Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Liz Truss – the Tory gift to Keir Starmer – politicalbetting.com

13567

Comments

  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    Why don't you support Truss then? Sounds as though you think what she parrots about Crimea is as sane as a button.

    Here are Cummings's own words:

    "And with the human handgrenade, she may catastrophically escalate the war — remember she has defined the goal as pushing Russia out of Crimea, which if seriously attempted would be seen by the vast majority of Russians (including anti-Putin Russians) as an attempt to destroy Russia and could lead to nuclear weapons."

    What would Dominic Cummings have to contribute to Russian internal security BTW? Perhaps the mudthrowers mean the SVR?
    Just because Truss has one sane policy, she still has 99999 stupid ones that make support her impossible.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,708
    edited October 2022
    eek said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    15% fall, I think. Don't know if we call that a "crash".
    Going to be more than a 15% fall..

    If you think about it most people pay x% of their income in rent / mortgage payments. Let's say its £1000 a month.

    When interest rates were at 1% that allowed you to borrow £265,342
    At 6.2% you can now borrow £152,304

    And that £265,342 loan is now costing £1742 a month.

    The figures there are poor as I'm using a ready reckoner on google to calculate the figures but it shows the scale of the issue.

    No one is going to be offering £270,000 at present interest rates - it's possible it could be half that...
    Also can the people who were paying £1k a month rent, still afford that after cost of living pressures? If that drops to £900, thats another 10% off on top of the interest rate impacts.

    However expect loads of government props to boost prices from this completely free market govt....
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    Or just implement the house-based wealth tax we ended up creating here....
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,001
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    It turned out that Russia was a paper tiger. People who were bullish in support in support of Ukraine have been proved right.
    For such a proponent of superforecasting, Cummings gets a lot of things wrong.

    And I'm not sure he's a Russophile as much as he's a autocratophile (as long as he gets to be Richelieu).
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    Why don't you support Truss then? Sounds as though you think what she parrots about Crimea is as sane as a button.

    Here are Cummings's own words:

    "And with the human handgrenade, she may catastrophically escalate the war — remember she has defined the goal as pushing Russia out of Crimea, which if seriously attempted would be seen by the vast majority of Russians (including anti-Putin Russians) as an attempt to destroy Russia and could lead to nuclear weapons."

    What would Dominic Cummings have to contribute to Russian internal security BTW? Perhaps the mudthrowers mean the SVR?
    DC is right about Jizzy Lizzy's intentions but her ability to affect the trajectory of the conflict is marginal at best. The intentions and actions of the USA and, to an extent, Poland are what really counts.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    IshmaelZ said:

    eristdoof said:

    ping said:

    Hmm. I’ve been mulling over Truss’s speech.

    One thing that’s bugging me is her anecdote about going on a plane as a child and being given an “air hostess in training” badge, as opposed to her brothers who were given a “pilot in training” badge. Or something.

    It seems to have offended her, but frankly, she comes across as entitled and ungrateful.

    She comes across as unreasonable and frankly, nasty, towards people who tried to do something nice for her.

    Her parents. Her teachers. Some air hostess trying to be nice.

    The woman clearly has issues and projects them onto the world.

    I don’t like people like that. I don’t think other people do, either.

    What she says is awful. Why she says it is really awful. But the part that blows my mind is *how* she says it.

    "You are wooden Prime Minister" someone must have told her. Because suddenly she has this pisstake huge grin on her face half the time which looks not just totally fake but entirely inappropriate with what she is saying.

    And then we have the arms. I commented during her LK interview on Sunday morning that her left arm looked like it was being operated by Frank Oz via a stick. Now it is both arms. Held out front. Moved up and down together.

    Do you remember when BBC News mistook a person who went for a job interview for a pundit and stuck him on air? The poor guy blustered his way through some answers to try not to embarrass people but clearly wasn't who they assumed he was?

    That's Liz Truss that is. Wooden. Inauthentic. Clearly not the Prime Minister because bonkers and embarrassing for anyone who understands politics to look at. But despite being a walking talking parody she IS the PM because giffers were put in the position of choosing and they chose *that*
    She has a childlike quality that sits ill with a great office of state.

    Is it the skinniness? The false bravado? The naïveté? The sense that she is practicing rather than doing? The faltering voice? The agonising gaps as she tries to come up with the right answer? The crush on her favourite teacher Miss Brodie Mrs Thatcher, who she hasn’t realised is in love with Benito? The string of fails in all her subjects? The experimentation? The casual nastiness? The inappropriate arm and face movements?

    Adolescence is awkward. Ask Fibber Johnson.

    Spitting Image, Private Eye or Viz ought to consider a ‘Behind the Bike Shed’ feature with Pretty Liz and her sidekick Beefy Coffey trying out fags to impress the boys. Kalamity Kwasi is seen sneaking off sheepishly, sniffing his fingers.
    I don't think that childlike is a problem.

    The problem is that most children are very inexperienced. Ms Truss also gives the impression that she is inexperienced. This is most evident by her lack of experience at answering akward questions. That is a fatal characteristic for someone who leads a country.
    What this proves I think is how excessively presidential the system is. Same with May: rose without trace, decade in a Great Office of State without that either preparing her for PMship or exposing her unfitness. Perhaps we should have weekly HSQs and FSQs and CXQs so that we can have a look at them?
    Good suggestion.

    But why are the media so compliant? We need some decent journalists. A lot of decent journalists. They are too used to simply re-drafting press releases.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,304
    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    It turned out that Russia was a paper tiger. People who were bullish in support in support of Ukraine have been proved right.
    To be fair for decades the West has believed that Russian weapons (the good ones not the rubbish export* versions) in Russian hands would prove formidable, and that we shouldn't think that something like the Gulf or Iraq wars would be replicated in a war between Russia and NATO. So I'll give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who thought that Russia would prevail, but over 7 months on anyone still believing that the Russia military is anything other than a moribund, corrupted, undisciplined shadow of what it might have once been is a fool.

    * This viewpoint in itself is now debatable.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kinabalu said:

    I sense a disconnect between PB feeltone and the betting markets. PB says it's just a matter of the *size* of the Labour GE majority. Betfair has any Labour majority at all @ 2.2 ie a less than 50% chance.

    True but I don't pay much nevermind to the wisdom of betfair after brexit, GE 17, LD victories last year etc etc. I think political bettors are on average un clued up Tories and tend to favour their side same way as Ingerland is always too short in the footie. Plus the markets are so thin, clued up Tories with the resources of say JRM can afford to influence them for pocket change.

    On the PB side I pay very little attention to the historical guff about This would be a bigger swing than Bonar Home achieved against Asquith in 1879. I Baxters the polls and I bets accordingly.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    How unreasonable of people with savings to expect a little interest on them after at least 10 years of nothing.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,985
    Ghedebrav said:



    And I'm not sure he's a Russophile as much as he's a autocratophile (as long as he gets to be Richelieu).

    He lived in Russia for years and that is impossible unless you are, to some degree, a cultural Russophile as it can be so fucking grim. Even in Moscow.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    Okay, I'll rise to the bait as one of the outright owners, retired, you refer to. I don't like cruises. And won't vote Tory.

    To repeat a point I make frequently but you choose to ignore, you say we "care little for the impoverishment of generations below". We do, most of us. Partly (but not only) because those generations include my kids and grandkids. And even Tory voters have them. Many of us who are comfortably off and retired actually vote in the interests of our kids' generation. I'm fine thanks, but I want my kids to have a good life, with great jobs, affordable housing and great public services.
    And yet when the votes are counted the vast majority of this group vote for the party that's giving them 11% pension rises and cutting benefits by 6% in real terms for working age people. Maybe you need to talk to your peers and find out what their intentions are because I don't think they care about the future generations as much as you believe.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    +1. Until 90% of people who live here and want to buy their own home can afford to do so, the stamp duty for non resident foreign buyers should be 10% of the whole price with no zero rated portion and 15% above the £925k threshold.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    Or just implement the house-based wealth tax we ended up creating here....
    Maybe, but it would need to be doubled or tripled for overseas investors to discourage rentseeking and a net drain of money out of the country.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,001
    Dura_Ace said:

    Ghedebrav said:



    And I'm not sure he's a Russophile as much as he's a autocratophile (as long as he gets to be Richelieu).

    He lived in Russia for years and that is impossible unless you are, to some degree, a cultural Russophile as it can be so fucking grim. Even in Moscow.
    I'd call myself a cultural Russophile, as least as far as arts and literature are concerned, but lack of democratic accountability doesn't make me swoon the way it does Classic D.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    We purchased our house ten years ago (our first house), and it is now 'worth' just under double what we paid for it (according to Zoopla range, and similar houses sold locally).

    That seems a rather steep 'profit'.

