Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
Kitty Donaldson @kitty_donaldson NEW: The Conservatives caved in and allowed a free vote on abortion clinic buffer zones, a fresh sign that whips don’t want to pick fights they can’t win with mutinous backbenchers
I guess everyone on here except HUYFD will be happy with this (it's an amendment that introduces the buffer zones btw).
No, I'm not happy. Conservatives used to believe in free speech.
This lot are not Conservatives. That is just the name of the Party, but it is more acceptable than "Cult" or "Bl**dy idiots"...
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
A housing crash does not help buyers much if it is more difficult for them to get a mortgage, as it would be
If this hypothetical buyer has saved a deposit, it becomes relatively bigger with every fall in prices, so not only do they need to borrow a smaller amount of money, but their loan-to-value ratio also gets better. It's absolutely perverse to argue that people can't benefit from paying less for something.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since.
Increasing house prices aids those who are on the ladder already, to the harm of those who aren't. Falling house prices aids those who aren't, to the harm of those who are. For those who scream til they're blue in the face about the harms of negative equity - there's groups losing out no matter what, there is no "victimless" option here.
Rising house prices, as @rcs1000 has said before, allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to get a bigger home when they move. Or it allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to buy a second home without moving.
Falling house prices wipes out equity from those already on the housing ladder, but those who aren't on the ladder have no equity to lose. Instead their deposit they're saving up becomes a higher share of the deposit and means a better LTV value and also they're not competing against those buying second etc homes by leveraging the house price changes.
To be precise falling house prices don’t help FTB (risk to banks means they are more conservative on lending).
The best time to be a FTB is when prices have fallen, have stabilised, and when banks are just beginning to recover their nerves.
But that’s really a detail around your basic thesis - lower prices clearly benefit first time buyers all other things being equal
The best time to be an FTB was 1995.
A period of high inflation had reduced price-to-incomes to low levels. While the high interest rates of the early 90s had decimated the buy-to-let sector, and had resulted in banks unwilling to lend to landlords, high rental yields (relative to purchase prices) and many landlords having left the market.
Result: if you bought a house or apartment in London 27 years ago you will probably have seen a 10x gain.
Kitty Donaldson @kitty_donaldson NEW: The Conservatives caved in and allowed a free vote on abortion clinic buffer zones, a fresh sign that whips don’t want to pick fights they can’t win with mutinous backbenchers
I guess everyone on here except HUYFD will be happy with this (it's an amendment that introduces the buffer zones btw).
No, I'm not happy. Conservatives used to believe in free speech.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
From what I remember from when Corbyn tried and failed to call a VONC, the only way that a VONC takes precedence over government business is if the LOTO puts down the motion in the exact form of words.
Forgive me if this sounds a bit facetious, but rather than a VoNC, what about a full-blooded Vote Of Confidence in the Prime Minister? Called by two "loyal" Tory backbenchers, who then force everyone else to stand up and be counted?
Normally I'd dismiss this as shit stirring from Labour but I can actually believe this is happening.
Me too, but again, for gods sake Tory MPs. You have the power. Get your representations in to Brady and the 1922, get your alternative PM lined up and agreed and get yourself on record as being opposed to Truss’ premiership. If there’s enough of you sheer political reality will bite and she will have to go. So stop moaning to Labour about it, grow a pair and sort it out.
Honestly if I have to hear them whinging on for week upon week again (just like in the Boris situation) I’ll be driven to distraction. DO IT you fools.
Meanwhile every week Truss stays in power more of those tentative Labour vote become solid Labour votes.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
Off topic. I may have mentioned that I am having trouble with HMRC returning necessary documents: so I can avoid double taxation on some significant foreign income
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. After EIGHT MONTHS. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
It was not a bad time to be a first time buyer and the 1995/96 peak was for people who had bought in the past three years. Ie from 1992/93. But that was the peak from which it got worse after
Actually in every year of the early 1990s the level of FTBs was higher than recent years. You were completely 100% wrong and were wrong because your entire theory was based not on facts or figures from first time buyers but instead a Four Yorkshiremen memory of how bad things were and figures on *overall* sales rather than FTB sales.
Of course FTB make a bigger proportion of sales after a downturn when their LTV ratio has improved while their competitors has worsened. But you only looked at total sales. People using increased housing equity and buying 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes to let count as house sales but aren't first time buyers.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
After a month of the campaign the rate is higher than in the spring.
Off topic. I may have mentioned that I am having trouble with HMRC returning necessary documents: so I can avoid double taxation on some significant foreign income
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
*heads off for coffee in sunny Colorado*
HMRC require staff to be in the office a minimum of 2 days a week - so lack of staff ain't an excuse.
