“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
No about 80% of it will be unwound in the next ten years. Singapore on Thames will never gain majority support and every other version of Brexit is nonsensical. Whether we fully rejoin I don't know but I'm not sure it matters.
Truss is of course in Europe today meeting European leaders about closer cooperation with Europe...
Hail Brexit !
The other way to look at it is that there is now an appreciation in the EU (Macron, particularly) that there needs to be a forum for European discussion and that the EU is not Europe. This was probably driven by Brexit. France have needed our energy exports this Summer. Europe has needed our support for Ukraine.
Europe is not the EU. The EU is now belatedly realising this. Things would have been very different if this was appreciated prior to the Brexit vote.
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
You expecting to be around for another 50 years? Are PB thinly disguised identity years different from the standard sort?
Dreadful news here as Edinburgh's Filmhouse and the Edinburgh International Film Festival, as well as the Belmont in Aberdeen, cease trading immediately. Yes, rising energy bills is a named factor https://twitter.com/kapaterson/status/1577965452822810630/photo/1
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
kjh is Tom Good, who in 1970s sitcom The Good Life quit his job at 40 having paid off the mortgage on what would now be a £2-3 million house. AICMFP.
Well to be honest you are not far wrong, but I do need to correct this myth that I quit my job and did nothing else. I set up my own business. Admittedly only part time, but I did run a successful business. I could have expanded but choose not to for quality of life reasons. I also had a mortgage until a few years ago, although not when I was forty as I had paid it off on that house.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
If house prices down South were sane, parents wouldn't need to destroy their own finances to allow their children to buy a home and have a family..
London is now the biggest and richest global city in Europe.
I am afraid the only way to collapse London and SE house prices again is for London to go back to a 1970s relative shithole with a few historic buildings. Even building all over the greenbelt wouldn't do it
What's the point of having the "biggest and richest" city if no one can afford to live in it?
Well go back to London being a 1970s style shithole then with a few historic buildings and much cheaper property. Pull down Docklands and put in some semis in its place, tell the American banks to get out of London and turn the Shard into UKIP HQ might do it!
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
The worst case of Inherited Boasting I have ever seen, on this forum, is @JackW
I don’t like to be mean to a venerable PB-er who is not here to defend himself but, fuck it. He used to boast about foreign honours - the “ancient order of the Maltese sporran-makers” - given to him solely because he’s an aristo with inherited money. Like someone proudly displaying a medal, awarded to them them for having won a nice refrigerator in a lottery
Grotesque, juvenile and existentially embarrassing
Rough Scottish Seat Prediction: SNP - 49 (+1) Labour - 7 (+6) Lib Dems - 3 (-1) Tories lose all 6 Scottish Seats.
Labour is coming home
Lib Dems benefit from the collapse of the Tory vote the most, I woild imagine they dont drop amy seats and could easily pick 1 (or more, need the get the spreadsheet out).
Of course my thinking is based on old boundaries so many notnsurvive updated constituency lines.
An understanding of the new boundaries is crucial, especially when assessing Scottish Lib Dem prospects. The new boundaries are a nightmare for them: Scotland only loses two seats in total (cf Wales), but both of them are SLD losses.
The new boundaries are incredibly cruel to the Unionist parties.
Where you are correct is that SCon to SLD tactical unwind is going to be humongous. It is profoundly unlikely to gain them any seats, but may well give them some stunning second places in eg the North East and the Borders.
On current boundaries on the Scotland in Union poll Labour would gain 10 SNP seats
Which polling company was that, please? Hard to keep up with Scottish polls these days ...
Dreadful news here as Edinburgh's Filmhouse and the Edinburgh International Film Festival, as well as the Belmont in Aberdeen, cease trading immediately. Yes, rising energy bills is a named factor https://twitter.com/kapaterson/status/1577965452822810630/photo/1
Aw, shit. I did like that place.
If only Scotland was more than energy self sufficient and control over that surplus.
Scryver is one of the nutjob "everything is going according to Russia's amazing plan" blogger/Twitter guys.
Here's from a recent missive:
To be fair, that is the basis on which Putin went to war. In PutinWorld Ukraine is part of the Near Abroad - tolerable as an obedient satellite of Russia, just. But should be part of the Motherland.
Independent Ukraine could only be a defeat for Russia. There are only winners and losers, in this world view. So independent Ukraine had to be a win for NATO*.
So “fixing” Ukraine would mean a geopolitical defeat for NATO
*NATO in the Russian hyper nationalist sense - where it is basically the Illuminati with nukes.
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
TBF Mr Sarwar did say "time is up for the Tories".
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
If house prices down South were sane, parents wouldn't need to destroy their own finances to allow their children to buy a home and have a family..
London is now the biggest and richest global city in Europe.
I am afraid the only way to collapse London and SE house prices again is for London to go back to a 1970s relative shithole with a few historic buildings. Even building all over the greenbelt wouldn't do it
What's the point of having the "biggest and richest" city if no one can afford to live in it?
Well go back to London being a 1970s style shithole then with a few historic buildings and much cheaper property. Pull down Docklands and put in some semis in its place, tell the American banks to get out of London and turn the Shard into UKIP HQ might do it!
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
How do you go leap from discouraging Foreign Ownership of London Property to London not being the world's city and a wasteland...
Literally the only thing @MaxPB 's policy would do is encourage properties to be actually used rather than left empty.
And Paris / Tokyo definitely have similar rules to what @MaxPB proposes - and New York already has way higher tax rates that are close to what he proposes
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
If house prices down South were sane, parents wouldn't need to destroy their own finances to allow their children to buy a home and have a family..
London is now the biggest and richest global city in Europe.