    I think there are four groups of people:
    *) Those who want to buy a home, but cannot because of high prices.
    *) Those who have bought a home recently and have a massive mortgage.
    *) Those who bought years ago and have a minimal, or no, mortgage, and like the high 'profit' they are sitting on.
    *) People and companies who have 'invested' in more than two properties. (*)

    I cannot see a way to keep all these groups happy. Although I think it is less important to keep the third and fourth happy than the first and second when it comes to house prices.

    But the really problematic group is the second of these (which we are not in; we paid off our mortgage a few years ago).

    (*) Two properties is an interesting one: I know several couples who have two properties, because they both bought before they got together, and kept both on, or sold one to pay for a move to a bigger place. I have some sympathy for their position.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,426
    Carnyx said:

    Jonathan said:

    Isn’t it inevitable that Liz Truss will recover through dint of not appearing on our screens for a bit. As the polls turn she will claim momentum. Her cheerleaders in the Mail will claim popularity and we will be told she is winning. It is easy to predict and pretty dismal.

    Obviously then she will then confidently pop up on our screens give a speech and launch a policy and remind us all why she is unfit for office.

    This is Peak Starmer.
    Good morning

    There is only one way this is going and it is not in favour of Sturgeon as Scots return to their labour roots now they have an electable leader
    What Labour roots? Labour have started picking Orangemen as councillors. That would be unheard of in the old days.
    Trump is rekindling his political career in local government in Scotland, with Labour?
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,001

    Seat projection - on the new boundaries - for the two Scottish polls published yesterday are identical:

    SNP 52 seats (+4)
    SLab 3 seats (+2)
    SLD 2 seats (nc)
    SCon 0 seats (-6)

    (YouGov/The Times; SNP45, Lab31, Con12, LD7)

    SNP 52 seats (+4)
    SLab 3 seats (+2)
    SLD 2 seats (nc)
    SCon 0 seats (-6)

    (Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman; SNP46, Lab30, Con15, LD8)

    The new boundaries are incredibly cruel to the Unionist parties.

    The Scotsman publishes a seat projection for Westminster, which shows that the SNP would be His Majesty’s Official Opposition:

    Labour 519 seats
    Scottish National Party 53 seats
    Conservatives 37 seats
    Liberal Democrats 17 seats

    (Based on the two latest Savanta ComRes polls: UK and Scottish)

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-tories-heading-for-total-wipeout-as-labour-gains-exclusive-poll-shows-3869122

    Interesting, but I think the LDs would do better than that because of tactical voting.
    Agreed.

    Not very likely that they’ll get more than 2 seats in Scotland, due to horrific boundary changes, but highly likely that the Liberal Democrats will get a lot more seats in southern England than UNS suggests.

    As evidence, see these astonishing net approval ratings for Truss in:

    South East -31
    South West -43
    Eastern -44

    (the same R&W Mike posted)

    Those are just mind-bogglingly poor. I have never seen such poor approval ratings for a UK PM in southern England. I’m happy to be corrected, but not even Gordon Brown reached so low, even during the height of the “Scottish Mafia” furore in the English media.

    Observe in particular that Eastern England, the very heartland of Brexit, is the worst area for Truss in the whole of England and Wales. (Only Scotland disapproves more: -51.) Why? Is she seen as a ‘Remainer’?

    In addition, we’ve been seeing a lot of dreadful Con VI figures in South West England. Eg just 24% in that Omnisis poll a few days ago:

    South West
    Lab 44%
    Con 24%
    LD 22%
    Ref 6%
    Grn 2%

    Those numbers must terrify local office-bearers.
    They are remarkable numbers. As you say, the Eastern number stands out especially - but there again the Turnip Mafia never forgets.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,708
    edited October 2022

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    We did finally put in a surcharge on stamp duty for non residents last year, but at 2% it is too low. A favourable week on the currency markets and the cost disappears.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,663
    edited October 2022

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    I must say it's fascinating to see you two PB regulars so emphatically in favour of such taxes/restrictions. (Comment not intended in any unkind way, far from it.) Surely this is a change of mood of recent years?
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,617
    edited October 2022
    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,663
    edited October 2022
    Selebian said:

    Carnyx said:

    Jonathan said:

    Isn’t it inevitable that Liz Truss will recover through dint of not appearing on our screens for a bit. As the polls turn she will claim momentum. Her cheerleaders in the Mail will claim popularity and we will be told she is winning. It is easy to predict and pretty dismal.

    Obviously then she will then confidently pop up on our screens give a speech and launch a policy and remind us all why she is unfit for office.

    This is Peak Starmer.
    Good morning

    There is only one way this is going and it is not in favour of Sturgeon as Scots return to their labour roots now they have an electable leader
    What Labour roots? Labour have started picking Orangemen as councillors. That would be unheard of in the old days.
    Trump is rekindling his political career in local government in Scotland, with Labour?
    Lol! It's a serious point, all the same, given Labour's roots in the RC Irish poor proletariat (vs nativist locals voting Unionist Party). It was a hell of a shock for them when the RCs shifted substantially over to the SNP in recent decades. I'm not sure old assumptions about Labour roots are much use these days.
  • Options
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off.
    We should all follow the excellent example of Prince Charles and inherit a few tens of billion.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
  • Options
    IcarusIcarus Posts: 898
    eek said:

    Icarus said:

    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:
    If you aren't plotting to save the next election - chances are you won't be in a position to be part of the opposition after the next election.

    Currently the Tory Party are heading into terminal wipe-out territory ...
    Next May's council elections may be the tipping point. If the Conservative lose a lot of councillors then the membership may turn on those responsible.
    The Tories did so badly in the 2019 local elections - it is going to be hard to identify any issue in 2023....

    It's very likely a bad result will look reasonable - because they really are starting from a very bad starting point..
    In 2019

    Conservatives won 3,564 seats (admittedly down 1330 on the previous results) with 31.4% of the vote
    Labour: 2,021 Seats - 26.6% of the vote
    Liberal Democrats: 1351 seats - 16.8% of the vote

    Still plenty of seats for the Conservatives to lose.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    Just seen a friend of mine who went to work at the Tory conference. Asked how it was, his response was "it reminded me of living through my parents bitter divorce."
    https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1577947110821040128
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
    Yes, I've only been saying it for the last 10 years or so, punitive value taxes on second home ownership. I keep getting told that it would hurt landlords, but that, to me, is a happy coincidence if the rent seekers have to actually go out and work for a living.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    I must say it's fascinating to see you two PB regulars so emphatically in favour of such taxes/restrictions. (Comment not intended in any unkind way, far from it.) Surely this is a change of mood of recent years?
    Nah, I've been on this subject for at least 10 years.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,192
    Ghedebrav said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Ghedebrav said:



    And I'm not sure he's a Russophile as much as he's a autocratophile (as long as he gets to be Richelieu).

    He lived in Russia for years and that is impossible unless you are, to some degree, a cultural Russophile as it can be so fucking grim. Even in Moscow.
    I'd call myself a cultural Russophile, as least as far as arts and literature are concerned, but lack of democratic accountability doesn't make me swoon the way it does Classic D.
    Putin is giving the world a master class in why democracies work and dictatorships don't.

  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    edited October 2022
    “This afternoon we should see the first post-speech polling and I would be very surprised if perceptions have moved.”

    Personally I wouldn’t like to call wether it’s temporary polling change or largely permanent - John Curtice said the same yesterday.

    It could prove like how a currency drops dramatically in hours, doesn’t jump back in hours but regains ground over days and weeks.

    In Truss first week there was not dramatic movement on her coronation, she was largely seen as doing okay at PMQs, indeed the polls were showing uptick in her favour. Yes, they were. The more dramatic nature of the collapse seems to linked to one budget, in fact one budget measure which is now gone, so gradual recovery could happen.

    Osborne had a “uber bad pasty budget” where Tory position was eroded to give Labour big leads, partly because the UKIP position was improved by the budget, but ultimately that bad budget drop unwound too.

    If you are going to bet on poll movement, a gradual unwinding of the collapse (though not completely!) is the smart bet I think.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    Or just implement the house-based wealth tax we ended up creating here....
    Maybe, but it would need to be doubled or tripled for overseas investors to discourage rentseeking and a net drain of money out of the country.
    Oh absolutely zero problem with it being way higher for foreign / corporate owners. Only issue to cover would be "build to rent" where corporate (pension fund) ownership exists and should be encouraged....

    It's a shame few Labour MPs read this we could provide them with a very good and popular redesign of the tax system which would encourage a lot of votes...
  • Options
    sbjme19sbjme19 Posts: 125
    I find the R&W regional figures rather puzzling. I'd expect Truss to be doing much worse in Wales and London but in fact she's doing worse in the very leave/red wall areas. Or is it that she was so low in London anyway that it couldn't fall much further?
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    Fitch revealed on Wednesday night that it had cut the outlook for its credit rating on UK government debt to "negative" from "stable".

