to hell then she'll be a legend in my eyes. 👍
    Lizzie "no sun farms on sheep farms and let's pump house prices by fucking with stamp duty" Truss?

    If you looked for two seconds at her utterances and actions your hard on for her would detumesce like a birthday balloon attacked with a chainsaw.
    Got to give you a thumbs up for that metaphor!

    Stamp duty is a tax on mobility, not land ownership. But yes the solar farms thing was disappointing pandering and I said so at the time.
  • I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    By coincidence, I believe Leon's back in England.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    The Saudis have just this week announced their first licenced hotel!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/18/saudi-arabia-serve-alcohol-beach-resort-first-kingdom/

    UAE announced its first “Gaming Resort” a few months ago.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/casino-operator-wynn-plans-resort-with-gaming-facilities-in-uae
    American operators looking to expand as China becomes more restrictive in places like Macau?
    Malaysian and Chinese resort companies have been on the march along the belt and road too.
  • TimS said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    This increase in low-level theft was predictable and predicted, even if you might suspect not all thieves are equally deserving.
    A neighbour in our road had her car stolen overnight. Ours was stolen in July. Police not bothered.
    No doubt Suella Braverman will send the police a stern memo about prioritising "real crime" over social media arguments, but with no actual help and cc'd to the newspapers.

    The odd thing is that, speaking as a layman who owns the Morse box set, you'd have thought car theft would be relatively easy to solve given anpr cameras everywhere. The Home Secretary should give a £250,000 grant to a university to investigate real-time flagging of pinched cars, or possibly a £250 million contract to an American consultancy with links to party donors.
  • The stamp duty cut is totally moronic. All it does is create yet more demand.

    The solution Liz is simple.

    BUILD MORE HOUSES

    She hasn't got time, surely; very busy.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,386
    Looks like a party that used to be far-right is going to win the Italian election tomorrow. How did this happen?
  • I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    By coincidence, I believe Leon's back in England.
    Was the 'stuff' all in bottles?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,386
    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Good idea but it ought to be in Scotland in my opinion. The population of England has risen by about 20 million over the last 100 years. The population of Scotland is almost the same as it was 100 years ago.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,055
    Dr. Foxy - A year or so ago, a very bright friend and I discussed the possibility of interstellar travel. We agreed that "generation ships" were almost certainly possible -- though so costly, and requiring so much engineering work that it might take a unified world government spending 1% of the world's GDP over 100 years to build a fleet of them.

    (You would almost certainly spin them to provide a substitute for gravity,and use nuclear power to run a closed ecology. Such ships could, in principle, travel for hundreds of years. I believe laser-powered solar sails could move such ships at a significant fraction of light speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_ship )

    If you see an obvious error in our thinking, I'd like to know to know what it is.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433
    edited September 2022

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Basically what the Saudis are doing with their “linear city”
    The Saudis have just this week announced their first licenced hotel!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/18/saudi-arabia-serve-alcohol-beach-resort-first-kingdom/

    UAE announced its first “Gaming Resort” a few months ago.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-25/casino-operator-wynn-plans-resort-with-gaming-facilities-in-uae
    American operators looking to expand as China becomes more restrictive in places like Macau?
    Operators looking to expand anywhere they can, and countries willing to stretch their rules to allow for cultural activities that generate tourism.

    There will likely be a lot of rules around them to keep the local out. At the casino in Singapore, it costs $100 to enter if you have a residence visa, but it’s free if you have a tourist visa. It was full of Chinese when I went, putting silly amounts of cash on the tables.

    There’s at least three hotels I know of in Dubai, that have function rooms designed as casinos, with all the cabling and data rooms in situ. They could be open within a week if given permission.

    I did once put together half a business plan for a “Night Cruise” out of Dubai, which would basically be an old ferry converted into a casino, that would head out into international waters, stay there for 6-9 hours, and then return. Probably would have been a recipe for trouble!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,215

    The stamp duty cut is totally moronic. All it does is create yet more demand.

    The solution Liz is simple.

    BUILD MORE HOUSES

    I'm afraid not and this is part of the short-sighted thinking from some.

    Building more houses without consequential improvements in all aspects of local infrastructure simply piles pressure on schools, GP surgeries, transport, roads, waste, sewerage and all manner of other things.