I am afraid the only way to collapse London and SE house prices again is for London to go back to a 1970s relative shithole with a few historic buildings. Even building all over the greenbelt wouldn't do it
What's the point of having the "biggest and richest" city if no one can afford to live in it?
Well go back to London being a 1970s style shithole then with a few historic buildings and much cheaper property. Pull down Docklands and put in some semis in its place, tell the American banks to get out of London and turn the Shard into UKIP HQ might do it!
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
If house prices down South were sane, parents wouldn't need to destroy their own finances to allow their children to buy a home and have a family..
London is now the biggest and richest global city in Europe.
I am afraid the only way to collapse London and SE house prices again is for London to go back to a 1970s relative shithole with a few historic buildings. Even building all over the greenbelt wouldn't do it
What's the point of having the "biggest and richest" city if no one can afford to live in it?
Well go back to London being a 1970s style shithole then with a few historic buildings and much cheaper property. Pull down Docklands and put in some semis in its place, tell the American banks to get out of London and turn the Shard into UKIP HQ might do it!
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
Tokyo doesn't have silly high rents, they just let people build things.
Interesting of Liz Truss to claim that neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Mark Drakeford understand the British people, given they have won 7 elections between them
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
If growth just means building 700 new homes, it is best to build them up north or in some other district falling behind, possibly as part of a new town.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on it.
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
If growth just means building 700 new homes, it is best to build them up north or in some other district falling behind, possibly as part of a new town.
It's Eastbourne - unless the elderly local residents are willing to move up North where will the care home staff live?
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
If house prices down South were sane, parents wouldn't need to destroy their own finances to allow their children to buy a home and have a family..
London is now the biggest and richest global city in Europe.
I am afraid the only way to collapse London and SE house prices again is for London to go back to a 1970s relative shithole with a few historic buildings. Even building all over the greenbelt wouldn't do it
What's the point of having the "biggest and richest" city if no one can afford to live in it?
Well go back to London being a 1970s style shithole then with a few historic buildings and much cheaper property. Pull down Docklands and put in some semis in its place, tell the American banks to get out of London and turn the Shard into UKIP HQ might do it!
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
Tokyo doesn't have silly high rents, they just let people build things.
Even in Tokyo the average property price to buy is now the equivalent of $604 000, which would be well above the UK average
I arranged a for a guy to come to my place to pick up the scrap metal bin and noticed his name was 'Philip Thompson'. Fucking hell, I thought, I don't have time to spend 14 1/2 hours arguing about nothing with this joker. I sent him a text saying "Did Boris Johnson send a letter to the EU in October 2019?". He replied "u wot m8????" so I reckon it's safe to let him come. True story.
I arranged a for a guy to come to my place to pick up the scrap metal bin and noticed his name was 'Philip Thompson'. Fucking hell, I thought, I don't have time to spend 14 1/2 hours arguing about nothing with this joker. I sent him a text saying "Did Boris Johnson send a letter to the EU in October 2019?". He replied "u wot m8????" so I reckon it's safe to let him come. True story.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
Not quite - the discussion was a rubbish theory from you that we tried to point out was utterly insane and represented something very few parents could do.
As an aside did your parents give you £100,000+ when you bought your home?
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
Hardly surprising when Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular Unionism” lock, stock and barrel. SLab are fishing in a shrinking BritNat pool.
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
Hardly surprising when Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular Unionism” lock, stock and barrel. SLab are fishing in a shrinking BritNat pool.
And if Labour get a UK majority they can and will then completely ignore the SNP
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
Not quite - the discussion was a rubbish theory from you that we tried to point out was utterly insane and represented something very few parents could do.
As an aside did your parents give you £100,000+ when you bought your home?
I am not disclosing parental contributions to my deposit in my case but it was a significant sum for a home counties property. Unless you work in the City or are a very high earner the vast majority of those buying a property in London or the Home Counties have parental assistance or an inheritance from grandparents
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
Hardly surprising when Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular Unionism” lock, stock and barrel. SLab are fishing in a shrinking BritNat pool.
And if Labour get a UK majority they can and will then completely ignore the SNP
You say that like it would help your cause. It wouldn’t.
In a democracy you have to win over hearts and minds. Unionists, of all shades, have entirely given up trying.
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
Interesting of Liz Truss to claim that neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Mark Drakeford understand the British people, given they have won 7 elections between them
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Which still leads to SLAB seat gains from SNP and Alba
On paper. At Peak Starmer. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and East Lothian Coast. Wow! Extraordinary! We’ll see how GOTV goes.
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
I am not hard right conservative or English, (indeed I am homeless politically) but Starmer rising above Sturgeon is very pleasing and I look forward to labour gaining seats in Scotland
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
Interesting of Liz Truss to claim that neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Mark Drakeford understand the British people, given they have won 7 elections between them
To be very honest, the trajectory already seemed determinedly Moving On Up for a very long time, you have to concede that?
“On Wednesday 28 September the intraday range of the yield on 30 year gilts of 127 basis points was higher than the annual range for 30 year gilts in all but 4 of the last 27 years”
Ie gilts (UK 30Y Govt borrowing) moved more in a day than they have in 23 of the past 27 YEARS…
No let’s play fair here, no selective quoting, that measures that chart been moving on up for a long time.
Not that you will believe us...
But just because the market was moving up doesn't irradicate the argument that the Mini budget increased the risk premium of the UK economy by 60-120 base points compared to the situation before the speech,,,
What I believe is there is a market having underlying concern with UKs maxed out credit card for a long while before Kwarzi and Truss came along, the income cutting budget and promises of not seen nothing yet exacerbated an underlying problem (with strong argument it was stupid to do that) but didn’t actually originate the underlying problem. Can we agree on that much?