It would be really helpful for Ukraine if the young people of Iran could overthrow the regime around about now. Because, if Putin has got access to an unrestricted supply of new Iranian drones - and the Guardian says he has stockpiled 2,400 already - that seriously changes the balance of military power in Ukraine. It means he CAN starve and freeze Ukraine through the winter, then take a weakened Kyiv from Belarus
I now believe Putin is reading PB, and taking my military advice
Not provided we keep sending food supplies to Ukraine
We can’t send water and leccy to Ukraine. That will be much more the problem
Putin has 2400 drones. And more coming. That’s a fuck of a lot. He can, perhaps, pound Ukrainian infrastructure relentlessly until there is a systemic failure and entire cities are without water and power for weeks at a time - and the population is helpless. In a Ukrainian winter
No matter how brave the Ukrainian soldiers - and they are decidedly brave - in that situation Ukraine would probably surrender
They can be helped on the electricity side from the EU - remember they are now connected to the EU grid. We could also supply them with the temporary generators which are now often used when the main supply goes down either for planned maintenance or in an emergency.
Either way these attacks won't make Ukraine surrender. Quite the opposite, they will simply harden Ukrainian resolve. They are as pointless as Hitler's V1s and V2s were.
Imagining the new war will be just like the last war is a perennial mistake. You are doing it
You continue to overestimate both the fragility of the Ukrainian power system and the effectiveness of these drones.
I imagine the Ukrainians are going to have a pretty horrible winter. There will be frequent power cuts. The war is coming again to Kyiv and Lviv.
But don't forget that most normal businesses and factories will have been forced to close by the war already. This means that electricity is demand is likely well down on where it was a year ago.
Coal fired power stations are also not complicated things: pipes can be replaced, boilers patched and repaired. And distributed generation - i.e. a few Aggreko containers - can power city blocks with relative ease (as well as being very hard to detect and destroy).
Then there's the other side of the equation: 2,400 drones sounds like a lot. But don't forget that they only have the oomph of a very small bomb. The total flying weight of the drones (including explosives) is 200 kilograms (440 pounds). If we - generously - assume that the amount of explosive it carries is half that, we get to a 220 pound bomb. An F16's standard bomb (of which it will carry several) is 2,000 pounds.
And let's not forget that not all of those drones are going to reach their targets: some will get shot down, some malfunction, some get lost, and some will simply miss at the end. And there's no shortage of countermeasures that the Ukrainians can take: the easiest of which is simply shining laser pointers on the drones, blinding the camera, and meaning operators will no longer be able to pinpoint exactly what gets hit.
The payload is much less than that - more like 40-80 pounds. They are not at all impressive if you see them as traditional bombs. But if you see them as a new form of air warfare - swarming with suicidal precision on to known targets - they are a lot scarier
I don’t type this with pleasure. But there are an awful lot of PB-ers who don’t want to hear ANYTHING negative/depressing about the war and only want to hear endless stories of Ukrainian brilliance and bravery and squalidly pathetic Russian defeat, and how that means Ukraine obviously wins and then Putin magically disappears
Sadly, reality isn’t like that. Putin still has military options and he can still win. It won’t be easy for him - indeed it will go bloody and difficult - but it is possible
Are you the Adult In The Room on this one then?
I fear I am
It’s perfectly possible to put a shield in place to safeguard Ukrainian cities against this form of attack but Biden and Israel have dragged their feet. Equally the US (or Israel) could destroy the Iranian drone factories but it’s seen as a bit provocative.
The whole war now is just about how much pain America decides is an acceptable level for Ukraine to bear but still win, or conversely how much humiliation can be rained on Russia without it being seen as too much of an escalation. For my money, we can swing quite a bit further in Ukraine’s favour without risk but Biden is a cautious old peanut.
America is indeed the key player. The fate of Ukraine depends on whether the US is prepared to keep the aid flowing and maintain the credible threat of retribution should Putin escalate to WMDs. The US position in turn depends on how the political struggle over there pans out. Eg if MAGA/GOP were to prevail I'd rather be Putin than Zelensky.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
I had my flu jab yesterday. I'm not bothering with a Covid 4th jab though
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
It was not a bad time to be a first time buyer and the 1995/96 peak was for people who had bought in the past three years. Ie from 1992/93. But that was the peak from which it got worse after
Actually in every year of the early 1990s the level of FTBs was higher than recent years. You were completely 100% wrong and were wrong because your entire theory was based not on facts or figures from first time buyers but instead a Four Yorkshiremen memory of how bad things were and figures on *overall* sales rather than FTB sales.
Of course FTB make a bigger proportion of sales after a downturn when their LTV ratio has improved while their competitors has worsened. But you only looked at total sales. People using increased housing equity and buying 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes to let count as house sales but aren't first time buyers.