    What is needed is or are more communities (arguably) or at least a planning system which equates infrastructural capacity to housing demand. Improve the amenities first then build the houses - we of course do it the other way round.

    I'd also argue the housing solution needs to be a proper mix of ownership models - despite the political benefits to the Conservative Party of home ownership, there is clearly a demand for rental property and a vibrant, well regulated private rental sector looks to me to be an essential part of any longer term housing solution.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 2,923
    edited September 2022

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.

    Personally, I’m a tad skeptical that the entire structure and meaning of the universe and all possibilities of life therein, have now been conclusively worked out by the keyboardist from D:Ream
    You'd be right to be skeptical - except Cox doesn't claim to have conclusively worked out anything.
    I follow this debate quite closely. As we discover evermore exoplanets, many of them strikingly receptive to life as we know it, the chances of life having evolved elsewhere in the universe have gone up by orders of magnitude

    I expect us to discover firm evidence of non human life in the universe within my lifetime, and I’m not exactly a teenager

    And no, this does not necessarily mean aliens landing in Surrey, tho I do not rule out the possibility we are being visited/observed by *something*
    I'm sure you will let us know if any grey-skinned little biped takes a suspiciously close interest in your botty.
    I do think that the medical difficulties of life in space are such that travel to other solar systems would be fatal. The same probably is true of aliens.

    It must be AI robots interested in probing our bottoms.
    It’s PB commentary like this - in which a semi-retired GP from suburban Leicester rules out the possibility of interstellar travel - which makes me read the FT
    It's PB commentary like this - in which a boomer who wrote a sub-Loaded novel about meeting women online (currently at #1,005,315 in the Kindle Store) tries to impress us all by claiming he reads the FT - that makes me glad I don't spend too much time in the more credulous corners of the internet.

    On which note, I spent the afternoon at a village beer festival one mile from David Cameron's house. Fair to say that the Tory-curious demographic of 2010 has dissipated. The Blue Wall is the Lib Dems' for the taking, if only they have the dedication to do so. I suspect they don't.
    #1,005,315?

    I must have sold a copy!
    Hahaha. Full marks.



    Earlier today I mentioned the RSPB having come out against Truss's latest bonfire of regulation, and said there were only two organisations that you'd want to keep more on side for the traditional Tory vote: the National Trust and the RNLI.

    Guess what? The National Trust has just endorsed the RSPB's statement. They have a membership of 5.3 million. Most of them, I guess, were Tory voters.

    https://twitter.com/nationaltrust/status/1573604451847380994
    No, now they’re “the woke National Trust” for their exhibits about slavery like “the woke RNLI” who pick up migrants in boats.

    RSPB just the latest national treasure to find itself on the opposite side of the Tory culture war, though the woke label is harder to stick on them. NIMBY is more likely (and to be fair birdwatchers have not historically been averse to a bit of nimbyism).
    Reading that thread it absolutely sounds like NIMBYism to me.

    If Truss tells the NIMBYs to go to hell then she'll be a legend in my eyes. 👍
    Barty loves Lizzie.....Swish!!!

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
  • TimS said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Quite easy to escape and blend into the crowds by New Cross Gate station from there. Out the door, turn right, up the ramp and disappear. I can imagine it’s a bit of a hotspot.
    Shoplifters don't need to blend into the crowds. They need to be able to sprint 25 yards which is well past the point the security guard stops chasing them.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,768

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Yep that seems sensible to me. Certainly, the plan we have followed for the last century of simply increasing the size of existing towns and villages has been environmentally and socially disastrous. It has destroyed much precious and endangered habitat and has failed to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the increased numbers. New towns seems a far more sensible idea.

    As I mentioned last week they plan on putting new solar farms on 10,000 acres of farmland in North Lincolnshire. At the same time plans were announced earlier this week for a new reservoir in Lincolnshire covering 4,500 acres to provide water to Cambridge. That is 14,500 acres of land. (which for reference is an area larger than Swindon or Ipswich or Peterborough) The main reason being quoted for putting these facilities in Lincolnshire is that the land is cheaper than elsewhere further south.