Edit. In fact I’ll go further than that - statements from credit agency’s and IMF pointing just to the mini budget and Kwarzi comments afterwards are dumbass and misleading because they are not telling the full story of the underlying issues already there. Credit agency’s and IMF, and anyone pushing the line they are making, are playing politics with this.
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
Hardly surprising when Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular Unionism” lock, stock and barrel. SLab are fishing in a shrinking BritNat pool.
And if Labour get a UK majority they can and will then completely ignore the SNP
You say that like it would help your cause. It wouldn’t.
In a democracy you have to win over hearts and minds. Unionists, of all shades, have entirely given up trying.
45% of Scots ie those who voted for independence, can be ignored by Unionists. They are ideological nationalists who backed independence in 2014 even before Brexit and still make up over 95% of the current SNP vote.
The swing voters in Scotland are those who voted SCon in 2017 for example and are now voting SLAB. Swing Unionists who dislike this Tory government but still back the Union
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
[snip!]
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
No UK govt has ever been much use at "growth" and all for the same reason - they want "Pound" projects on "Penny" budgets. They never spend what is really needed to do it correctly. If it costs £100m they will budget £20m and then cut that to £10m for "efficiency" savings.
That plus an attraction to mega-projects that are usually poorly understood and later pile up delays. And that is probably caused by failing to spend enough money on the early planning stages.
"Penny wise, Pound foolish" is HMG's motto and has been for years, decades and probably centuries.
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
Hardly surprising when Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular Unionism” lock, stock and barrel. SLab are fishing in a shrinking BritNat pool.
And if Labour get a UK majority they can and will then completely ignore the SNP
You say that like it would help your cause. It wouldn’t.
In a democracy you have to win over hearts and minds. Unionists, of all shades, have entirely given up trying.
45% of Scots ie those who voted for independence, can be ignored by Unionists. They are ideological nationalists who backed independence in 2014 even before Brexit and still make up over 95% of the current SNP vote.
The swing voters in Scotland are those who voted SCon in 2017 for example and are now voting SLAB. Swing Unionists who dislike this Tory government but still back the Union
"Scots", eh? Surely you mean voters in Scottish constituencies.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Actually most upper middle class parents in London and the Home counties do help their children with deposits.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
Not quite - the discussion was a rubbish theory from you that we tried to point out was utterly insane and represented something very few parents could do.
As an aside did your parents give you £100,000+ when you bought your home?
I am not disclosing parental contributions to my deposit in my case but it was a significant sum for a home counties property.
Thanks for confirming that - it explains a great deal.
Interesting of Liz Truss to claim that neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Mark Drakeford understand the British people, given they have won 7 elections between them
Which still leads to SLAB seat gains from SNP and Alba
On paper. At Peak Starmer. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and East Lothian Coast. Wow! Extraordinary! We’ll see how GOTV goes.
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
I am not hard right conservative or English, (indeed I am homeless politically) but Starmer rising above Sturgeon is very pleasing and I look forward to labour gaining seats in Scotland
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
- “… Starmer rising above Sturgeon…”
Huh?
SNP projected to win 52 seats. SLab projected to win 3 seats.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Actually most upper middle class parents in London and the Home counties do help their children with deposits.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
What proportion of the population do you reckon qualifies as 'upper middle class' @HYUFD?
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Actually most upper middle class parents in London and the Home counties do help their children with deposits.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
What proportion of the population do you reckon qualifies as 'upper middle class' @HYUFD?
25%.
In London and the Home counties most upper middle class members will be on £50 to £100k plus, more if both in a couple on that
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
No, no, that can't be true. The EU is on the verge of collapse. As soon as the UK leaves it will disintegrate into chaos. Soon.
Which still leads to SLAB seat gains from SNP and Alba
On paper. At Peak Starmer. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and East Lothian Coast. Wow! Extraordinary! We’ll see how GOTV goes.
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
I am not hard right conservative or English, (indeed I am homeless politically) but Starmer rising above Sturgeon is very pleasing and I look forward to labour gaining seats in Scotland
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
- “… Starmer rising above Sturgeon…”
Huh?
SNP projected to win 52 seats. SLab projected to win 3 seats.
Yeah, Starmer is a superstar.
I believe it is a reference to net personal rating in a poll a couple of days ago. Though I can't remember if it was one of those "do you think X is doing a good job for party Y?" type questions which is inherently hard to parse.
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
We’re not rejoining in at least the next couple of decades. EFTA, however, is a definite possibility.
I've just read the 11-page letter from the BoE chap to Mel Stride. I didn't understand all of it, but I understood enough to give a very brief summary:
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
The case for the EU is that keeps this country left wing and liberal. That assumption might not hold good in coming years.
Which still leads to SLAB seat gains from SNP and Alba
On paper. At Peak Starmer. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and East Lothian Coast. Wow! Extraordinary! We’ll see how GOTV goes.
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
I am not hard right conservative or English, (indeed I am homeless politically) but Starmer rising above Sturgeon is very pleasing and I look forward to labour gaining seats in Scotland
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
- “… Starmer rising above Sturgeon…”
Huh?
SNP projected to win 52 seats. SLab projected to win 3 seats.
Yeah, Starmer is a superstar.
It seems to me very unlikely the SNP would win 52 seats if they poll 44% and Labour get back to 31%. With a 36-28 lead in 2017 with the following two parties on an almost perfectly even split they were down to the equivalent of about 32 seats. I'd be interested to see how that model works.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Actually most upper middle class parents in London and the Home counties do help their children with deposits.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
What proportion of the population do you reckon qualifies as 'upper middle class' @HYUFD?
25%.