I've no idea what you are going on about. You seem to think that I don't know that the proportion of first time buyers has been falling for years. Quite why you think that is relevant to what happened when prices fell sharply in 1989-1991 is anyone's guess.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
From what I remember from when Corbyn tried and failed to call a VONC, the only way that a VONC takes precedence over government business is if the LOTO puts down the motion in the exact form of words.
Forgive me if this sounds a bit facetious, but rather than a VoNC, what about a full-blooded Vote Of Confidence in the Prime Minister? Called by two "loyal" Tory backbenchers, who then force everyone else to stand up and be counted?
Not facetious at all, I think the voc in the government earlier this year was called by the government for technical reasons which escape me. Government also by implication calls a voc in itself every time it introduces a money bill as Hunt will do on 31 Oct because defeat on a money bill is equivalent to vonc.
Backbenchers can't really initiate things because they don't get given time to debate them. Best they can do is an Early Day Motion which is purely symbolic because not debated.
Off topic. I may have mentioned that I am having trouble with HMRC returning necessary documents: so I can avoid double taxation on some significant foreign income
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
*heads off for coffee in sunny Colorado*
HMRC require staff to be in the office a minimum of 2 days a week - so lack of staff ain't an excuse.
Is that so they can claim home to be their official office and can then claim the mileage to get to work?
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
Otherwise idiotic backbenchers and the SNP would be calling VONCs every day which would paralyse the government and parliament.
*The PM can also call for a vote of confidence.
Not true. Anyone can call one. But only one by the LOTO, in the accepted language is automatically timetabled for the next day. Any other can be ignored.
A housing crash does not help buyers much if it is more difficult for them to get a mortgage, as it would be
If this hypothetical buyer has saved a deposit, it becomes relatively bigger with every fall in prices, so not only do they need to borrow a smaller amount of money, but their loan-to-value ratio also gets better. It's absolutely perverse to argue that people can't benefit from paying less for something.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since.
Increasing house prices aids those who are on the ladder already, to the harm of those who aren't. Falling house prices aids those who aren't, to the harm of those who are. For those who scream til they're blue in the face about the harms of negative equity - there's groups losing out no matter what, there is no "victimless" option here.
Rising house prices, as @rcs1000 has said before, allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to get a bigger home when they move. Or it allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to buy a second home without moving.
Falling house prices wipes out equity from those already on the housing ladder, but those who aren't on the ladder have no equity to lose. Instead their deposit they're saving up becomes a higher share of the deposit and means a better LTV value and also they're not competing against those buying second etc homes by leveraging the house price changes.
To be precise falling house prices don’t help FTB (risk to banks means they are more conservative on lending).
The best time to be a FTB is when prices have fallen, have stabilised, and when banks are just beginning to recover their nerves.
But that’s really a detail around your basic thesis - lower prices clearly benefit first time buyers all other things being equal
The best time to be an FTB was 1995.
A period of high inflation had reduced price-to-incomes to low levels. While the high interest rates of the early 90s had decimated the buy-to-let sector, and had resulted in banks unwilling to lend to landlords, high rental yields (relative to purchase prices) and many landlords having left the market.
Result: if you bought a house or apartment in London 27 years ago you will probably have seen a 10x gain.
Sadly, I was eight in 1995.
Guess who this is about?
In 1995, they bought their first property, a one-bedroom flat in Redcliffe Square, Earl's Court, London. Using a £6,000 loan from their grandmother, the brothers renovated the £122,000 apartment while living in it. Eighteen months later they sold it for £172,000, making a £50,000 profit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_and_Nick_Candy
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
After a month of the campaign the rate is higher than in the spring.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
After a month of the campaign the rate is higher than in the spring.
Normally I'd dismiss this as shit stirring from Labour but I can actually believe this is happening.
Me too, but again, for gods sake Tory MPs. You have the power. Get your representations in to Brady and the 1922, get your alternative PM lined up and agreed and get yourself on record as being opposed to Truss’ premiership. If there’s enough of you sheer political reality will bite and she will have to go. So stop moaning to Labour about it, grow a pair and sort it out.
Honestly if I have to hear them whinging on for week upon week again (just like in the Boris situation) I’ll be driven to distraction. DO IT you fools.
Meanwhile every week Truss stays in power more of those tentative Labour vote become solid Labour votes.
And solid Lib Dem votes as well, Mr Eek. All the fault of the supine Tory MPs of course....
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
After a month of the campaign the rate is higher than in the spring.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
After a month of the campaign the rate is higher than in the spring.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
The problem is that each requires either courage and principle from Tory MPs and/or involves some of them acting altruistically in some cases to their financial disadvantage.