    So I would suggest some of that land towards the Lincolnshire coast would be well suited to a big new development like you describe.
    https://www.butlins.com/resorts/skegness
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Dr. Foxy - A year or so ago, a very bright friend and I discussed the possibility of interstellar travel. We agreed that "generation ships" were almost certainly possible -- though so costly, and requiring so much engineering work that it might take a unified world government spending 1% of the world's GDP over 100 years to build a fleet of them.

    (You would almost certainly spin them to provide a substitute for gravity,and use nuclear power to run a closed ecology. Such ships could, in principle, travel for hundreds of years. I believe laser-powered solar sails could move such ships at a significant fraction of light speed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_ship )

    If you see an obvious error in our thinking, I'd like to know to know what it is.

    No biosphere experiment has worked yet

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2

    No empirical findings on what it would be like to be a later generation on a generation ship, no good reason to think everyone wouldn't go mad

    Cosmic rays

    Collision with microscopic particles
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,248
    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a party that used to be far-right is going to win the Italian election tomorrow. How did this happen?

    The short answer is that they were the only party to consistently oppose Draghi's government, which sadly is the dynamic that matters in most democracies these days.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a party that used to be far-right is going to win the Italian election tomorrow. How did this happen?

    Being in the euro and close enough to africa to have a migration challenge?
  • Putin's partial mobilization seems to be including women. Some with dependent children.

  • stodge said:

    The stamp duty cut is totally moronic. All it does is create yet more demand.

    The solution Liz is simple.

    BUILD MORE HOUSES

    I'm afraid not and this is part of the short-sighted thinking from some.

    Building more houses without consequential improvements in all aspects of local infrastructure simply piles pressure on schools, GP surgeries, transport, roads, waste, sewerage and all manner of other things.

    What is needed is or are more communities (arguably) or at least a planning system which equates infrastructural capacity to housing demand. Improve the amenities first then build the houses - we of course do it the other way round.

    I'd also argue the housing solution needs to be a proper mix of ownership models - despite the political benefits to the Conservative Party of home ownership, there is clearly a demand for rental property and a vibrant, well regulated private rental sector looks to me to be an essential part of any longer term housing solution.
    ...and cutting stamp duty provides all these effects?......
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,055
    IshmaelZ said: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_ship"

    The biosphere experiment on the earth has worked quite well, for millions of years.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,248

    EPG said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    OK so Z jr has just scored a distinction in a Masters in economics from a top 5 UK university. Have lunch with him and ask his plans. He says I am going to go and live in Bedford for a year because a mate has got a house there at a really good rent, was going to go to London but my house in Earlsfield fell through. Maybe get a bar job.

    Insane that rentability of bedrooms in shit houses determines life decisions even for people like him.

    Guess where we just bought!

    Congratulations to your son, a smart cookie clearly like his father
    This was a rental, but 4 beds so he had to fill up the other 3 and his mates were saying Naah, too far out for us mate. WTF? Even in my day people thought Earlsfield was liveable. 15 min to Waterloo is it?
    Yes, part of the problem does seem to be that generation we-pay-too-much is also generation I'd-never-live-THERE.
    Even when homes were affordable on average middle-class salaries, London's commuter belt spread through outer London to the Home Counties. There were cheapish flats in Central London 40 or 50 years ago but even then, you had to share with a bunch of mates unless you were seriously rich.
    My impression is also that it was less desirable to live in cities at that time. There was nothing like a restaurant culture, pubs were boozers and the drugs were about as tame as tobacco.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_ship"

    The biosphere experiment on the earth has worked quite well, for millions of years.

    Less so on a tiny subset of it.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881

    Putin's partial mobilization seems to be including women. Some with dependent children.

    Part of the Special Distraction Regiment, cunning plan.


  • How long will the typical Russian remain detached and apathetic about Putin's Vietnam?


    Business Ukraine mag
    @Biz_Ukraine_Mag
    ·
    1h
    Mobilised Russians fight with police who are attempting to herd them onto a bus

    https://twitter.com/Biz_Ukraine_Mag/status/1573684845225689089
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,799

    How long will the typical Russian remain detached and apathetic about Putin's Vietnam?


    Business Ukraine mag
    @Biz_Ukraine_Mag
    ·
    1h
    Mobilised Russians fight with police who are attempting to herd them onto a bus

    https://twitter.com/Biz_Ukraine_Mag/status/1573684845225689089

    Probably about as long as it doesn't directly affect the typical Russian.