In London and the Home counties most upper middle class members will be on £50 to £100k plus, more if both in a couple on that
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
Major still got 41% in 1992 and even in 1997 the 30% he and the Tories got is more than the Truss Tories are polling now
I've just read the 11-page letter from the BoE chap to Mel Stride. I didn't understand all of it, but I understood enough to give a very brief summary:
It was all the Chancellor's fault.
[Jade pulls her lob inwards to create a Mandy Rice Davis fringe] Well he would say that, wouldn’t he.
Here’s the truth. He who stupidly poured gasoline over the flames did not actually build the original fire.
We’ve got to be fair here, if we lose true history we can only be losers.
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
The case for the EU is that keeps this country left wing and liberal. That assumption might not hold good in coming years.
Indeed, Italy and Poland have more rightwing governments even than the UK government under Truss. Macron's government, the Swedish government, the Irish (provided SF don't get in) and Dutch government and probably the current German government would all be more rightwing even than a Starmer led Labour government
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
It's a general problem across mature democracies that rent-seeking is preferred to growth. Hence, growth rates have slowed markedly since the start of the century.
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
We’re not rejoining in at least the next couple of decades. EFTA, however, is a definite possibility.
Why would the EU have us back given we have been nothing but trouble for quite a while.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
Well is probably too generous. Better than Brown, May, Johnson and Truss though, so not too bad.
I've just read the 11-page letter from the BoE chap to Mel Stride. I didn't understand all of it, but I understood enough to give a very brief summary:
It was all the Chancellor's fault.
[Jade pulls her lob inwards to create a Mandy Rice Davis fringe] Well he would say that, wouldn’t he.
Here’s the truth. He who stupidly poured gasoline over the flames did not actually build the original fire.
We’ve got to be fair here, if we lose true history we can only be losers.
You're an interesting, quirky contributor, although half the time I don't really have a clue what you're on about. The other half of the time, I don't agree with you.
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
Yep I did (6 months after my 40th birthday), although I did set up a business which I worked at part time and then worked for the LDs and charitable causes foc and fortunately my business was successful. I am also married to a Doctor. So I actually do fall into the category you define (it is odd you think I don't as I meet every part of your definition!). But I fail to see what that has to do with anything. If anything it proves the point. I am rich by most people's standards and although I could do it, it would empty us of all our available cash (and easy to convert to cash assets) that I live on. I don't have a DB pension or annuity bringing in a regular income big enough to live on as will be the case going forward for many. Eventually I will downsize and live off that realised capital.
But I am fortunate. I note again you are referring to Upper Middle Class parents who work in the City, Doctors, Corporate Lawyers, etc
What about the dustman, nurse, social worker, call centre worker, etc who make up the vast majority of the population (like my parents (junior civil servant and payroll clerk) who live in the south. I guess they can go hang then?
So you married into the category then, even if after 40 you weren't in it yourself.
If you are on an average income in London or the Home Counties and don't have wealthy parents, then outside of a few areas like Harlow, Margate or Dagenham and Clacton where property prices are cheap I would suggest moving north if you want to buy a property before 40. As property prices as I said are far cheaper north of Watford and that is unlikely to change much however much you concrete over the greenbelt or tighten immigration rules
I have just seen you edited your post with the new first line. You do jump to conclusions don't you.
Not that it is any of your business but I worked in the City. I left Uni to join one of the big Consultancies. I then went to work for one of the big US computer companies. I made substantially more money than my wife. I semi retired before I got married. Marrying my wife was the cherry on the cake.
So you still weren't in the category after 40 then even if you were before and your wife still was
Yep I was (not that it matters) because I set up a business that meets your criteria completely. But I don't get this boasting stuff. What does it matter what I or my wife did? She certainly doesn't think of herself as being upper middle class not I. Why does it matter to you?
As you were not both in the category able to help your children with deposits for expensive London or Home counties properties at the time they needed it
Being able to help your children with their deposit wasn't in your list. You created a list and said these people help their children with their deposit. I pointed out:
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
The discussion was about upper middle class parents with high incomes in London and the Home counties helping their children with deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
This is where a discussion with you gets frustrating. You set a category where you said all these people helped their children (upper middle class) and I pointed out they all didn't. I also pointed out most people aren't in that category.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
Actually most upper middle class parents in London and the Home counties do help their children with deposits.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
What proportion of the population do you reckon qualifies as 'upper middle class' @HYUFD?
25%.
In London and the Home counties most upper middle class members will be on £50 to £100k plus, more if both in a couple on that
25%!? What planet are you on?
Everyone in social class AB is upper middle class ie managers and senior professionals. In London most ABs earn more than £50k and lots earn more than £100k if they are partners in corporate law firms or gp practices, directors etc
The worst case of Inherited Boasting I have ever seen, on this forum, is @JackW
I don’t like to be mean to a venerable PB-er who is not here to defend himself but, fuck it. He used to boast about foreign honours - the “ancient order of the Maltese sporran-makers” - given to him solely because he’s an aristo with inherited money. Like someone proudly displaying a medal, awarded to them them for having won a nice refrigerator in a lottery
Grotesque, juvenile and existentially embarrassing
I had always assumed he was fictional. A Peter Simple creation along the lines of The Earl of Mountwarlock, who never quite made it to the pages of the Telegraph.
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.
The Evul Furriners Steal Our Houses is another excuse.
We need vastly more space than can come from all the flats owned by Chinese people, can be built on brownfield sites or any of the other avoidance memes.
We need to build a fuck ton of new housing. If that means some crested newts get fucked up… fuck the crested newts. And if anyone wants to lie down in front of the bulldozers, cool. I’ll drive slow, I promise…
I've just read the 11-page letter from the BoE chap to Mel Stride. I didn't understand all of it, but I understood enough to give a very brief summary:
It was all the Chancellor's fault.