None of them solve the problem of the succession being decided by the same MPs who put Hunt last and Truss second last time, and the venal insanity of the party membership, a plurality of whom want Truss or Boris as PM.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
That’s not how it works. The U.K. will be seen as a jurisdiction where people’s data is not safe and the EU will put obstacles in the way of data being sent here. I’m currently offshoring a client’s 45 jobs to the Netherlands because their customers are concerned that the data centres they run here will no longer be considered safe by the EU. 45 redundancies because of Brexit. But, hey, what’s the loss of British jobs to your annoyance at cookie notifications.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
I had my flu jab yesterday. I'm not bothering with a Covid 4th jab though
Got my flu jab on Saturday coming but covid booster is not until next Wednesday.
To be honest right now I am more worried about bird flu (not for me but my chickens and ducks)
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
I'd do your best to encourage them. I had a chat with a colleague today - had covid for the first time last week. Boosted 4 weeks ago. Most colds he has had were worse. Undoubtedly the effect of vaccination to reduce a disease that killed around 1 in 100 at best to giving a 60 year old man a mild sniffle.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
It was not a bad time to be a first time buyer and the 1995/96 peak was for people who had bought in the past three years. Ie from 1992/93. But that was the peak from which it got worse after
Actually in every year of the early 1990s the level of FTBs was higher than recent years. You were completely 100% wrong and were wrong because your entire theory was based not on facts or figures from first time buyers but instead a Four Yorkshiremen memory of how bad things were and figures on *overall* sales rather than FTB sales.
Of course FTB make a bigger proportion of sales after a downturn when their LTV ratio has improved while their competitors has worsened. But you only looked at total sales. People using increased housing equity and buying 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes to let count as house sales but aren't first time buyers.
I've no idea what you are going on about. You seem to think that I don't know that the proportion of first time buyers has been falling for years. Quite why you think that is relevant to what happened when prices fell sharply in 1989-1991 is anyone's guess.
What happened after prices fell sharply is that first time buyers went UP, not DOWN as you claimed.
Total sales fell, but first time buyer sales increased ultimately to record highs.
But then because the stupid, ridiculous notion set in that "negative equity" was to be avoided, rather than part of the ups and downs of any market, those who leverage their equity have done incredibly well while those who are trying to get on the ladder are finding it pulled out of their reach.
It would be really helpful for Ukraine if the young people of Iran could overthrow the regime around about now. Because, if Putin has got access to an unrestricted supply of new Iranian drones - and the Guardian says he has stockpiled 2,400 already - that seriously changes the balance of military power in Ukraine. It means he CAN starve and freeze Ukraine through the winter, then take a weakened Kyiv from Belarus
I now believe Putin is reading PB, and taking my military advice
Not provided we keep sending food supplies to Ukraine
We can’t send water and leccy to Ukraine. That will be much more the problem
Putin has 2400 drones. And more coming. That’s a fuck of a lot. He can, perhaps, pound Ukrainian infrastructure relentlessly until there is a systemic failure and entire cities are without water and power for weeks at a time - and the population is helpless. In a Ukrainian winter
No matter how brave the Ukrainian soldiers - and they are decidedly brave - in that situation Ukraine would probably surrender
2400 drones. If they send ~100/day that's 24 days. Of those, 80%+ are shot down (and that number will rise as more air defence comes online)
This sounds more like a harassing measure, unless they can significantly improve penetration, and/or significantly improve targeting.
OR they source a constant new supply. How difficult is this shit?
Too difficult for PB, it seems
It is possible that they will - but I wouldn't count on that. I imagine there are some people giving considerable thought to covert means by which that can be prevented.
I'm by no means saying that you are wrong, just that RU has surprised us on the downside where these logistical matters have been concerned, thus far.
I get the horrible feeling we are seeing a formidable new axis emerging, which perceives us as the enemy and is quite self sufficient in technology basically as good as ours
The main players are Russia, China and Iran. Plus their satellites. India is damagingly neutral
Russia’s military is quite shit but with China supplying weapons and parts via Iran (I bet that this is happening) that makes a Eurasian chain of materiel we cannot easily interdict
And that’s how Russia might win in Ukraine unless we are willing to go full nuclear confrontation over Lviv
Xi’s speech to the CCP was bristling with hostility and intent. They will move on Taiwan within a few years, for sure
In the short term, Russia is complaining about the poor quality of Chinese components it has been forced to buy on the grey market.
Actually, it is genuinely interesting that the Apocalyptic Crowleyite Sacha Dugin met Lukashenko
We are often told that Dugin is a peripheral figure. With no influence on Putin or Kremlin thinking. Yet here he is, meeting the president of Putin’s most crucial current ally
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
There's probably a stronger economic case for alignment with the US on privacy laws than the EU.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
Our local surgery is running them every Saturday so as to avoid messing up normal appointments. They have been pretty rammed every Saturday apparently.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
OK, I'll take your word for it even though it differs from my recollection. This is where it would be helpful if the Vanilla search was better than useless.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
There's probably a stronger economic case for alignment with the US on privacy laws than the EU.