    It maintained its overall rating - with AAA being the ideal verdict - at AA-
    https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1577920378776723456
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,426
    Carnyx said:

    Selebian said:

    Carnyx said:

    Jonathan said:

    Isn’t it inevitable that Liz Truss will recover through dint of not appearing on our screens for a bit. As the polls turn she will claim momentum. Her cheerleaders in the Mail will claim popularity and we will be told she is winning. It is easy to predict and pretty dismal.

    Obviously then she will then confidently pop up on our screens give a speech and launch a policy and remind us all why she is unfit for office.

    This is Peak Starmer.
    Good morning

    There is only one way this is going and it is not in favour of Sturgeon as Scots return to their labour roots now they have an electable leader
    What Labour roots? Labour have started picking Orangemen as councillors. That would be unheard of in the old days.
    Trump is rekindling his political career in local government in Scotland, with Labour?
    Lol! It's a serious point, all the same, given Labour's roots in the RC Irish poor proletariat (vs nativist locals voting Unionist Party). It was a hell of a shock for them when the RCs shifted substantially over to the SNP in recent decades. I'm not sure old assumptions about Labour roots are much use these days.
    It is very odd and wasn't something I was aware of, although to be fair I've got little knowledge of local politics beyond North Yorkshire and to some extent mid-Essex. Neither of which, as far as I'm aware, are awash with Orangemen (not sure where HYUFD is on that).
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    Which part of kjh can't work out how he can afford to sub his children £100,000 has post got to do with.

    Some people can afford to gift their children a substantial profit - many can't....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited October 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
  • Options
    sbjme19 said:

    I find the R&W regional figures rather puzzling. I'd expect Truss to be doing much worse in Wales and London but in fact she's doing worse in the very leave/red wall areas. Or is it that she was so low in London anyway that it couldn't fall much further?

    Redwall switch voters have been lied to and shafted by the Tory Party.

    Lifelong Tories voting for their team because that is what they always have done, plus the 10% of the country who back and believe in what Truss and Kwarteng want to do.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited October 2022

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    Why don't you support Truss then? Sounds as though you think what she parrots about Crimea is as sane as a button.

    Here are Cummings's own words:

    "And with the human handgrenade, she may catastrophically escalate the war — remember she has defined the goal as pushing Russia out of Crimea, which if seriously attempted would be seen by the vast majority of Russians (including anti-Putin Russians) as an attempt to destroy Russia and could lead to nuclear weapons."

    What would Dominic Cummings have to contribute to Russian internal security BTW? Perhaps the mudthrowers mean the SVR?
    Why would I support somebody I think is bonkers?

    The fact that Cummings is even more malign and bonkers as well as an apologist for Nazism is no reason to support Truss. There is the option of saying they're both beyond the pale.

    On Crimea, she's actually right. It is Ukrainian territory, illegally annexed, and should be returned. There is no greater likelihood of that triggering a nuclear war than the recapture of Kherson or Luhansk, both of which now look likely, despite Cummings' vapouring.

    As for what he could contribute, probably nothing given how dim he is. To reiterate, in case you have the same reading comprehension skills as your hero, that the charge was unconvincing.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,885
    edited October 2022
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    In Doncaster one of the large development areas (mostly sheds and a rail terminal) is an investment of a Canadian Pension Fund (Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan). I don't think our state pension funds would be allowed to do that?

    Anyway, I assume it is only residential property that we would need to apply any additional tax to.
  • Options
    Groggy after two hours’ sleep I arouse blinking into a new dawn. The plane is losing altitude as we approach London, a little faster than usual it seems to me. Down below a parachutist drifts elegantly to earth in the still morning air. “Is that a pilot’s uniform?” I muse, “Hard to tell from this distance.” It appears the bossy stewardess who grabbed my tray before I’d finished dinner is now fulfilling a lifetime’s ambition to fly a plane and the rest of the cabin crew are in the cockpit, cheering her on. According to rumour first-class passengers have been issued with parachutes. I reach below my seat and nervously finger my life jacket. “This is your new captain speaking” giggles a voice over the tannoy “we are now going to loop the loop”. “Go for it Liz” cry the cabin crew. A man in row 63, who apparently was some sort of legal bureaucrat in an earlier life, also has a lifetime’s ambition to fly a plane. “I’m not sure looping the loop is such a good idea,” he mutters sotto voce. “Maybe a nose dive would work better?” First class passengers are arguing about when to open the door and bale out. “Let’s wait until we’re over Surrey,” say some. “We might not even get there,” say others. “Look, Dad, you can see our house from up here” says Little Lord Fauntleroy.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited October 2022
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    Which part of kjh can't work out how he can afford to sub his children £100,000 has post got to do with.

    Some people can afford to gift their children a substantial profit - many can't....
    I am not referring to KJH. I am referring to upper middle class parents I know, who have worked in the City, been doctors, corporate lawyers, directors of companies etc almost all of who live in London or the Home Counties and almost all of whom have given their children a deposit to buy a property.

    KJH by his own admission gave up full time work in his 40s
  • Options
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    Which part of kjh can't work out how he can afford to sub his children £100,000 has post got to do with.

    Some people can afford to gift their children a substantial profit - many can't....
    If they don't happen to have the cash spare, why not gift them the coach house or one of their rental flats instead?
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
    Ironicaly the thing to save the Tories now would be PR....
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,304
    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    I must say it's fascinating to see you two PB regulars so emphatically in favour of such taxes/restrictions. (Comment not intended in any unkind way, far from it.) Surely this is a change of mood of recent years?
    Not sure it is?

    I favour a low tax burden on UK residents and workers for their own good and the good of the UK economy as a whole - I don't hold a brief for big international corporations, foreign institutional investors or the globally superwealthy - who I think are almost entirely self-interested- unless it can be demonstrated to me that it's strongly in our economic interest.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,182
    eek said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    15% fall, I think. Don't know if we call that a "crash".
    Going to be more than a 15% fall..

    If you think about it most people pay x% of their income in rent / mortgage payments. Let's say its £1000 a month.

    When interest rates were at 1% that allowed you to borrow £265,342
    At 6.2% you can now borrow £152,304

    And that £265,342 loan is now costing £1742 a month.

    The figures there are poor as I'm using a ready reckoner on google to calculate the figures but it shows the scale of the issue.

    No one is going to be offering £270,000 at present interest rates - it's possible it could be half that...
    Maybe but about 15% over the next 2 years is what I'm expecting. Sellers resist sharp falls unless they have to sell quick so much of it feeds into lower volumes rather than crashed prices. Buyers tend to deal in term fixes and these aren't as volatile as base rate. The upper term in the price = income/yield equation is on the rise with inflation. Wages, rents going up etc.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    edited October 2022
    pigeon said:

    Meanwhile, what do you make of OPEC (Saud) aligned with Putin on oil cuts - failure of US and UK diplomacy, or just temptation to carpet bag was understandably too great?

    FWIW, I reckon it's about 50% scalping and 50% despots siding with Putin.

    Mohammed bin Salman is the second best argument for decarbonisation (after the world baking to death,) and it's a close-run thing.
    Nice answer from the last thread, thank you. 🙂

    “Meanwhile, what do you make of OPEC (Saud) aligned with Putin on oil cuts - failure of US and UK diplomacy, or just temptation to carpet bag was understandably too great?”

    Can we equate just how much extra pain this decision is heaping on us? Does it make our poor poorer and Truss borrowing more expensive so The budget deficit needing even more cuts to fill it up 🙁
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
    Ironicaly the thing to save the Tories now would be PR....
    They would still lose with PR but yes would likely win more seats on current polls with PR than FPTP.

    FPTP helps the Tories if they are ahead but punishes the Tories if they are behind
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    Or just implement the house-based wealth tax we ended up creating here....
    Maybe, but it would need to be doubled or tripled for overseas investors to discourage rentseeking and a net drain of money out of the country.
    Oh absolutely zero problem with it being way higher for foreign / corporate owners. Only issue to cover would be "build to rent" where corporate (pension fund) ownership exists and should be encouraged....

    It's a shame few Labour MPs read this we could provide them with a very good and popular redesign of the tax system which would encourage a lot of votes...
    That's easy as well, create 25-40 year non-transferable tax free allowances for the build to rent sector.
  • Options
    rkrkrk said:

    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.

    Timing.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,885
    MaxPB said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
    Yes, I've only been saying it for the last 10 years or so, punitive value taxes on second home ownership. I keep getting told that it would hurt landlords, but that, to me, is a happy coincidence if the rent seekers have to actually go out and work for a living.
    Should someone with two small properties be hammered compared to someone with a single large property of a size that they "don't need" (according to some dictat)?

    I'd be reluctant to distinguish.