    I don't think we're at a tipping point yet.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,433

    Putin's partial mobilization seems to be including women. Some with dependent children.

    Wow, can’t see that going too well.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 1,458
    Some taxes have a dual purpose: to raise money for public services and ______

    What’s Stamp Duty’s other purpose? Nothing so far as I can see, and the downsides are well known.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    EPG said:

    EPG said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    OK so Z jr has just scored a distinction in a Masters in economics from a top 5 UK university. Have lunch with him and ask his plans. He says I am going to go and live in Bedford for a year because a mate has got a house there at a really good rent, was going to go to London but my house in Earlsfield fell through. Maybe get a bar job.

    Insane that rentability of bedrooms in shit houses determines life decisions even for people like him.

    Guess where we just bought!

    Congratulations to your son, a smart cookie clearly like his father
    This was a rental, but 4 beds so he had to fill up the other 3 and his mates were saying Naah, too far out for us mate. WTF? Even in my day people thought Earlsfield was liveable. 15 min to Waterloo is it?
    Yes, part of the problem does seem to be that generation we-pay-too-much is also generation I'd-never-live-THERE.
    Even when homes were affordable on average middle-class salaries, London's commuter belt spread through outer London to the Home Counties. There were cheapish flats in Central London 40 or 50 years ago but even then, you had to share with a bunch of mates unless you were seriously rich.
    My impression is also that it was less desirable to live in cities at that time. There was nothing like a restaurant culture, pubs were boozers and the drugs were about as tame as tobacco.
    How old are you? There have always been good restaurants in cities, having boozers rather than just more wannabe restaurants was a positive bonus, coke was more expensive but generally better stuff and without the fear of fentanyl contam.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,799
    Andy_JS said:

    TimS said:

    Here’s a supply side idea.

    Find a part of the country that’s economically backward, fairly sparsely populated but geographically accessible. Somewhere in Lincolnshire or Norfolk perhaps. And go full on UAE: build one absolutely massive, brand new city.

    - excellent multimodal transport links
    - Housing capacity for a population of at least 1m people
    - all buildings passive house levels of energy efficiency
    - 100% renewables for electricity and heating
    - Large designated industrial zones with generous tax incentives
    - Vast new tourist facilities: theme parks, artificial beaches, skiing, casinos
    - fully services for education, health and social care with the opportunity to innovate
    - Might as well make it all weather and cover in a huge poly dome

    Instead of faffing around with dozens of investment zones and hundreds of NIMBY challenges everywhere, just go big in one place.

    Good idea but it ought to be in Scotland in my opinion. The population of England has risen by about 20 million over the last 100 years. The population of Scotland is almost the same as it was 100 years ago.
    You have to build it where people actually want to live, or at least near there.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,438

    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a party that used to be far-right is going to win the Italian election tomorrow. How did this happen?

    Being in the euro and close enough to africa to have a migration challenge?
    Migration is a palpable problem in Italy

    On my recent visit I sensed the dire tension around the station at Florence, which attracts multiple migrants. You can feel it

    In Rome I saw a fistfight between a white Italian and a black African street trader who he accused of robbing him, outside the Pantheon. People stood and watched, police swarmed in

    That was in 6 days
  • Sandpit said:

    pigeon said:

    A tumbling pound is adding £5 to a tank of petrol by cancelling out the benefits of falling oil prices, according to the AA.

    Another reminder that the government’s fiscal policy risks fuelling inflation.


    https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1573624635966558208

    Of course, those riding around in Government limos don't have to worry about the cost of filling their tanks up.

    The biggest problem is the Fed being too aggressive in raising rates causing the dollar to rise against every other currency.

    The US has a considerably bigger deficit than the UK, but the Fed is jacking up rates by 0.75% a go while the BoE aren't.
    Indeed. Many people discussing the fall in the pound and of the London stock market, as a stick with which to beat the UK government, are missing the international picture. The issue is the strong dollar, against pretty much every other currency at the moment, caused mostly by the over-eagerness of the Fed to raise rates.
    The Americans are pursuing 'beggar thy neighbour' economical policies as they always have. We can't keep following them, so we should stay the course. If a dollar ends up worth 6 pounds, so be it.
    How much do the Kremlin pay you?
    Nah, not @Luckyguy1983. He may be an idiot but he's not a 'useful idiot' ;-)
    Thanks. Strictly useless idiot here.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279
    Wars are fought by young people.