[Jade pulls her lob inwards to create a Mandy Rice Davis fringe] Well he would say that, wouldn’t he.
Here’s the truth. He who stupidly poured gasoline over the flames did not actually build the original fire.
We’ve got to be fair here, if we lose true history we can only be losers.
You're an interesting, quirky contributor, although half the time I don't really have a clue what you're on about. The other half of the time, I don't agree with you.
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it.
The Russians are retreating towards Kherson where there is no possibility of escape. If they lose the dam upriver then that is it for them. The dam also controls fresh water supplies to Crimea for agricultural use.
“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.
The problem that Truss and Kwarteng face is that they will have to announce swingeing public service cuts in November.
That, surely, is why they wanted to pass the tax cuts and the abolition of the 45% tax band first - because cutting taxes for the richest 1% while cutting benefits for the majority would have been completely untenable.
Hence the OBR omission. And the core vote strategy of tax cuts for the middle classes.
If Labour is 25% ahead now, how far will it be ahead in November when public sector pay freezes and service cuts are announced?
It is a shame as Truss's approach is really the only way that Brexit makes sense.
As Jacob Rees Mogg said: Brexit makes sense if you take a 50 year viewpoint (he was unwise to do so, albeit correct)
That’s how long it might take to a show a real net benefit. But it will show that benefit. Let’s reconvene in 2066
Yes let's have my kids living under this shit for most of their working lives and then we can decide. No.
Well, you’re stuck with it. Sorry
So we will have plenty of time to see if I’m right
Only four years to wait according to the idiot that wrote this drivel:
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
Even Brexiteers now know that Brexit is an enormous clusterf*ck. The narrative has changed. SKS will align more closely to the EU over the next Parliament with an avenue to rejoin in the subsequent Parliament. Yes, in 50 years things will be much better, primarily because we would be back at the heart of the EU.
We’re not rejoining in at least the next couple of decades. EFTA, however, is a definite possibility.
Why would the EU have us back given we have been nothing but trouble for quite a while.
They’ll have us back on the condition that we’re not treating them as a revolving door and we’re committed for the long term.
This means signing up to the whole project which will mean no opt outs and likely Euro adoption.
That is why rejoin is not yet a feasible option and won’t be for some time, if ever.
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.
The Evul Furriners Steal Our Houses is another excuse.
We need vastly more space than can come from all the flats owned by Chinese people, can be built on brownfield sites or any of the other avoidance memes.
We need to build a fuck ton of new housing. If that means some crested newts get fucked up… fuck the crested newts. And if anyone wants to lie down in front of the bulldozers, cool. I’ll drive slow, I promise…
The thing with Crested Newts is that it doesn't mean you need to stop building you just need to provide suitable habitats on completion of the project...
The biggest contradiction in British Politics is that the Conservative party claim to be the party of 'growth'. Yet they fail to make the difficult decisions about how to achieve growth, IE through reform of the planning system.
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
It's a general problem across mature democracies that rent-seeking is preferred to growth. Hence, growth rates have slowed markedly since the start of the century.
If this is true, then surely it is problematic in light of the budget deficit and the level of national debt.
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.
Don't you care what people want who actually live in Crimea? I ask because you don't mention them. Or is it just that Khrushchev - the man who said if he was English he'd vote Tory - transferred the territory to the Ukrainian SSR in 1954 and therefore it must be good to use military force to eject the Russian state from it now?
Russophobia is far more of a danger in Britain than Russophilia - although, having said that, for many rightwing patriotic "sash windows and cricket are best" droolers the fact that the foreign country in this instance is Russia doesn't matter much. They'd have the same attitude if it was France or Spain or Ireland.
All the actual elections in Crimea (including the original independence vote) didn’t get a majority for joining Russia.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
It's easy to forget just what a ruthless populist Tony Blair was, with no shame about things like exploiting the murder of James Bulger.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
You're being a bit unfair to Major. He took over at an incredibly difficult time for the Conservative Party, and managed pretty well. It wasn't really his fault that his party was trying to stab him in the back, and the decisions which led Black Wednesday weren't at the time so obviously bad ones as they now appear in retrospect - that's why they were broadly supported, including by the opposition. He left the economy in a really good state, having appointed one of the best Chancellors we've had since the war. He made great strides in the NI peace process.
Overall, a pretty good record in the circumstances.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
What excitement ? He would merely be a means to an end, being not directly offensive to the bulk of the Conservative party. Such interest that there is confined to whether he can profitably be backed.
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
Probably third most dangerous
1) transferring weapons from the train to a depot 2) building a pontoon - because that really is only a matter of time before it's spotted and taken out 3) repairing a bridge - because it's less likely to be spotted than the other 2 options...
It's quite funny that SLab after years of whining about the SNP 'stealing' their voters are now bellowing triumphantly about stealing SCon and SLD voters. Meanwhile all those stolen SLab voters remain in the SNP swag bag.
The gear crunch from the SNP is quite something. From ‘there’s no difference between the Tories and Labour’ to ‘if you want a Labour government don’t vote labour’. All over the place.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
Major still got 41% in 1992 and even in 1997 the 30% he and the Tories got is more than the Truss Tories are polling now
He fairly regularly polled in the 20s, though.
It's not impossible that the Tories aren't at their floor yet. Maybe they won't recover at all. But a bit of sober reflection rather suggests that there probably will be some reversion to the mean, and this all feels a bit like 1995.
I'm not understating the issue for the Tories - they are up sh1t creek for sure. Just saying as an historical point that it isn't completely without precedent, and Major being a kindly elder statesman figure now shouldn't detract from the fact 1992-7 was a real mess and he was a poor PM.