    How would you deal with corporate ownership?
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
    There is no chance of Farage doing that well. He is just a bogeyman that Tories use to whip their wavering supporters into line and it works every time.

    If you all truly believed in what you are doing, none of you would give a darn about Farage.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
    While Russian money prevents the Tories from doing it - it won't prevent Labour doing it.

    Especially given the state Government Finances will look like in 2 years time
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
    Ironicaly the thing to save the Tories now would be PR....
    Doubly ironic given it's bad PR that's killing them...
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited October 2022
    rkrkrk said:

    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.

    The markets, plus the fact that public opinion is in a very different place ont hese kinds of issues from 2010, 11 or 12 or so.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    I sense a disconnect between PB feeltone and the betting markets. PB says it's just a matter of the *size* of the Labour GE majority. Betfair has any Labour majority at all @ 2.2 ie a less than 50% chance.

    True but I don't pay much nevermind to the wisdom of betfair after brexit, GE 17, LD victories last year etc etc. I think political bettors are on average un clued up Tories and tend to favour their side same way as Ingerland is always too short in the footie. Plus the markets are so thin, clued up Tories with the resources of say JRM can afford to influence them for pocket change.

    On the PB side I pay very little attention to the historical guff about This would be a bigger swing than Bonar Home achieved against Asquith in 1879. I Baxters the polls and I bets accordingly.
    The political betting markets are totes weird. It's why I bet on politics - you don't get many chances to bet compared to sport but you end up with the opportunity of hitting home runs rather than stealing singles.

    I don't know if there is a consistent bias though - Le Pen was waaaaaaay to short in 2017 but then in the other direction Remain was to short in 2016. If anything Cons should have been shorter in 2019 than they were.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,441
    An average first time deposit on a house is 100k? Really?! That seems insanely high. Maybe London skews it, but that seems unattainable for most of the country.

  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    edited October 2022

    MaxPB said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
    Yes, I've only been saying it for the last 10 years or so, punitive value taxes on second home ownership. I keep getting told that it would hurt landlords, but that, to me, is a happy coincidence if the rent seekers have to actually go out and work for a living.
    Should someone with two small properties be hammered compared to someone with a single large property of a size that they "don't need" (according to some dictat)?

    I'd be reluctant to distinguish.

    How would you deal with corporate ownership?
    Yes....

    Corporate ownership - there are already rules for Build to Rent schemes - and @MaxPB covers it below...
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,617
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    'Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know'

    So we are eliminating anyone who is not upper middle class, we are eliminating anyone outside of the home counties and and London and eliminating anyone you don't know. So the sample is 0.00001 percent of a highly selective population.

    I received no help with my purchase because my parents did not have the money to do so as will be the case with the vast majority of parents who aren't rich.

    I am well off but I don't have a DB pension or annuity (as will be the case with many people going forward who will have no or small pensions) so will rely on savings/investments or drawdown. Not having an income in old age means you have to keep capital by to pay for your care (and don't give me the guff of I won't have to pay over £86K because that is bollocks and I have no intention of going into a local authority funded home).
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,538

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    Okay, I'll rise to the bait as one of the outright owners, retired, you refer to. I don't like cruises. And won't vote Tory.

    To repeat a point I make frequently but you choose to ignore, you say we "care little for the impoverishment of generations below". We do, most of us. Partly (but not only) because those generations include my kids and grandkids. And even Tory voters have them. Many of us who are comfortably off and retired actually vote in the interests of our kids' generation. I'm fine thanks, but I want my kids to have a good life, with great jobs, affordable housing and great public services.
    I fully accept that is what nearly all older people want. It is not what they, as a cohort rather than individuals, vote for though.
    I don't disagree, really. I just get a bit irritated by the lazy talk of retired homeowners as a homogenous bloc who vote Tory when there are many, like me and my peers, who don't. Same with the Red Wall - many voters in that 'bloc' voted remain and/or Labour, and some are even 'woke', but they are talked about as if they were a homogenous entity.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    rkrkrk said:

    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.

    Timing.
    Political or economic? In economic terms, I'd argue 2012 was a pretty bad situation also.
    Politically... she's got a substantial majority, Osborne was struggling by in a coalition govt.

    Honestly I'm really puzzled by this. I thought it was a guiding principle for conservatives that taxes on high income earners should be lowered, and did not foresee this backlash at all.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited October 2022
    Not the 1st, not the 2nd but the 3rd Scottish poll!

    https://twitter.com/WhatScotsThink/status/1577946326523944960

    Westminster
    SNP 44 (-1)
    Lab 31 (+4)
    Con 15 (-4)
    LD 6 (n/c)

    28-29.9


    Commissioned by batshit Scotland in Union organisation so I imagine the supplementaries are a load of garbage.
  • Options
    Hello_CloudsHello_Clouds Posts: 97
    edited October 2022
    glw said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    Chapeau to Dom Cummings.

    She really is properly bonkers.

    Indeed. D Cummings rightly said L Truss was bonkers because aiming to reconquer Crimea meant nuclear war, WW3. Which half the main posters here too are also pushing for.
    Really? I assumed it was because she thought he was a creepy liar who didn't have a clue what he was doing and told him so.

    Both would be correct, of course. Truss is clearly bonkers and as for Cummings...

    As for Cummings on Crimea, he's long been a Russophile. Indeed, he's so blatant in his pro-Russian stance he's even been accused of being an FSB agent (not very convincingly, I might add). That he should be arguing against trying to take some of the land they've nicked back off them is no surprise at all.
    It turned out that Russia was a paper tiger. People who were bullish in support in support of Ukraine have been proved right.
    To be fair for decades the West has believed that Russian weapons (the good ones not the rubbish export* versions) in Russian hands would prove formidable, and that we shouldn't think that something like the Gulf or Iraq wars would be replicated in a war between Russia and NATO. So I'll give the benefit of the doubt to anyone who thought that Russia would prevail, but over 7 months on anyone still believing that the Russia military is anything other than a moribund, corrupted, undisciplined shadow of what it might have once been is a fool.

    * This viewpoint in itself is now debatable.
    If Russian nukes didn't work and the authorities didn't have the logistics and the security to be able to rely on using them properly, Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago.

    Any explanation offered in support of the premise that "Russia couldn't handle its own nukes for toffees" is sheerest bullsh*t. Yeah they're out of Lyman and they didn't take Kiev. Right.

    The elite had access to great consumer electronics during the Soviet period - in luxury shops that the hoi polloi were kept completely out of. And that wasn't their only means of access either. This was while the median family had to be careful their TV set didn't blow up and toast their flat. (Such accidents were the main cause of domestic fires.) Never mind the ridiculousness of much of the target indicator economy, where if an enterprise got a bonus for producing a certain weight of nails and it was easier to meet the target by churning out one big nail a yard thick then that's what they would do. Never mind checking that goods were produced near the start of the month because the chance of them breaking down soon after delivery would be far higher if they were produced near the end of the month during the rush to meet targets. That kind of thing speaks volumes about the nature of the Soviet economy, as does the sheer size of the repair sector, blah blah. Not being a fan of Cornelius Castoriadis's theory of the stratocracy (Castoriadis hadn't actually studied the Soviet economy as far as I'm aware, and his work in the 1980s wasn't anywhere near the standard of some of what he produced in the 1950s) I'm not surprised this has eventually played a role in the perfomance of the Russian army when pitted against US- and British-backed Ukrainian forces in conventional land battles (unlike vs Georgia, in Syria, or indeed vs the Azov guys in Luhansk and Donetsk in 2014+) but, sorry, about strategic nuclear weapons none of this says sheeyit. Cf. difference between Bang and Olufsen gear in the 1980s and exploding TV sets. (Which is not even to say that conventional Russian weapons are crap. I thought the logistics was the problem. But for some people anything that advances the Kenny Everett conclusion must be true.)
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    After the U-turn on top 45p tax rate, Tory MPs think they can push the prime minister around:

    “It’s like a supply teacher who comes in at the start of the year and immediately loses control of the class,” said one senior Conservative.

    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.

    Timing.
    Political or economic? In economic terms, I'd argue 2012 was a pretty bad situation also.
    Politically... she's got a substantial majority, Osborne was struggling by in a coalition govt.

    Honestly I'm really puzzled by this. I thought it was a guiding principle for conservatives that taxes on high income earners should be lowered, and did not foresee this backlash at all.
    The problem is that it's not high earners it's 1% of earners....

    So there are very few votes to be gained from it and 2012 wasn't the same because in 2012 the first half of the budget didn't contain a £100bn commitment on energy prices to ensure the economy didn't blow up due to price shocks...

    The Markets were happy with that commitment (heck all of Europe are doing the same) so the other tax cuts on top were just that bit too much - especially when the market knew the justification was a joke...
  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    Okay, I'll rise to the bait as one of the outright owners, retired, you refer to. I don't like cruises. And won't vote Tory.