    Young Ukrainians are disproportionately pro-western.
    Young Russians are disproportionately anti war.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,055
    IshmaelZ - So how were the restaurants in Ur? Any five-star restaturants there? Can you share any translated menus with us?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 20,038
    EPG said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a party that used to be far-right is going to win the Italian election tomorrow. How did this happen?

    The short answer is that they were the only party to consistently oppose Draghi's government, which sadly is the dynamic that matters in most democracies these days.
    Also, they gamed the system successfully while the centre-left cocked it up. Italy uses a blend of FPTP and PR, with the former predominant. The three right-wing parties agreed on joint candidates for the FPTP seats. The various centre-left parties squabbled idly.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 10,150
    edited September 2022

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Screw sensibly.

    Sensibility just becomes abused by NIMBYs and hands control of development to developers.

    Protect zones that aren't appropriate for development then let individuals build a home in zones approved for construction to preset standards wherever and whenever they want.

    No individual home can be responsible for transport, or healthcare or anything else. Let local government etc react to developments as they organically occur instead of having planned developments all at once.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ - So how were the restaurants in Ur? Any five-star restaturants there? Can you share any translated menus with us?

    What is your point? Ur is known for certain to have been massively rich, massively stratified and massively specialised. So, yes, it had billionaires and chefs capable of catering for billionaires. We don't know enough to know whether this was via restaurants or in house chefs, but one or the other, or both.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,951
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    OK so Z jr has just scored a distinction in a Masters in economics from a top 5 UK university. Have lunch with him and ask his plans. He says I am going to go and live in Bedford for a year because a mate has got a house there at a really good rent, was going to go to London but my house in Earlsfield fell through. Maybe get a bar job.

    Insane that rentability of bedrooms in shit houses determines life decisions even for people like him.

    Guess where we just bought!

    Congratulations to your son, a smart cookie clearly like his father
    This was a rental, but 4 beds so he had to fill up the other 3 and his mates were saying Naah, too far out for us mate. WTF? Even in my day people thought Earlsfield was liveable. 15 min to Waterloo is it?
    It's easy to get flatmates: you simply advertise online.

    If you are organized, you can even make a small turn on the arrangement, where you charge 30% of the total rent to each of your new flatmates.
  • sladeslade Posts: 1,664
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Foxy said:

    TimS said:

    Sandpit said:

    When do we think it's going to start getting properly cold? I see a few 15 degree high days coming up but they're few and far between.

    Its already cold enough that heating set to minimum levels will start kicking in at times. Proper cold any time from November?
    My heating isn't yet on at all.
    we've had heating on for about 1 hour this month. just got my last bill and we used £14.32 in gas last month. with the £400 rebate our bill will be about £5.60 per month october to march. crazy. Stepdaughter and her 3 children live in a colder house and seem addicted to doing laundry and using the tumble drier so they can have our £400.
    Tumble dryers should be high on the list for the public information campaign - they use an inordinate amount of electricity, more than any other single appliance. After turning down the room temperature, avoiding the tumble dryer is the single best thing you can do to reduce the winter bills.
    What is the point in a tumble dryer? Can't you just stick your clothes up around the house or buy a heated drying rack like I've got. Never seen the point in owning one.
    Kids.

    As a young adult I was very happy to use drying racks or radiators etc for mine and then my wife's clothes.

    But with a family, doing a family's load of laundry, tumble dryers are a blessing.

    Especially since cleaning a house with a couple of young kids is in itself much more of a chore, without even thinking about laundry it's like running on a treadmill just to stand still so anything that helps like dryers are very useful, especially in winter.
    We don’t use a tumble dryer - not fit any energy saving reason but because of my wife’s fear of shrunken clothes - and don’t really miss it, but it helps having a warm utility room to dry clothes in.

    The secret to happiness in housing is the functional spaces: utility rooms, box rooms, pantries, garages, boot rooms and porches. I have the utility and box rooms but would love the others.