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
Probably third most dangerous
1) transferring weapons from the train to a depot 2) building a pontoon - because that really is only a matter of time before it's spotted and taken out 3) repairing a bridge - because it's less likely to be spotted than the other 2 options...
Don’t put me down for any of those!
I’ll happily be the weapons systems guy, preferably with the Air Force - important work, but well away from any actual fighting.
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)
Fake news.
My first house was in London.
My father got on the mortgage because at the time I was a callow 21 year who was just about to start his first job after university.
My grandparents were the ones who helped me with the deposit and the furnishings.
But you miss the point, I was lucky, I'm an only child, and the only grandchild of both grandparents, so I was the only apple in so many eyes.
Most people have siblings and cousins, and no matter how wealthy/middle class your parents, there's not enough resources to help those families get on the property.
True conservatism is about making sure we are a home owning (and share owning) democracy.
Right now the Tory party is making it harder for us to become a home owning democracy, and that means the party is utterly borked for generations.
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
Major still got 41% in 1992 and even in 1997 the 30% he and the Tories got is more than the Truss Tories are polling now
He fairly regularly polled in the 20s, though.
It's not impossible that the Tories aren't at their floor yet. Maybe they won't recover at all. But a bit of sober reflection rather suggests that there probably will be some reversion to the mean, and this all feels a bit like 1995.
I'm not understating the issue for the Tories - they are up sh1t creek for sure. Just saying as an historical point that it isn't completely without precedent, and Major being a kindly elder statesman figure now shouldn't detract from the fact 1992-7 was a real mess and he was a poor PM.
The Tories rarely polled under 25% with Major though, the Truss Tories are now often under 25%
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
Trying to clear a minefield under fire is probably slightly worse.
Which still leads to SLAB seat gains from SNP and Alba
On paper. At Peak Starmer. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath and East Lothian Coast. Wow! Extraordinary! We’ll see how GOTV goes.
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
I am not hard right conservative or English, (indeed I am homeless politically) but Starmer rising above Sturgeon is very pleasing and I look forward to labour gaining seats in Scotland
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
- “… Starmer rising above Sturgeon…”
Huh?
SNP projected to win 52 seats. SLab projected to win 3 seats.
Yeah, Starmer is a superstar.
It seems to me very unlikely the SNP would win 52 seats if they poll 44% and Labour get back to 31%. With a 36-28 lead in 2017 with the following two parties on an almost perfectly even split they were down to the equivalent of about 32 seats. I'd be interested to see how that model works.
The SNP vote would have to drop to approximately 35% before SLab start to make significant gains.
Possible, but no sign of that thus far.
SLab would need to become unashamedly pro-Scottish to eat into SNP support.
A Home Office immigration official has been suspended after posting “vile” and “abhorrent” racist content on a WhatsApp group with former police officers.
Rob Lewis, a former Metropolitan Police officer, is alleged to have created the group chat, which also included other ex-Met officers.
The messages, uncovered by the BBC’s Newsnight, allegedly included racist and derogatory comments about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and featured jokes about the government’s Rwanda policy and the recent flooding in Pakistan, in which almost 1,700 died.
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)
Fake news.
My first house was in London.
My father got on the mortgage because at the time I was a callow 21 year who was just about to start his first job after university.
My grandparents were the ones who helped me with the deposit and the furnishings.
But you miss the point, I was lucky, I'm an only child, and the only grandchild of both grandparents, so I was the only apple in so many eyes.
Most people have siblings and cousins, and no matter how wealthy/middle class your parents, there's not enough resources to help those families get on the property.
True conservatism is about making sure we are a home owning (and share owning) democracy.
Right now the Tory party is making it harder for us to become a home owning democracy, and that means the party is utterly borked for generations.
New homeowners begets Tory voters.
New homeowners may eventually beget Tory voters. At the moment any homeowner remortgaging is going to look at mortgage rates and go you what???? and vote for anyone not currently in power...
Could be. I have bet she will be out by end of year, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that the party is so split that a coronation will not be allowed. Braverman basically looks like she will run no matter what. I guess the grey suits might find a way around this and for time being I am keeping my bet in place as it is only beer money.
They need Rishi in order to calm the markets. The young cardinals, old popes dictum suggests MPs might settle for Theresa May in a Michael Howard-like damage limitation role. Things might be clearer once Boris encounters the Privileges Committee.
Wallace PM, Sunak back as Chancellor is the only possible replacement for Truss and Kwarteng that might produce a poll bounce and also not split the party
You are probably right, Hyufd, and even that might not work.
Would either of them take the jobs though?
PB's fondness for Ben Wallace is not persuasive. Look at his videos on Youtube: will he really excite the voter on the Clapham omnibus?
Did John Major excite? Still did the job well.
That's a slightly romanticised view of Major's Premiership.
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
You're being a bit unfair to Major. He took over at an incredibly difficult time for the Conservative Party, and managed pretty well. It wasn't really his fault that his party was trying to stab him in the back, and the decisions which led Black Wednesday weren't at the time so obviously bad ones as they now appear in retrospect - that's why they were broadly supported, including by the opposition. He left the economy in a really good state, having appointed one of the best Chancellors we've had since the war. He made great strides in the NI peace process.
Overall, a pretty good record in the circumstances.
Um didn't major ditch the poll tax and replace it with Council tax?
Which we need to do again because revaluing properties isn't going to be an option....
Boros Johnson was also considered a gift to Keir Starmer; all he had to do was 'not be Boris'. The problem with this approach is that it allows his opponent to take the initiative and frame the debate.
Russians now evacuating from Svatove and Kreminna, in Kharkiv Oblast.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
EOD is statistically the most dangerous job in the military by a very long way. Combat Engineer would be up there though and it requires a certain type of sustained composure for very long periods. Not easy to tap an M12 thread when you've been shelled for eight hours.