    To repeat a point I make frequently but you choose to ignore, you say we "care little for the impoverishment of generations below". We do, most of us. Partly (but not only) because those generations include my kids and grandkids. And even Tory voters have them. Many of us who are comfortably off and retired actually vote in the interests of our kids' generation. I'm fine thanks, but I want my kids to have a good life, with great jobs, affordable housing and great public services.
    I fully accept that is what nearly all older people want. It is not what they, as a cohort rather than individuals, vote for though.
    I don't disagree, really. I just get a bit irritated by the lazy talk of retired homeowners as a homogenous bloc who vote Tory when there are many, like me and my peers, who don't. Same with the Red Wall - many voters in that 'bloc' voted remain and/or Labour, and some are even 'woke', but they are talked about as if they were a homogenous entity.
    Surely such grouping is necessary for political betting type discussion and should always be read as the bloc rather than each and every individual?

    Or we could read the same caveat next to such words hundreds of times a day each time someone wants to talk about a group?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Scott_xP said:

    After the U-turn on top 45p tax rate, Tory MPs think they can push the prime minister around:

    “It’s like a supply teacher who comes in at the start of the year and immediately loses control of the class,” said one senior Conservative.

    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    I don't think that person has ever been a supply teacher. If they're there from the start it's usually less of a problem. It's when they arrive a couple of months in that it gets tough.
  • Options
    House of Lords By-elections.

    We have three by-elections (two of them double) coming up in very quick succession.

    First up, with voting on the 17th and 18th October, is a double by-election following the retirement of Viscount Ullswater and Lord Colwyn. The electorate is the whole House of Lords, but under an informal agreement between the parties it is expected that the vacancies will be filled by conservatives. The voting system is STV.

    We have 21 Candidates.

    Abergavenny, M. (Conservative)
    I have the time, commitment and energy to be a working Conservative Peer. After 15 years in shipping and finance in London, New York and Europe, I have focused on rural diversification and urban regeneration; advocating on behalf of social enterprise and charities; enabling small businesses and rural job creation. I served 8 years as a Conservative councillor and 4 years as National Chairman of the Conservative Rural Forum.

    Ashbourne, L. (Conservative)
    Experienced financial professional (specialising in mining) from a naval family with a good record of attendance. Extensive media experience (used to host a show on LBC). Resident in the division bell area and a party member for three decades, but familiar with life’s tribulations with a father with multiple sclerosis and a severely mentally handicapped brother. Read chemistry at Pembroke College, Oxford. Educated at Christ’s Hospital. Represented Ireland target shooting.

    Ashcombe, L. (Conservative)
    Aged 58, I am a consistent Conservative voter, member of the party and regular attender of the ACP. With a civil engineering degree from Imperial College, I have pursued a career in insurance, primarily with Marsh, specialising in the energy sector. If elected I would hope to apply my experience, skills and knowledge to the benefit of this House. Living in London and Hampshire I would have the time required to attend and vote.

    Baillieu, L. (Conservative)
    London resident, and a member of the Conservative Party. After I left the army in 1973, I lived and worked in banking and finance in Australia (17 years, visiting other Commonwealth countries), Hong Kong (5 years, also working in China and Taiwan), and Russia (23 years, also covering Ukraine). Used to cross border and cross culture negotiations, I continue to work as a financial consultant. Interests: Commonwealth, Trade, Environment.

    Balfour, E. (Conservative)
    I have been working full-time in international financial services and markets for 50 years. I believe my extensive experience and knowledge would be useful in the Chamber, particularly with a Financial Services Bill in the offing and where international competition is key in this field. 1 can also contribute in broader matters such as taxation, Middle East politics and daughters' rights. I am a member of the Conservative Party.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    Truss wants the party to split?

    Team Truss, for their part, argue that the Prime Minister’s problem is that her party is packed full of ‘social democrat’ fainthearts who are running frightened from real conservatism
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/crash-course-how-the-truss-revolution-came-off-the-road
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Ghedebrav said:

    Seat projection - on the new boundaries - for the two Scottish polls published yesterday are identical:

    SNP 52 seats (+4)
    SLab 3 seats (+2)
    SLD 2 seats (nc)
    SCon 0 seats (-6)

    (YouGov/The Times; SNP45, Lab31, Con12, LD7)

    SNP 52 seats (+4)
    SLab 3 seats (+2)
    SLD 2 seats (nc)
    SCon 0 seats (-6)

    (Savanta ComRes/The Scotsman; SNP46, Lab30, Con15, LD8)

    The new boundaries are incredibly cruel to the Unionist parties.

    The Scotsman publishes a seat projection for Westminster, which shows that the SNP would be His Majesty’s Official Opposition:

    Labour 519 seats
    Scottish National Party 53 seats
    Conservatives 37 seats
    Liberal Democrats 17 seats

    (Based on the two latest Savanta ComRes polls: UK and Scottish)

    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-tories-heading-for-total-wipeout-as-labour-gains-exclusive-poll-shows-3869122

    Interesting, but I think the LDs would do better than that because of tactical voting.
    Agreed.

    Not very likely that they’ll get more than 2 seats in Scotland, due to horrific boundary changes, but highly likely that the Liberal Democrats will get a lot more seats in southern England than UNS suggests.

    As evidence, see these astonishing net approval ratings for Truss in:

    South East -31
    South West -43
    Eastern -44

    (the same R&W Mike posted)

    Those are just mind-bogglingly poor. I have never seen such poor approval ratings for a UK PM in southern England. I’m happy to be corrected, but not even Gordon Brown reached so low, even during the height of the “Scottish Mafia” furore in the English media.

    Observe in particular that Eastern England, the very heartland of Brexit, is the worst area for Truss in the whole of England and Wales. (Only Scotland disapproves more: -51.) Why? Is she seen as a ‘Remainer’?

    In addition, we’ve been seeing a lot of dreadful Con VI figures in South West England. Eg just 24% in that Omnisis poll a few days ago:

    South West
    Lab 44%
    Con 24%
    LD 22%
    Ref 6%
    Grn 2%

    Those numbers must terrify local office-bearers.
    They are remarkable numbers. As you say, the Eastern number stands out especially - but there again the Turnip Mafia never forgets.
    One of the strangest aspects of Truss’s short premiership is her willingness to piss off core conservative institutions, such as RSPB England, the National Trust and mortgage holders.

    The ‘Turnip Mafia’ is a new one for me, but I have quite a clear picture of the demographic in my mind’s eye.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    Letter from Bank of England deputy governor Sir John Cunliffe to Treasury committee chair Mel Stride puts paid to government claims the mini-budget played no part in the subsequent economic chaos.

    Look at how the cost of UK govt borrowing shot up compared to US and EU. https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1577953705919655936/photo/1
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,885
    eek said:

    MaxPB said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Sean_F said:

    tyson said:

    The Tories key selling point has always been the fact that it persuades people that it can spend taxes more wisely than Labour. Rinse and repeat. The British public is small c conservative- they like the Government to add 1 and 1. That point has won the Tories every election despite Labour being trusted to run public services better (aside from the police and immigration). Our Conservative instinct leads us to place counting money higher than what it is spent on. We love the NHS, but not as much as our fear of indebtedness.

    Major lost it momentarily on Black Monday and Labour won 3 elections. Well Truss has well and truly FUBARed the Tory edge on counting money.

    And as Casino has so eloquently said, she has double down and fucked with people's houses. Labour can now pin next years inevitable house price crash on the Tories. And play this message for the next few elections in the same way the Tories linked the banking crisis with Brown.

    I never thought Corbyn was an existential risk to the Labour Party. I always thought it was a passing phase. But Truss genuinely I think poses an existential risk to the Tory party which is not a good thing. Because out of the ashes of the Tory party will rise a Populist Right akin to Le Pen or Meloni.

    The Tories must now go into full damage limitation mode with the MP's agreeing on a Unity candidate who can limp them into the next GE, but leave them enough of base to survive as a political force.

    I think it unlikely that prices will crash. Mortgage rates have been rising since the start of the year, without crashing prices.

    That said, the next election results seems pretty well settled.
    The rates have only got problematic in the last 2-3 months (together with energy bills) and it will take some time for that to feed through as the fixed rates expire.

    A crash happens only if there's a recession with a rise in unemployment- as people are forced to sell - but it will force people in employment to massively extend mortgage terms, go interest only, take lodgers, or - in some cases - firesell as there's no way of servicing the debt.

    In the latter case it then comes up against willing buyers. I suspect first time buyers are emptying out of the market at the moment.