    Same with gardens. The shed, cold frames, bike storage etc.
    A decent cellar is what is missing in British homes. Ideal for storage, and utility.

    Most American and continental houses seem to have them, not sure why they are so rare here.
    US they do dual duty as tornado refuges
    And refuge from aliens like in War of the Worlds (2005 version).
    And places for the finale of Silence of the Lambs to play out.

    But apart from that, what have cellars ever given us?
    When I was growing up we used ours for coal, fresh meat (in a mesh safe), a copper (with posser), and cat nursery.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,768
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ - So how were the restaurants in Ur? Any five-star restaturants there? Can you share any translated menus with us?

    What is your point? Ur is known for certain to have been massively rich, massively stratified and massively specialised. So, yes, it had billionaires and chefs capable of catering for billionaires. We don't know enough to know whether this was via restaurants or in house chefs, but one or the other, or both.
    Did they have camel-delivered takeaways?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Screw sensibly.

    Sensibility just becomes abused by NIMBYs and hands control of development to developers.

    Protect zones that aren't appropriate for development then let individuals build a home in zones approved for construction to preset standards wherever and whenever they want.

    No individual home can be responsible for transport, or healthcare or anything else. Let local government etc react to developments as they organically occur instead of having planned developments all at once.
    Infrastructure Barty. Do you want schools for your children and hospitals for you and roads to drive to both on?
  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    None of which should be linked to an individual home, except maybe that most people building an individual home for themselves would choose to avoid flood plains because it'll be harder to get insurance on a flood plain.

    If they build on a flood plain and an insurer is prepared to insure them, then that's their responsibility.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,951
    @IshmaelZ

    Likewise, if your son wants to move into a house share, there are thousands of houses every week that comes up. He might need to visit half a dozen before he finds a match, but it isn't exactly complicated.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Screw sensibly.

    Sensibility just becomes abused by NIMBYs and hands control of development to developers.

    Protect zones that aren't appropriate for development then let individuals build a home in zones approved for construction to preset standards wherever and whenever they want.

    No individual home can be responsible for transport, or healthcare or anything else. Let local government etc react to developments as they organically occur instead of having planned developments all at once.
    Infrastructure Barty. Do you want schools for your children and hospitals for you and roads to drive to both on?
    No, I don't.

    There are existing schools and hospitals in towns and villages already, I don't expect a new one to be built just for my children.

    If demand reaches sufficient levels as to require expanded infrastructure then that should be dealt with as required. No individual home does that.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rcs1000 said:

    @IshmaelZ

    Likewise, if your son wants to move into a house share, there are thousands of houses every week that comes up. He might need to visit half a dozen before he finds a match, but it isn't exactly complicated.

    That sounds right. I did think that maybe a masters in economics isn't all it's cracked up to be.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Need not be 1m homes for 1m people either. Even with an average household size of 2 that would be down to 200sq km. Then throw in some higher density flats and we’re talking a much smaller footprint.

  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    None of which should be linked to an individual home, except maybe that most people building an individual home for themselves would choose to avoid flood plains because it'll be harder to get insurance on a flood plain.

    If they build on a flood plain and an insurer is prepared to insure them, then that's their responsibility.
    Ignoring the fact that the act of building on flood plains pushes the floods further downstream and floods other houses which were previously safe. Yet again you display remarkable ignorance for the reason for planning regulations. Something that is increasingly becoming a hallmark of your postings.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,768
    edited September 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Screw sensibly.

    Sensibility just becomes abused by NIMBYs and hands control of development to developers.

    Protect zones that aren't appropriate for development then let individuals build a home in zones approved for construction to preset standards wherever and whenever they want.

    No individual home can be responsible for transport, or healthcare or anything else. Let local government etc react to developments as they organically occur instead of having planned developments all at once.
    Infrastructure Barty. Do you want schools for your children and hospitals for you and roads to drive to both on?
    1. Barty builds house and 3 garages on a cheap field in Lesser Snotworthy in the Marsh.
    2. Barty finds the farmer has converted from pasture to a pig farm next door because cheap imports of crap meat.
    3. The farmer on the other side has converted from pasture to tank driving for stag parties because Brexit.
    4. Someonbe else builds a distribution centre a mile upstream, so there is more runoff and the river floods Barty's place.
    5. The copunty school authority can't afford school buses any more thanks to Tory policies, and one child goes to primary school 10 miles awau and the other to secondary school 10 miles in the other direction, and nobody has planned for public transport ...