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)
Fake news.
My first house was in London.
My father got on the mortgage because at the time I was a callow 21 year who was just about to start his first job after university.
My grandparents were the ones who helped me with the deposit and the furnishings.
But you miss the point, I was lucky, I'm an only child, and the only grandchild of both grandparents, so I was the only apple in so many eyes.
Most people have siblings and cousins, and no matter how wealthy/middle class your parents, there's not enough resources to help those families get on the property.
True conservatism is about making sure we are a home owning (and share owning) democracy.
Right now the Tory party is making it harder for us to become a home owning democracy, and that means the party is utterly borked for generations.
New homeowners begets Tory voters.
So your high earning professional father still helped you buy your first property in London then. You also received support from your grandparents too to buy in the capital.
The Tories have just won their biggest landslide since Thatcher by winning seats in the North and Midlands and Wales where average earners can afford to buy without assistance. Even if they lost London where most people now rent.
Just Truss has now lost the redwall seats Boris won too as well as London with her policies seen as tax cuts for the rich mainly and cuts to public services for the rest
Comments
Europe is not the EU. The EU is now belatedly realising this. Things would have been very different if this was appreciated prior to the Brexit vote.
Leave being a global city to Paris and New York and LA and Tokyo
In planning, the main way in which 'growth' happens is through difficult decisions taken by pro growth local authorities who ram it through in urban areas (ie Birmingham), and the governments own planning Inspectors, who over-rule local Councils to allow large scale housing; and then get criticised and threatened with abolition by the Conservative Party - indeed I think Truss has already been complaining about them.
The link below is todays example of this phenemenon. Councillors in Wealden refusing planning permission for development that was allocated in the plan that they approved a few years before. Local tory MP in on the act. Overturned by a planning Inspector.
https://www.sussexexpress.co.uk/news/politics/appeal-decision-made-on-700-homes-on-outskirts-of-eastbourne-3860091
Viewed in this context, the Conservative party are very far from being the party of growth, they are actually a backward anti growth party.
Independent Ukraine could only be a defeat for Russia. There are only winners and losers, in this world view. So independent Ukraine had to be a win for NATO*.
So “fixing” Ukraine would mean a geopolitical defeat for NATO
*NATO in the Russian hyper nationalist sense - where it is basically the Illuminati with nukes.
Literally the only thing @MaxPB 's policy would do is encourage properties to be actually used rather than left empty.
And Paris / Tokyo definitely have similar rules to what @MaxPB proposes - and New York already has way higher tax rates that are close to what he proposes
https://twitter.com/rhydiantomas/status/1577628931938738179?s=46&t=ZufN8YAs4WTmrmQybO-kUw
a) it was a ridiculous list because it excluded the majority of people
b) I was in the list but can't do so. Most people don't have £200,000 lying around doing nothing even in that list. If they did they would be paying off mortgages or if retired needing it to live on it.
You have jumped to assumption after assumption about me which has been wrong. I mean you have done so in every post. Stupidly I have responded with corrections which gives away far to much about me. However I will do it again. You have assumed I was unable to help my children when they needed a deposit for a house in London/Home Counties. Not true as neither do yet and neither live here, although I wouldn't be able to without depleting my cash convertible assets significantly. My daughter has just left Uni and is in rented accommodation in Manchester and is in no position to think about buying a house yet. My son has free accommodation provided by Cambridge University as he and his girlfriend are now technically employees of the Uni. I moved them in yesterday.
deposits. A category which by 40 and now you did not fall into by your own choice
Fun to see a hard right English Tory cheering on the Scottish Labour Party.
https://resources.realestate.co.jp/news/how-much-does-an-apartment-cost-in-tokyo-march-2022-update/
As an aside did your parents give you £100,000+ when you bought your home?
In a democracy you have to win over hearts and minds. Unionists, of all shades, have entirely given up trying.
You did not limit your group to 'only upper middle class people who help their children' with a deposit because that is obviously and patently true. You just said 'upper middle class'
It is like saying 'All brunettes are brunette' Obviously that is true.
You also said it was my choice. It wasn't entirely. I suppose I could have got a job that paid a DB pension at a local authority or as a civil servant so in that case it is my choice (and I would be a lot poorer), but otherwise like most people now I have to plan my retirement and it depends largely on capital I have which is tied up. Once I reach 80 I might feel confident in releasing it, but not now when I might need it in my old age and I couldn't anyway without downsizing. Again like most people who don't have DB pensions.
I would tactically vote for any party that opposes Independence if I lived in Scotland
Edit. In fact I’ll go further than that - statements from credit agency’s and IMF pointing just to the mini budget and Kwarzi comments afterwards are dumbass and misleading because they are not telling the full story of the underlying issues already there. Credit agency’s and IMF, and anyone pushing the line they are making, are playing politics with this.
The swing voters in Scotland are those who voted SCon in 2017 for example and are now voting SLAB. Swing Unionists who dislike this Tory government but still back the Union
That plus an attraction to mega-projects that are usually poorly understood and later pile up delays. And that is probably caused by failing to spend enough money on the early planning stages.
"Penny wise, Pound foolish" is HMG's motto and has been for years, decades and probably centuries.
The fact you no longer fall into that income category is your own choice
"In ten years’ time we’ll look through the kitchen window of renewed prosperity, watch the laughing Remainers playing football with our smiling Brexit child, and we’ll quietly sip tea from a Union Jack mug, and we’ll think: best thing I ever did."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-brexit-is-just-like-having-a-baby
Vote share:
LAB: 52% (+20)
CON: 24% (-20)
LDM: 10% (-1)
SNP: 5% (+1)
GRN: 5% (+3)
Seats:
LAB: 435 (+233)
CON: 95 (-270)
SNP: 58 (+10)
LDM: 36 (+25)
GRN: 1 (=)
Result: Labour majority of 245.
https://twitter.com/politlcsuk/status/1576999551441178624?s=46&t=ZufN8YAs4WTmrmQybO-kUw
Nice map! 😄
Huh?