    So I think we'll almost certainly see a fall.
    The issue is that sterling is in the toilet and falling house prices in the UK just becomes a buying opportunity for cash rich overseas investors and we're one of few countries that hasn't got any real restrictions on overseas purchasers. So any internal fall in demand is likely to be met by an increase in external demand. If we want a fall in house prices to actually be a net benefit to the UK and not just another exercise of rentseeking by foreign investors then Labour will need to put up some kind of annual value tax on foreign ownership of property.
    It's an absolute scandal that we've never put restrictions in on overseas purchasers of property.
    It's such an easy target as well because 99% of foreign investors can't vote so hitting them with taxes is literally a free hit for any government. If it results in lower house prices that's also a net benefit because it's getting lower prices without the usual rise in mortgage rates that we're about to see. It's also really easy to implement, a 10% value surcharge payable on purchase for non tax residents and then a follow up annual surcharge of 5%. Just make it unprofitable for overseas owners to hold UK property as if the UK was just a giant bank account for the global elite.
    Russian money will prevent Tories from ever doing it.

    Second/holiday homes are as selfish as it gets and should be hammered with great force. You could elegantly address both problems with jacked up taxes on second homes, including all homes owned by foreigners unless they domicile here for all tax purposes.
    Yes, I've only been saying it for the last 10 years or so, punitive value taxes on second home ownership. I keep getting told that it would hurt landlords, but that, to me, is a happy coincidence if the rent seekers have to actually go out and work for a living.
    Should someone with two small properties be hammered compared to someone with a single large property of a size that they "don't need" (according to some dictat)?

    I'd be reluctant to distinguish.

    How would you deal with corporate ownership?
    Yes....

    Corporate ownership - there are already rules for Build to Rent schemes - and @MaxPB covers it below...
    I'm thinking more of the 'holiday homes 4 U' type ownership. You could buy one and incorporate it, thus pretending it isn't really yours.

    There's definitely an argument that to convert a house into a holiday let / weekend bolthole / nuclear shelter you should need planning permission. That might deal with a lot of the problem outside London, where the general prices aren't quite as ridiculous.
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,970
    HYUFD said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    Which part of kjh can't work out how he can afford to sub his children £100,000 has post got to do with.

    Some people can afford to gift their children a substantial profit - many can't....
    I am not referring to KJH. I am referring to upper middle class parents I know, who have worked in the City, been doctors, corporate lawyers, directors of companies etc almost all of who live in London or the Home Counties and almost all of whom have given their children a deposit to buy a property.

    KJH by his own admission gave up full time work in his 40s
    You do realise that the people you refer to are only a small minority, even if they are the majority of the people you know personally?
  • Options
    IcarusIcarus Posts: 898
    Oh dear, Conservative Home seems to have twigged that Growth, Growth, Growth is pretty meaningless to voters. https://tinyurl.com/cdvpzrpx

    Even if Growth magically happened, which is unlikely because of increased Interest rates and falling demand, it would not be measurable by the time of the next General election.
  • Options
    sbjme19 said:

    I find the R&W regional figures rather puzzling. I'd expect Truss to be doing much worse in Wales and London but in fact she's doing worse in the very leave/red wall areas. Or is it that she was so low in London anyway that it couldn't fall much further?

    I hope it's worse in Leave/Red Wall areas because finally, finally, people are beginning to accept that the herds of unicorns they were promised if they voted for Brexit have vanished forever, to be replaced by the bitter reality of being screwed, yet again, by the Tories.

    People aren't daft. They know they were conned. It's taken a bit longer than I expected but I think we're there now.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Alistair said:

    Not the 1st, not the 2nd but the 3rd Scottish poll!

    https://twitter.com/WhatScotsThink/status/1577946326523944960

    Westminster
    SNP 44 (-1)
    Lab 31 (+4)
    Con 15 (-4)
    LD 6 (n/c)

    28-29.9


    Commissioned by batshit Scotland in Union organisation so I imagine the supplementaries are a load of garbage.

    A swing of 7% from SNP to Labour since 2019
  • Options
    Bristol, M. (Conservative)
    I live and work in London, am a lifelong Conservative, and would be an active member of the House if elected. I run a financial technology business which I founded 7 years ago. Previously worked within the UK property sector, and lived in the Baltic States for 8 years running a property fund. Trustee of two charities, one of which I founded, and patron of a further four. Other interests include Heritage, Countryside, International Relations.

    Dormer, L. (Conservative)
    I bring to the House some forty years’ international, commercial business experience in engineering, and manufacturing products, used in global defence programmes. I have a degree in Naval Architecture, a Cranfield MBA, and an ILM certificate in Leadership. I live in Berkshire with my wife Sue. I have a son and daughter. I am a member of the Conservative Party. If elected, I will make the necessary changes in my life to attend the House.

    Dudley, E. (No party/group affiliation declared)
    My “cv”. yt.technodemic. David Dudley. https://www.youtube.com/c/technodemic/videos

    Effingham, E. (Conservative)
    Aged 51 with a strong interest in the Royal British Legion from family naval connection. I have a degree in Classics from Bristol and have worked in finance at Barclays advising British companies on foreign exchange and treasury. I am a proponent of sport for all and enjoy countryside activities such as hiking and fishing. I live and work in London and would commit to attending the House regularly. Member of the Conservative Party.

    Eglinton and Winton, E. (Conservative)
    After 20 years working in the USA and following my Father’s passing, my family and I returned home in late 2020. Having previously served in HM Armed Forces, I wish to continue service to the country. If elected, I will dedicate myself and my capabilities to participating in and contributing to the business of the House of Lords on a full-time basis. I look forward to being a loyal and committed member of the Party.

    Elibank, L. (Conservative)
    In my career I have worked a variety of Industries including Technology and Energy and I am currently working for Reading University as a fundraiser. The latter two have given me considerable insight into the challenges of a sustainable future. I am a lifelong Conservative supporter and a member of the party and I would hope to be a diligent, effective and collegiate member of the House.

    Glendyne, L. (Conservative)
    As a result of Brexit, we have an opportunity to re-new our union for the well-being and happiness of our fellow citizens. An ethical, fair and free Kingdom, where no individual is left behind, is a high undertaking worthy of our efforts. I would be honoured to contribute to this.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    In their darker moments, some Tories referred back to the Canadian Tories wipeout in 1993. “I’ve been coming to these conferences for decades,” said one donor. “It’s the worst since the 1970s.”

    One minister added: “It feels like we’ve already lost.”


    https://www.ft.com/content/68425612-3dbd-4f76-81a4-52bef42f9eec

    If Farage sees a revival that nightmare might come true, a Labour landslide, Farage's party second on votes and the SNP second on seats. For now, fortunately for the Tories, Farage is relatively becalmed and Truss is not yet the UK Tories' Kim Campbell even if she has seen a similar slump in support
    Maybe the British populist insurgency will come from an unexpected direction. Someone like JK Rowling, perhaps.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Isn’t it inevitable that Liz Truss will recover through dint of not appearing on our screens for a bit. As the polls turn she will claim momentum. Her cheerleaders in the Mail will claim popularity and we will be told she is winning. It is easy to predict and pretty dismal.

    Obviously then she will then confidently pop up on our screens give a speech and launch a policy and remind us all why she is unfit for office.

    This is Peak Starmer.
    Nice. Probably. But you never know. Peak Sturgeon lasted quite a while. The big difference for Starmer now is that he has confidence and looks like a winner, which creates positive feedback. Last week he had a good week on top of Truss’ disaster.
    Easy to look good against such a weak opponent as Truss. Less easy against a quality opponent like Sturgeon.

    Several things worry me about Lab Maj buyers, but one of the biggest concerns is not Starmer but rather the rest of the Opposition front bench. Some of them are quite simply appalling. Reeves för example did a car-crash interview a couple of weeks ago. Nobody noticed of course - it was a great week to bury bad stories - but that is going to become impossible if Lab Maj becomes the accepted wisdom. The weak links are going to be exposed.
  • Options
    Hazlerigg, L. (Conservative)
    A successful entrepreneur who founded the Noisily Festival of Music & Arts and Floan, a POS finance business. Previous experience in renewables with a passion for sustainability; and driven by a desire to make palliative care a right. I feel that with my direct experience, I would be able to offer fresh and practical insight to these key areas which need help to grow and flourish. 35, London-based and driven to make a difference.

    Ironside, L. (Conservative)
    I spent the first 25 years of my career in the Lloyd’s Insurance Market as a director of several successful companies. For the last 20 years I established and ran my own business specialising and a leader in the field of classic Mercedes cars. I am interested in politics and business and would like to offer my energy and expertise to the House of Lords. I would take an active interest if elected.

    Limerick, E. (L. Foxford) (Conservative)
    Age 59. London and Sussex based. Useful international career experience: FCO with postings in Paris (ENA, first British diplomat in Quai d’Orsay), Senegal and Jordan. Fluent French, Russian. Some Spanish, Arabic and Wolof. Lawyer and banker in London, Moscow and Dubai financing SMEs and infrastructure. School governor and active conservation charity trustee. Running diversified farm including renewables, wilding, weddings, camping, care garden, MicroBrewery. Host to 7 Ukrainians. Key interests: Foreign Policy, Trade, Environment, Education, Planning.