Absolutely, yes!
If you want to reduce red tape by aligning with one or the other, absolutely embrace the land of the First Amendment.
America doesn't get everything right, but that one, absolutely.
Did you carry several changes of underwear in your manbag back during the cold war? You must have shat yourself every time someone slammed a door, a car backfired or you looked up and saw a slightly odd shaped cumulonimbus cloud?
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
OK, I'll take your word for it even though it differs from my recollection. This is where it would be helpful if the Vanilla search was better than useless.
Just go to Richard's profile. It's easy to check what he did and didn't say on the matter (spoiler, he didn't say it).
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
I had my flu jab yesterday. I'm not bothering with a Covid 4th jab though
Got my flu jab on Saturday coming but covid booster is not until next Wednesday.
To be honest right now I am more worried about bird flu (not for me but my chickens and ducks)
Yep my butcher's turkey supplier has had to cull his entire flock so we've had to resort to Marks and my butcher is bailing on turkeys for this christmas as there is too much risk of late culls etc with a new supplier. The pheasant shoots arent going ahead either, they are just killing them so i'm sourcing as many as possible for the freezer now.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
none of my extended family is getting the jab this time...enthusiasm seems to have fallen off a cliff.....gb news dont help with their scaremongering
I'd do your best to encourage them. I had a chat with a colleague today - had covid for the first time last week. Boosted 4 weeks ago. Most colds he has had were worse. Undoubtedly the effect of vaccination to reduce a disease that killed around 1 in 100 at best to giving a 60 year old man a mild sniffle.
One of the 20-something American PR girls on my trip says she had Covid a couple of months ago. After 3 jabs
She says It was the sickest she’s ever been and she is sure that, without the jab, she would have died
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
There's probably a stronger economic case for alignment with the US on privacy laws than the EU.
A housing crash does not help buyers much if it is more difficult for them to get a mortgage, as it would be
If this hypothetical buyer has saved a deposit, it becomes relatively bigger with every fall in prices, so not only do they need to borrow a smaller amount of money, but their loan-to-value ratio also gets better. It's absolutely perverse to argue that people can't benefit from paying less for something.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since.
Increasing house prices aids those who are on the ladder already, to the harm of those who aren't. Falling house prices aids those who aren't, to the harm of those who are. For those who scream til they're blue in the face about the harms of negative equity - there's groups losing out no matter what, there is no "victimless" option here.
Rising house prices, as @rcs1000 has said before, allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to get a bigger home when they move. Or it allows existing home owners to leverage the increase in their equity to enable them to buy a second home without moving.
Falling house prices wipes out equity from those already on the housing ladder, but those who aren't on the ladder have no equity to lose. Instead their deposit they're saving up becomes a higher share of the deposit and means a better LTV value and also they're not competing against those buying second etc homes by leveraging the house price changes.
To be precise falling house prices don’t help FTB (risk to banks means they are more conservative on lending).
The best time to be a FTB is when prices have fallen, have stabilised, and when banks are just beginning to recover their nerves.
But that’s really a detail around your basic thesis - lower prices clearly benefit first time buyers all other things being equal
The best time to be an FTB was 1995.
A period of high inflation had reduced price-to-incomes to low levels. While the high interest rates of the early 90s had decimated the buy-to-let sector, and had resulted in banks unwilling to lend to landlords, high rental yields (relative to purchase prices) and many landlords having left the market.
Result: if you bought a house or apartment in London 27 years ago you will probably have seen a 10x gain.
Ken Clarke was a better Chancellor than either Gordon Brown or George Osborne. I doubt he would have implemented a monetary policy framework that ignored asset bubbles and then made it government policy to keep them inflated forever.
I would agree with that: he also implemented a bunch of measures to encourage saving (PEPs, ISAs, etc.) that were very effective at boosting the UK's Household Savings rate.
He was also a simplifier: one of only three great tax simplifiers in the last half century.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
The "plotters" being the "stick with Liz" ninnies? And the loyalists being Tory MPs who are more loyal to the country and the real (as opposed to "true") Conservative Party?
Kitty Donaldson @kitty_donaldson NEW: The Conservatives caved in and allowed a free vote on abortion clinic buffer zones, a fresh sign that whips don’t want to pick fights they can’t win with mutinous backbenchers
I guess everyone on here except HUYFD will be happy with this (it's an amendment that introduces the buffer zones btw).
No, I'm not happy. Conservatives used to believe in free speech.