SNP projected to win 52 seats.
SLab projected to win 3 seats.
Yeah, Starmer is a superstar.
In London and the Home counties most upper middle class members will be on £50 to £100k plus, more if both in a couple on that
It was all the Chancellor's fault.
Francis Scarr
@francis_scarr
·
1h
The knives are well and truly out in Russia after recent retreats in Ukraine
This morning Vladimir Solovyov had this to say to the military top brass
"Do you think time is on our side? They've hugely increased their amount of weapons... But what have you done in that time?"
https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1577961655992041472
He ditched Council Tax and held it together for 1992 - which is no mean achievement. But he quickly ran into Black Wednesday after that, destroying the Government's reputation for economic competence in a similar way to now. And the rest was a weak PM, unable to articulate a clear vision, struggling to retain control of a party that had run out of steam and were mired in sleaze on their way out. Even against an improving economic climate approaching 1997, he came nowhere close to averting disaster at the ballot box.
That's not to say he isn't broadly a decent chap who has been a good EX Prime Minister. But, at the time, he didn't really do the job that well and it was a bit of a sh1tshow in all honesty.
more than the Truss Tories are polling now
NATO was seen as non vital by a number of European nations - who wanted to replace it with an EU centric function
Now it is utterly vital - even to formerly neutral states. The US is 2000% re engaged with NATO
Russian power has been publicly downgraded. Western weapons and tactics have smashed their reputation.
Here’s the truth. He who stupidly poured gasoline over the flames did not actually build the original fire.
We’ve got to be fair here, if we lose true history we can only be losers.
The famous Antonivsky Bridge in Kherson was hit again by the defenders, as the Russians were trying to repair it. Is repairing bridges, within range of accurate defender weapons, the most dangerous job in the military?
Russia has whatever wasn't used in the initial wave to call upon...
The other half of the time, I don't agree with you.
A Peter Simple creation along the lines of The Earl of Mountwarlock, who never quite made it to the pages of the Telegraph.
We need vastly more space than can come from all the flats owned by Chinese people, can be built on brownfield sites or any of the other avoidance memes.
We need to build a fuck ton of new housing. If that means some crested newts get fucked up… fuck the crested newts. And if anyone wants to lie down in front of the bulldozers, cool. I’ll drive slow, I promise…
This means signing up to the whole project which will mean no opt outs and likely Euro adoption.
That is why rejoin is not yet a feasible option and won’t be for some time, if ever.
But I suppose they don’t count or something?
Overall, a pretty good record in the circumstances.
He would merely be a means to an end, being not directly offensive to the bulk of the Conservative party.
Such interest that there is confined to whether he can profitably be backed.
1) transferring weapons from the train to a depot
2) building a pontoon - because that really is only a matter of time before it's spotted and taken out
3) repairing a bridge - because it's less likely to be spotted than the other 2 options...
https://twitter.com/marcuscarslaw1/status/1577788396587700224
It's not impossible that the Tories aren't at their floor yet. Maybe they won't recover at all. But a bit of sober reflection rather suggests that there probably will be some reversion to the mean, and this all feels a bit like 1995.
I'm not understating the issue for the Tories - they are up sh1t creek for sure. Just saying as an historical point that it isn't completely without precedent, and Major being a kindly elder statesman figure now shouldn't detract from the fact 1992-7 was a real mess and he was a poor PM.
I’ll happily be the weapons systems guy, preferably with the Air Force - important work, but well away from any actual fighting.
My first house was in London.
My father got on the mortgage because at the time I was a callow 21 year who was just about to start his first job after university.
My grandparents were the ones who helped me with the deposit and the furnishings.
But you miss the point, I was lucky, I'm an only child, and the only grandchild of both grandparents, so I was the only apple in so many eyes.
Most people have siblings and cousins, and no matter how wealthy/middle class your parents, there's not enough resources to help those families get on the property.
True conservatism is about making sure we are a home owning (and share owning) democracy.
Right now the Tory party is making it harder for us to become a home owning democracy, and that means the party is utterly borked for generations.
New homeowners begets Tory voters.
Emma Dunkley
@EmDunks
The average rate on a five-year fixed mortgage has breached 6% for the first time since Feb 2010. Rates still on the rise...
Possible, but no sign of that thus far.
SLab would need to become unashamedly pro-Scottish to eat into SNP support.
A Home Office immigration official has been suspended after posting “vile” and “abhorrent” racist content on a WhatsApp group with former police officers.
Rob Lewis, a former Metropolitan Police officer, is alleged to have created the group chat, which also included other ex-Met officers.
The messages, uncovered by the BBC’s Newsnight, allegedly included racist and derogatory comments about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and featured jokes about the government’s Rwanda policy and the recent flooding in Pakistan, in which almost 1,700 died.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/home-office-suspends-former-met-police-officer-rob-lewis-over-racist-and-vile-whatsapp-group-pq3bvr2h3
If The Met was any other organisation it would have been proscribed.
Which we need to do again because revaluing properties isn't going to be an option....
The Tories have just won their biggest landslide since Thatcher by winning seats in the North and Midlands and Wales where average earners can afford to buy without assistance. Even if they lost London where most people now rent.
Just Truss has now lost the redwall seats Boris won too as well as London with her policies seen as tax cuts for the rich mainly and cuts to public services for the rest