    Minto, E. (Conservative)
    After a spell in the forces, and then qualifying as a surveyor, I spent the following twelve years in a multinational, multifaceted retail business. Then, with a partner, I led an acquisition of a small retail brand and built it over the next twenty years into a global presence with over two thousand employees across several continents. Particular interests are business/countryside/environment/defence. I come from and live in the Scottish borders.

    Napier and Ettrick, L. (Conservative)
    As a Conservative candidate, I wish to assure you that my life experience as someone who has succeeded in business despite significant challenges, due to severe hearing impairments, would enable me to make a distinctive and valuable contribution to the House. However, having lost my son and heir apparent aged 25 on the ground of his mental illness in August 2021, I am able to expose how utterly flawed our NHS mental health system is.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited October 2022

    HYUFD said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    I see 2-year mortgages are now above 6%. I got mine Nov last year with Santander at 0.89%.

    Just think of what a sledgehammer that is when it comes up to remortgaging. You can do the maths for yourself on a £200k debt. Add energy bills and inflation on top and ask how families are going to afford it. It's over an extra £1,000 a month every month.

    Tories used to have a lead amongst homeowners. They won't now.

    They will because the Tories will lead heavily among outright owners with no mortgage. They want higher interest rates, they care little for the impoverishment of generations below if it gets them an extra cruise per year.
    They also help with deposits for their grandchildren and children to get a house.

    Typical libertarian attitude ignoring the family
    Not this one again. Most people don't inherit until their mid sixties and parents also can't afford to pay a deposit for typically 2 children out of their savings while they are still alive. Listening to More or Less yesterday, the typical first time deposit is £100,000. I have 2 children and I am by most people's standards very well off, but I can't just find £200,000 at the drop of a hat and it would be a risk to my retirement if I did. These days many/most people don't have DB pensions to live off so I need the buffer of cash, potential to pay for a care in old age.
    Simply not true. Most upper middle class parents in the home counties and London I know help their children in their 20s or 30s with a deposit for a property and that is where property prices are highest and it is most needed. North of Watford property is much more affordable to buy for those on average incomes (even if TSE for instance also got help from his dad to buy in Hallam, a relatively more expensive part of the North)
    Which part of kjh can't work out how he can afford to sub his children £100,000 has post got to do with.

    Some people can afford to gift their children a substantial profit - many can't....
    I am not referring to KJH. I am referring to upper middle class parents I know, who have worked in the City, been doctors, corporate lawyers, directors of companies etc almost all of who live in London or the Home Counties and almost all of whom have given their children a deposit to buy a property.

    KJH by his own admission gave up full time work in his 40s
    You do realise that the people you refer to are only a small minority, even if they are the majority of the people you know personally?
    Not in London or the Home Counties they aren't a small minority they are at least a substantial minority, as I said outside there properties are more affordable to those on average incomes.

    If you want to buy a property before you are 40 and are on an average income and don't have wealthy parents, don't move to London and the Home Counties is my advice.

    Unless you are going to work in the City of London for instance or for Google then you are better off staying in the North or Midlands or Scotland or Wales if you grew up there than moving South
  • Options
    Roborough, L. (Conservative)
    I am 52, married with 5 children (youngest being 20) and live between London and Devon. I understand that being eligible to take a seat in the Lords is a privilege and imposes an obligation to be available when the House and/or the Conservative Party requires my attendance. My career has been in investment banking and investment management. I also have interests in agriculture, natural capital and enabling the development of natural capital markets.

    Rossmore, L. (Conservative)
    Age 39, live in London and run my own business.
    • I teach music like a language online, and have over 35,000 students
    • Stephen Sondheim invited me to his home in NY to play him my musical
    • spent a month in Ukraine last year and introduced many close contacts there to journalists in London
    • am setting up a £100,000 scholarship for students in the hard sciences at Cambridge
    • regular ACP attendee

    Rowallan, L. (Conservative)
    I am a passionate Conservative standing for Parliament twice in the 70’s. I was a regular speaker and attender in the 90’s. I have been involved in a large renewable energy windfarm and mental health projects for 25 years. I am an international showjumping judge judging at the London Olympics and am chairman of a trust running a covenanting museum. I currently work on new technologies to cure cancer and to provide off grid electricity.

    Windlesham, L. (Conservative)
    Despite all recent upheavals and uncertainties His Majesty’s Government remains committed to achieving Net Zero by 2050. While the UK is a global leader in areas such as renewables there is still a long way to go and much investment is needed. I head up global sustainable strategy for a leading consultancy business which advises providers and users of asset finance how best to prepare for a greener, more sustainable future.

  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    pigeon said:

    Meanwhile, what do you make of OPEC (Saud) aligned with Putin on oil cuts - failure of US and UK diplomacy, or just temptation to carpet bag was understandably too great?

    FWIW, I reckon it's about 50% scalping and 50% despots siding with Putin.

    Mohammed bin Salman is the second best argument for decarbonisation (after the world baking to death,) and it's a close-run thing.
    Nice answer from the last thread, thank you. 🙂

    “Meanwhile, what do you make of OPEC (Saud) aligned with Putin on oil cuts - failure of US and UK diplomacy, or just temptation to carpet bag was understandably too great?”

    Can we equate just how much extra pain this decision is heaping on us? Does it make our poor poorer and Truss borrowing more expensive so The budget deficit needing even more cuts to fill it up 🙁
    “Opec+ cartel of oil-producing nations said it would cut production by two million barrels per day.
    That pushed oil prices upwards - by more than $3 a barrel - and renewed inflation fears on markets more widely.
    The pound stood at $1.1320 against the dollar on Thursday – and was falling.”

    So it’s caused a run on pound = inflation
    Higher petrol prices = inflation

    So to answer my own question, the Opec+Putin decision = upward pressure on UK inflation.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    From latest @Survation @scotlandinunion poll.

    Remain in UK 51 (-1)
    Leave UK 36 (-2)

    Fwork 28-29.9 (ch since 29.4-3.5).

    https://bit.ly/2ZOQHZn
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    edited October 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    Truss wants the party to split?

    Team Truss, for their part, argue that the Prime Minister’s problem is that her party is packed full of ‘social democrat’ fainthearts who are running frightened from real conservatism
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/crash-course-how-the-truss-revolution-came-off-the-road

    Real Conservativism is not pure libertarianism Team Truss. Macmillan or Disraeli for example were hardly capitalist in tooth and claw but still traditional Tories
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883
    I don't know if the Tory press office are taking a day off today but...

    Sadiq Khan to @LBC: "If your obsession is growth the easiest way, the quickest way, to get growth is to join the single market...

    "By joining the single market, you increase growth almost overnight."


    https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1577954091518631936
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052
    Scott_xP said:

    Truss wants the party to split?

    Team Truss, for their part, argue that the Prime Minister’s problem is that her party is packed full of ‘social democrat’ fainthearts who are running frightened from real conservatism
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/crash-course-how-the-truss-revolution-came-off-the-road

    Prior to Brexit, would you not have been on the Truss wing of that divide?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,708
    edited October 2022
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I'm personally amazed at the number of Tory MPs who appear to have forced a u-turn on the 45% tax rate.
    I guess market reaction has them spooked? Or maybe Labour has won the argument on this?

    George Osborne was happy to go from 50% -> 45% when he was implementing austerity.
    I'm not really sure why Liz's logical continuation from 45% -> 40% is apparently unacceptable now to Tories.

    Timing.
    Political or economic? In economic terms, I'd argue 2012 was a pretty bad situation also.
    Politically... she's got a substantial majority, Osborne was struggling by in a coalition govt.

    Honestly I'm really puzzled by this. I thought it was a guiding principle for conservatives that taxes on high income earners should be lowered, and did not foresee this backlash at all.
    I would also say that 50% was a rate that psychologically feels much higher and more unfair than 45%. There are plenty of people who think 51% extremely unfair but could live with 49%, the "principle" of not being taxed more than half your earnings is important to some. To others the gap between 49 and 51 is a rounding error.

    It is also more plausible that reducing the tax rate at 50% might actually increase the tax take than it is reducing from 45%. (I don't think either true but the higher the starting rate the more likely cutting it does increase total tax take is true).

    And the Tories are a more disparate economic coalition than they were in 2012. Plenty more social conservatives who were happy with state intervention and not Thatcherite at all. The inevitable falling apart of the Brexit coalition of free traders and protectionists is playing out now most of Brexit is in the past.

    She only has a nominal majority. I think she has the firm support of about 60 MPs, that is probably the lowest for any PM ever.

    But really it is timing and optics. You can't have all public sector workers in pay disputes at the same time as giving big tax cuts to the wealthiest.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    So are the lights going out this winter or not?