We've had one introduced by the local council not far from me recently (which makes me wonder why they need a Commons vote, but that's a different story_. They don't meaningfully infringe free speech, they do make it more difficult for illegal intimidatory tactics. I'm not sure it would be better to have multiple police officers permanently stationed nearby to deter such tactics, but I guess your mileage may vary.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
From what I remember from when Corbyn tried and failed to call a VONC, the only way that a VONC takes precedence over government business is if the LOTO puts down the motion in the exact form of words.
Forgive me if this sounds a bit facetious, but rather than a VoNC, what about a full-blooded Vote Of Confidence in the Prime Minister? Called by two "loyal" Tory backbenchers, who then force everyone else to stand up and be counted?
Again, that would need to be approved by the government.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
The "plotters" being the "stick with Liz" ninnies? And the loyalists being Tory MPs who are more loyal to the country and the real (as opposed to "true") Conservative Party?
Sorry if I shock you, but there is more than one view on most issues.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
Thats assuming that the british version isn't even more of a pig's ear....given the monstrosity that is the online safety bill I suspect it will be worse by far than gdpr
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
Williamglenn said that the mid 90s were a good time to be a first time buyer (subsequently claimed to be the best time to be one), you rejected that and said it was a bad time.
You were wrong. Categorically and completely wrong.
At no stage of the early to mid 90s was it a worse time to be a first time buyer than now. The house price falls in the early 90s allowed property to become affordable for first time buyers. It absolutely should happen again.
Any Tory MP that comes out with a mealy mouthed “we have to give Liz Truss a chance” in the coming days fully deserves to lose their seat.
Wake. Up. People.
im wondering if they are worried ousting her too quickly could be seen as misogyny.....not a good look to be seen bullying a woman
Lol, classic pb gammon dressed as woke: can't put too much pressure on the laydeez, fragile little things that they are, even if they have unwisely got in too deep into men's business.
hearing that rebel Tories have been asking Labour MPs to help them overthrow Liz Truss
Conservative backbenchers are growing increasingly frustrated with the PM's leadership, but currently lack any mechanisms to remove her
One Labour MP tells me: "Tories are speaking to us saying 'this is a complete nightmare and there is no way out'. We are being asked 'can't you do something about her?'"
Otherwise idiotic backbenchers and the SNP would be calling VONCs every day which would paralyse the government and parliament.
*The PM can also call for a vote of confidence.
But if enough Tories want her gone, they can get Starmer to call for the VoNC and then either abstain or vote against the govt. Admittedly they would then have to face the electorate...
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
The thing is that it won't remove those Cookie notifications because you need to agree to your data going to the USA (which is where the tracking lives),
I would agree with that: he also implemented a bunch of measures to encourage saving (PEPs, ISAs, etc.) that were very effective at boosting the UK's Household Savings rate.
He was also a simplifier: one of only three great tax simplifiers in the last half century.
Yes, he was an excellent Chancellor. However, PEPs were a Nigel Lawson invention, improved by Gordon Brown who replaced the rather silly distinction between single-company and multi-company PEPs with the simplified and wider ISAs.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
That’s not how it works. The U.K. will be seen as a jurisdiction where people’s data is not safe and the EU will put obstacles in the way of data being sent here. I’m currently offshoring a client’s 45 jobs to the Netherlands because their customers are concerned that the data centres they run here will no longer be considered safe by the EU. 45 redundancies because of Brexit. But, hey, what’s the loss of British jobs to your annoyance at cookie notifications.
Not much point calling for a closer relationship with the EU if the EU is still in a vindictive mood, then, is there?
He's full of shite, only Wragg, Brady and Ghani know how many letters have gone in and I doubt they even tell the rest of the 1922 exec much less Labour MPs.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
Williamglenn said that the mid 90s were a good time to be a first time buyer (subsequently claimed to be the best time to be one), you rejected that and said it was a bad time.
You were wrong. Categorically and completely wrong.
At no stage of the early to mid 90s was it a worse time to be a first time buyer than now. The house price falls in the early 90s allowed property to become affordable for first time buyers. It absolutely should happen again.
Was out shopping earlier and spotted today's Times (I think) with headline about prospect of gargantuan fuel bills landing on doormats next April. Prompted two thoughts:
1. Thank Christ I fixed until 2024 2. Do we think, assuming that Jeremy Hunt (or at least his policies) are still in force next Spring, that the Government will have the gumption to do what it says and target support only at relatively narrow groups (such as the severely disabled and hospitality businesses?)
I may just be being a terrible old cynic again, but I can't see them instructing the grey vote to suck it up. The Tories' polling position is absolutely dire, and you'd think the one thing that they could afford less than anything else would be to lumber their core voter demographic with colossal price hikes that will wipe out the increase in value in their state pensions many, many times over. Followed immediately by much screaming from Labour, various charities and the newspapers (especially the Dementia Press) about heat or eat dilemmas.