    PS 2 can already happen - no planning permission needed IIRC - it happened to the parents of a friend of mine, or at least the pig farm next door did just after the farmer sold them the land to build their house.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    None of which should be linked to an individual home, except maybe that most people building an individual home for themselves would choose to avoid flood plains because it'll be harder to get insurance on a flood plain.

    If they build on a flood plain and an insurer is prepared to insure them, then that's their responsibility.
    Ignoring the fact that the act of building on flood plains pushes the floods further downstream and floods other houses which were previously safe. Yet again you display remarkable ignorance for the reason for planning regulations. Something that is increasingly becoming a hallmark of your postings.
    Not really, since as I said if a zone needs to be kept free due to environmental risks then with a sensible zoning system you zone that plain as not suitable for development.

    I never said build anywhere, I said build on zones where development is acceptable. If development is unacceptable there, it should be zoned that way, then its not a problem that its not developed.

    The problem with our system, as we discussed the other day, is that unlike nations like Belgium and Netherlands with zonal development systems whereby its easy to build a new home in approved zones so most people self-build, in this country the planning system is so messed up that only developers navigate it.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    None of which should be linked to an individual home, except maybe that most people building an individual home for themselves would choose to avoid flood plains because it'll be harder to get insurance on a flood plain.

    If they build on a flood plain and an insurer is prepared to insure them, then that's their responsibility.
    Wrong. National capital is finite and it is best to have rules against wasting it by building floodable houses. The free market is no more perfect at sorting things here than elsewhere, because what happens is a lot of wide boys make a fortune taking premiums for flood damage, and then fuck off before a 30 year flood occurs. See 2008, and Lloyd's 1970s - 80s.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    Nimby..
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279
    TimS said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Need not be 1m homes for 1m people either. Even with an average household size of 2 that would be down to 200sq km. Then throw in some higher density flats and we’re talking a much smaller footprint.

    The point is that even if we went for largesse we aren't talking about a huge area.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,214

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,206
    edited September 2022
    in the circket ,India women just beat England woman by a Mankab for the final wicket when England needed 12 runs to win for final wicket.

    Personally I think Mankabing is fine - batters should not try and gain a yard or so when at the non striking end
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,612
    Split the city into 2 architecturally. One half can be Poundbury city. Retro olde English architecture, cobbled streets in the old town, timber framed buildings, proper Harry Potter studio tour style pastiche. The other half a gleaming modernist city straight out of blade runner. Something for everyone.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,768
    carnforth said:
    Hmm, take your dog to work and keep your feet warm.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881
    dixiedean said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
    Wouldn’t happen at Waitrose. THIS. IS. A. DISGRACE.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Basements do add to the cost of a house. Our basement cement walls would compare favourably with that those of a swimming pool. It contained two workshops, darkroom, washing machine with a drain in the floor and concrete deep sink, a "chute to receive soiled clothes for washing, room for a pingpong table, and the house furnace with gravity feed large cast iron pipes going to radiators upstairs. The latter system worked beautifully but requires subtle tilting of the pipes to assist circulation. Forgive my fond (in the old sense) memory.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 7,279
    dixiedean said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
    Monitoring the number of security guards is probably a good way of seeing how things are more generally. It's also a major cost.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Ought we to allow non-residents to buy property in the UK? Can we generally buy property as we wish in their countries?

    Or is this what funds our current account deficit?

    Very few countries bar foreigners from buying property, but many reserve areas for local housing with planning laws, and tax foreign-owned property, especially by non-residents.

    Yes, it’s a big source of foreign capital into the UK which helps enormously with the current account deficit.

    Despite what most of us on here may think of the UK and its government, to 90% of the rest of the world, it’s considered a safe haven from their own government, and property rights are well respected.
    I'm well aware of that. The reality is that we are a densely populated island (south of Leeds) and land is a fixed resource. Neither do we build the number of houses we actually need. Having a hands off approach to foreign property ownership is just asking for trouble.
    Building more houses would solve everything.