    I think the smart answer is no one knows do they? It’s linked to the weather.

    But the Tory position of not pushing energy savings very seriously looks like a bad one either way.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,096
    Scott_xP said:

    Truss wants the party to split?

    Team Truss, for their part, argue that the Prime Minister’s problem is that her party is packed full of ‘social democrat’ fainthearts who are running frightened from real conservatism
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/crash-course-how-the-truss-revolution-came-off-the-road

    An interesting nugget I learned recently is that Red Wall Tory MPs self identify as Social Democrats. It seems highly unlikely that they will vote for the Truss revolution so some kind of rupture seems inevitable - bringing forward the potential date for a general election.
    In light of recent events I think a Tory majority now looks a more remote prospect than before. I would make it a 10% chance. 50% Lab majority, 40% NOM.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    eristdoof said:

    ping said:

    Hmm. I’ve been mulling over Truss’s speech.

    One thing that’s bugging me is her anecdote about going on a plane as a child and being given an “air hostess in training” badge, as opposed to her brothers who were given a “pilot in training” badge. Or something.

    It seems to have offended her, but frankly, she comes across as entitled and ungrateful.

    She comes across as unreasonable and frankly, nasty, towards people who tried to do something nice for her.

    Her parents. Her teachers. Some air hostess trying to be nice.

    The woman clearly has issues and projects them onto the world.

    I don’t like people like that. I don’t think other people do, either.

    What she says is awful. Why she says it is really awful. But the part that blows my mind is *how* she says it.

    "You are wooden Prime Minister" someone must have told her. Because suddenly she has this pisstake huge grin on her face half the time which looks not just totally fake but entirely inappropriate with what she is saying.

    And then we have the arms. I commented during her LK interview on Sunday morning that her left arm looked like it was being operated by Frank Oz via a stick. Now it is both arms. Held out front. Moved up and down together.

    Do you remember when BBC News mistook a person who went for a job interview for a pundit and stuck him on air? The poor guy blustered his way through some answers to try not to embarrass people but clearly wasn't who they assumed he was?

    That's Liz Truss that is. Wooden. Inauthentic. Clearly not the Prime Minister because bonkers and embarrassing for anyone who understands politics to look at. But despite being a walking talking parody she IS the PM because giffers were put in the position of choosing and they chose *that*
    She has a childlike quality that sits ill with a great office of state.

    Is it the skinniness? The false bravado? The naïveté? The sense that she is practicing rather than doing? The faltering voice? The agonising gaps as she tries to come up with the right answer? The crush on her favourite teacher Miss Brodie Mrs Thatcher, who she hasn’t realised is in love with Benito? The string of fails in all her subjects? The experimentation? The casual nastiness? The inappropriate arm and face movements?

    Adolescence is awkward. Ask Fibber Johnson.

    Spitting Image, Private Eye or Viz ought to consider a ‘Behind the Bike Shed’ feature with Pretty Liz and her sidekick Beefy Coffey trying out fags to impress the boys. Kalamity Kwasi is seen sneaking off sheepishly, sniffing his fingers.
    I don't think that childlike is a problem.

    The problem is that most children are very inexperienced. Ms Truss also gives the impression that she is inexperienced. This is most evident by her lack of experience at answering akward questions. That is a fatal characteristic for someone who leads a country.
    Thank you for strengthening my simile.

    But why do you think that having a childlike head of government is not a problem?!
  • Options
    Next up is a Crossbench by-election following the retirement of the Earl of Listowel.

    The election will be held on 19th October with the electorate being the existing 34 hereditary crossbench peers. We have 10 candidates

    Albemarle, E.
    I am 56 years old, my career background was design with 25 years in industrial packaging and branding whilst living in New York and Milan. The last nine years were spent farming in East Sussex. My contribution would be creative thinking together with a hands on understanding of agricultural and environmental issues. As one of the youngest cross bench Peers (1988-99) I continue to be committed to the values represented by the House of Lords.

    Braybrooke, L.
    I am the marketing director of an established British luxury brand and have spent the last twenty years working in the internet and technology sector from small start-ups to multinational companies. With my experience, I would be able to contribute on a wide range of current issues in this field which I feel would complement the make-up of the House. I am a political independent and would regularly attend the House.

    De Clifford, L.
    My aspirations are to be a politically independent, committed, and effective member of the House of Lords. Particularly I want to contribute to promoting and addressing the issues affecting the animal welfare, small business, and leadership development. My experience has been in accountancy, rural property, and the veterinary industry. I am an operations director and part owner of a veterinary practice and finance director of a not-for-profit organisation that supports management and leadership development.

    Dudley, E.
    My “cv”. yt.technodemic. David Dudley. https://www.youtube.com/c/technodemic/videos

    Hampton, L.
    I’m a Hackney-based photographer turned Head of Department at a local state school. Perhaps not a traditional career path, but one that has given me an understanding of both the commercial mindset and the hard daily realities faced by a vast part of the UK population. I am a firm believer in the power of education and the creative sector in not only empowering our young people, but in driving our economy forward.

    Meston, L.
    Practising barrister from 1973 (QC 1996) until 1999 (mainly family law). Then a Circuit Judge until 2020. Now part-time judge. Second in last Crossbench by-election. Active in Lords until 1999, latterly a Crossbencher. Particularly involved in Bills concerning children, domestic abuse, divorce. Committees included Medical Ethics, Statutory Instruments, Consolidation Bills, Personal Bills. Believe strongly in effective scrutiny of legislation and the value of Crossbench independence and objectivity. Would commit fully to involvement in the Lords.
  • Options

    Monson, L.
    Media and public relations specialist. Campaigns to create awareness of mental health dangers from use of high potency cannabis. Successfully campaigned to overturn wrongful verdict on son’s death in Kenyan prison. Four Kenyan police officers jailed last November. Started charitable initiative, help4ukraine. So far bought and sent to Ukraine 25 ambulances freighted with medical aid. Charity commended publicly by Ukraine Ambassador to UK.
    5
    Norwich, V.
    Graduated from Oxford, I retrained as an architect, and then worked with several large practices before establishing my own in 1995. Specialising in environmental design and engineering for 25 years, we are now developing an ultra-light, pedal-electric city car. Politically independent, if elected I would be an active member in these areas, and seek Select Committee work. I am 62, live in London, and have a strong interest in music and the arts.

    Rochdale, V.
    Award-winning education entrepreneur: 24 years, developed scientifically proven techniques helping professionals and students think more clearly and better understand new information. Masters' degree: International Finance, trade, shipping. Specific focus on joint ventures in China. Proficiency in Mandarin. Public service: Metropolitan Police, 12 years (commendations for bravery and investigative ability). Passionate: Dyslexia, Mental health - depression, bipolar, addiction (four lived experiences). Social justice, environment and climate. I am Independent, London-based, and fully committed to the House.

    Walpole, L.
    I am 54 years old. My mother, Judith Chaplin MP, represented Newbury from 1992 until her untimely death in 1993. My father sat as a crossbench peer from 1989 until 2017. I am an independent political thinker. Employment: financial analyst, teacher and writer (MA and PhD upgrade). Fluent in French. I would commit to being a full-time working peer.
  • Options
    PhilPhil Posts: 1,936
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Truss wants the party to split?

    Team Truss, for their part, argue that the Prime Minister’s problem is that her party is packed full of ‘social democrat’ fainthearts who are running frightened from real conservatism
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/crash-course-how-the-truss-revolution-came-off-the-road

    Real Conservativism is not pure libertarianism Team Truss. Macmillan or Disraeli for example were hardly capitalist in tooth and claw but still traditional Tories
    Libertarian Conservatism is a decent chunk of the UK voter political spectrum, but it’s not big enough to achieve a majority in the House.

    All parties are coalitions of interest groups that agree to bury their differences in the interests of getting some of what they want out of the system. That Truss doesn’t seem to understand this & thinks that her brand of Conservatism is the only one that matters is telling.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,883

    Prior to Brexit, would you not have been on the Truss wing of that divide?

    I don't think so. Nor would Cameron and Osborne
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    Icarus said:

    Oh dear, Conservative Home seems to have twigged that Growth, Growth, Growth is pretty meaningless to voters. https://tinyurl.com/cdvpzrpx

    Even if Growth magically happened, which is unlikely because of increased Interest rates and falling demand, it would not be measurable by the time of the next General election.

    if there is growth, do all parts of the UK benefit equally, or has it always been grossly unevenly centred around south east of UK?
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956

    So are the lights going out this winter or not?

    I think the smart answer is no one knows do they? It’s linked to the weather.

    But the Tory position of not pushing energy savings very seriously looks like a bad one either way.

    It's quite possible - I posted Ofgem's warning on Monday which you can see at https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1576872022692745216
This discussion has been closed.