To borrow a phrase oft used by a notable PBer, I can see this all ending with the dwindling base of middle income working taxpayers being shafted like Turkish conscripts yet again - told they have to pay full whack for gas and leccy, and simultaneously being left on the hook for yet another gargantuan bung for pensioners, in the form of either price-capped social tariffs bankrolled by the Treasury, or straightforward handouts (a bit like the Winter Fuel Payment, but worth something like £3,000 a year.)
Once again, it feels like there's little reason left for anyone below pensionable age to vote Conservative, save perhaps if you are an expectant heir to a hugely valuable property, and are concerned that a new Government might choose to hike death duties to help plug the deficit.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
The thing is that it won't remove those Cookie notifications because you need to agree to your data going to the USA (which is where the tracking lives),
Oh it’s such a waste of life having to click those things, especially since most websites don’t seem to remember your choice. One of the worst developments of the 21st century those are. Just let me approve it once when I install my browser and be done with it!
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
There's probably a stronger economic case for alignment with the US on privacy laws than the EU.
I think you will find there is not
As we share a common language and legal heritage, the potential upside for services trade is greater with the US.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
I had my flu jab yesterday. I'm not bothering with a Covid 4th jab though
Got my flu jab on Saturday coming but covid booster is not until next Wednesday.
To be honest right now I am more worried about bird flu (not for me but my chickens and ducks)
Yep my butcher's turkey supplier has had to cull his entire flock so we've had to resort to Marks and my butcher is bailing on turkeys for this christmas as there is too much risk of late culls etc with a new supplier. The pheasant shoots arent going ahead either, they are just killing them so i'm sourcing as many as possible for the freezer now.
Yep the pheasant and partridge stuff is hitting us hard this year. As I said the other day we normally eat pheasant at least twice a week during the season. I am already looking for frozen turkey for christmas just in case our local supplier has to cull.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
Williamglenn said that the mid 90s were a good time to be a first time buyer (subsequently claimed to be the best time to be one), you rejected that and said it was a bad time.
You were wrong. Categorically and completely wrong.
At no stage of the early to mid 90s was it a worse time to be a first time buyer than now. The house price falls in the early 90s allowed property to become affordable for first time buyers. It absolutely should happen again.
You justified your claim by saying Look here's a doc saying there were 950,000 buyers in 1995, biggest year ever. When it was pointed out that was buyers within previous 3 years giving an average of 315,000 pa you said That makes my point even stronger.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
OK, I'll take your word for it even though it differs from my recollection. This is where it would be helpful if the Vanilla search was better than useless.
Just go to Richard's profile. It's easy to check what he did and didn't say on the matter (spoiler, he didn't say it).
He sort of did. Direct line of responses to each other:
Nabavi: The trouble is that a big fall in house prices combined with higher interest rates doesn't help younger buyers, quite the opposite. What happens is that the mortgage providers get nervous about affordability and negative equity, and require bigger deposits, whilst at the same time sellers don't put their houses on the market. The whole market seizes up, leaving only a few forced sellers whose properties get bought at low prices by people with cash.
Williamglenn: This is only true if you take an extremely short-term perspective. The mid-90s was a good time to be a first-time buyer.
Nabavi: For those who held on long enough and didn't go bust in the meantime. Prices took nearly a decade to recover from 1989.
Williamglenn: That's completely irrelevant if you were a first-time buyer in the 1990s. Your argument that such people were locked out of the market doesn't match the reality of what happened.
Nabavi: Yes, it does, I remember it very well.
The problem is his memory doesn't match the facts. William was right.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
Our local surgery is running them every Saturday so as to avoid messing up normal appointments. They have been pretty rammed every Saturday apparently.
Flu and covid booster at a pharmacy midday yesterday. Three jabbers kept things moving. Maybe half a dozen waiting for 5-10 minutes.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
Williamglenn said that the mid 90s were a good time to be a first time buyer (subsequently claimed to be the best time to be one), you rejected that and said it was a bad time.
You were wrong. Categorically and completely wrong.
At no stage of the early to mid 90s was it a worse time to be a first time buyer than now. The house price falls in the early 90s allowed property to become affordable for first time buyers. It absolutely should happen again.
You justified your claim by saying Look here's a doc saying there were 950,000 buyers in 1995, biggest year ever. When it was pointed out that was buyers within previous 3 years giving an average of 315,000 pa you said That makes my point even stronger.
Because it did. It meant the 3 years to 1995 were the strongest ever.
Richard responded to the facts showing 1995 to be the peak by claiming that was when it started to recover, but a recovery from 1995 would show in the three years to 1997 if the years before it were atrocious.
If the three years to 1995 are the highest ever, then that means that collectively 1993, 1994 and 1995 were the highest ever. Which means the price falls in 1991 and 1992 far from locking out first time buyers as claimed, opened the doors to them instead.