    And devalue those houses people have bought as an investment. Win/win.
    I would agree with that. But it needs to be done sensibly. Not just 'bonfire of regulations.'
    Yup. The trouble is, it can't be done sensibly or sustainably or any of that crap. It can only be done by abolishing rural England. That is the lesser of two evils vs condemning the poor to homelessness, but it is a crying shame and one which is not resisted purely to prop up house prices. But you can't do it without a bonfire of regulations.
    The vast majority of rural England is not built on. Admittedly some land would not be suitable.

    What is the footprint for a good size home and garden. Let's say 400 sq metres.

    A million homes would be 400 million sq metres or 400 sq km.

    England is 130,000 sq km.

    So 0.3% of England's land mass. About the size of Rutland.

    Have I missed something?
    Infrastructure

    Roads

    Flood plains

    Highlands
    None of which should be linked to an individual home, except maybe that most people building an individual home for themselves would choose to avoid flood plains because it'll be harder to get insurance on a flood plain.

    If they build on a flood plain and an insurer is prepared to insure them, then that's their responsibility.
    Ignoring the fact that the act of building on flood plains pushes the floods further downstream and floods other houses which were previously safe. Yet again you display remarkable ignorance for the reason for planning regulations. Something that is increasingly becoming a hallmark of your postings.
    Not really, since as I said if a zone needs to be kept free due to environmental risks then with a sensible zoning system you zone that plain as not suitable for development.

    I never said build anywhere, I said build on zones where development is acceptable. If development is unacceptable there, it should be zoned that way, then its not a problem that its not developed.

    The problem with our system, as we discussed the other day, is that unlike nations like Belgium and Netherlands with zonal development systems whereby its easy to build a new home in approved zones so most people self-build, in this country the planning system is so messed up that only developers navigate it.
    Nope. As someone who has been involved in 3 separate self build projects going back over 50 years or more (the first was my dad building his own house in 1970) I can assure you that planning permission is not the issue. The massive issue is building regs which become ever more labyrinthine and unsuited to small scale home building.

    As I said the other day, the default position of planning decisions is to permit. Indeed we already zone for development in this country - it is called the local plan. The problem is that as soon as that land is zoned for development the big companies buy it up and sit on it.

    One change we could make (and should) is to return to the practice of 30 years ago or more whereby the developer had to pay the specific costs of developing the infrastructure - schools, doctors etc. This no longer happens as the law now allows them to make a smaller up front payment to the local council who then spend that money and don't build the infrastructure.

    There are many things wrong with our housebuilding system but planning is not the big one. Stop the developers sitting on vast tracts of land with planning permission for years and that will make a big difference.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881
    Forgive me for being an absolute idiot but in floodplains why don’t they build houses on stilts and give everyone a fan-boat?

    Apparently there are parts of the world people live in that are quite waterlogged and they cope.
  • boulay said:

    dixiedean said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
    Wouldn’t happen at Waitrose. THIS. IS. A. DISGRACE.
    No cheese was stolen.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,248

    boulay said:

    dixiedean said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
    Wouldn’t happen at Waitrose. THIS. IS. A. DISGRACE.
    No cheese was stolen.
    We're even selling self-satisfaction... to Waitrose!
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,881

    boulay said:

    dixiedean said:

    I was in the Sainsbury's garage today waiting to pay, and a bloke ran out with his arms full of stuff he'd swiped off the shelves. This isn't a normal occurence, even in SE14. Society is fraying around the edges.
    (i didn't chase after him, I am a loyal Sainsbury's shopper but not that loyal).

    Seen that a couple of times in ASDA. They've gone from one security guard to three.
    Wouldn’t happen at Waitrose. THIS. IS. A. DISGRACE.
    No cheese was stolen.
    Still, tonnes of crime committed at lesser supermarkets.
  • boulay said:

    Forgive me for being an absolute idiot but in floodplains why don’t they build houses on stilts and give everyone a fan-boat?

    Apparently there are parts of the world people live in that are quite waterlogged and they cope.

    Most of those places don't worry about things like sewerage systems. Not sure it is a model we should be following.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    in the circket ,India women just beat England woman by a Mankab for the final wicket when England needed 12 runs to win for final wicket.

    Personally I think Mankabing is fine - batters should not try and gain a yard or so when at the non striking end

    Mankad not b.
This discussion has been closed.