Was out shopping earlier and spotted today's Times (I think) with headline about prospect of gargantuan fuel bills landing on doormats next April. Prompted two thoughts:
1. Thank Christ I fixed until 2024 2. Do we think, assuming that Jeremy Hunt (or at least his policies) are still in force next Spring, that the Government will have the gumption to do what it says and target support only at relatively narrow groups (such as the severely disabled and hospitality businesses?)
I may just be being a terrible old cynic again, but I can't see them instructing the grey vote to suck it up. The Tories' polling position is absolutely dire, and you'd think the one thing that they could afford less than anything else would be to lumber their core voter demographic with colossal price hikes that will wipe out the increase in value in their state pensions many, many times over. Followed immediately by much screaming from Labour, various charities and the newspapers (especially the Dementia Press) about heat or eat dilemmas.
To borrow a phrase oft used by a notable PBer, I can see this all ending with the dwindling base of middle income working taxpayers being shafted like Turkish conscripts yet again - told they have to pay full whack for gas and leccy, and simultaneously being left on the hook for yet another gargantuan bung for pensioners, in the form of either price-capped social tariffs bankrolled by the Treasury, or straightforward handouts (a bit like the Winter Fuel Payment, but worth something like £3,000 a year.)
Once again, it feels like there's little reason left for anyone below pensionable age to vote Conservative, save perhaps if you are an expectant heir to a hugely valuable property, and are concerned that a new Government might choose to hike death duties to help plug the deficit.
On the last point, it has been notably quiet on whether the social care cap will be abandoned.
All we have heard as far as I know is that there will be cuts to social services, although Hodges thinks this is part of a kite flying expedition.
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
You don't need the cookie notification to be GDPR compliant IIRC. Goldplating as ever. As for introducing a British GDPR, it is fucking stupid, totally unnecessary and only anyone who has never run a business would think it worthwhile. So much for Brexit reducing red tape.
There's probably a stronger economic case for alignment with the US on privacy laws than the EU.
I think you will find there is not
As we share a common language and legal heritage, the potential upside for services trade is greater with the US.
Those of us that have worked for American companies might debate whether they share a common language, and their legal system I will allow others to comment upon, but I think you will find it is really quite different in practice. The reality is that British companies have GDPR in place, and it was a major pain in the arse to implement, but it is now done. To introduce a requirement to fall into line with a new system is so fucking stupid it can only be advocated by those who have no understanding of business, are terminally braindead or, as in the case of Barty, are both.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
OK, I'll take your word for it even though it differs from my recollection. This is where it would be helpful if the Vanilla search was better than useless.
Just go to Richard's profile. It's easy to check what he did and didn't say on the matter (spoiler, he didn't say it).
He sort of did. Direct line of responses to each other:
Nabavi: The trouble is that a big fall in house prices combined with higher interest rates doesn't help younger buyers, quite the opposite. What happens is that the mortgage providers get nervous about affordability and negative equity, and require bigger deposits, whilst at the same time sellers don't put their houses on the market. The whole market seizes up, leaving only a few forced sellers whose properties get bought at low prices by people with cash.
Williamglenn: This is only true if you take an extremely short-term perspective. The mid-90s was a good time to be a first-time buyer.
Nabavi: For those who held on long enough and didn't go bust in the meantime. Prices took nearly a decade to recover from 1989.
Williamglenn: That's completely irrelevant if you were a first-time buyer in the 1990s. Your argument that such people were locked out of the market doesn't match the reality of what happened.
Nabavi: Yes, it does, I remember it very well.
The problem is his memory doesn't match the facts. William was right.
He's full of shite, only Wragg, Brady and Ghani know how many letters have gone in and I doubt they even tell the rest of the 1922 exec much less Labour MPs.
There are enough letters to have precipitated a meeting between Brady and Truss yesterday.
Rip off Energy company news. My tarriff renews Nov 1, EoN will only offer me the variable. Single, 2 bed flat, they state my annual use is ca 2500 kwh leccy and 6600 gas, both below the UK average, gas by some distance. Currently pay £86 per month and am £320 in credit. They want £214 per month. They want me to pay as much as the cap on the average UK use household. I believe they can fuck off
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
That’s not how it works. The U.K. will be seen as a jurisdiction where people’s data is not safe and the EU will put obstacles in the way of data being sent here. I’m currently offshoring a client’s 45 jobs to the Netherlands because their customers are concerned that the data centres they run here will no longer be considered safe by the EU. 45 redundancies because of Brexit. But, hey, what’s the loss of British jobs to your annoyance at cookie notifications.
Not much point calling for a closer relationship with the EU if the EU is still in a vindictive mood, then, is there?
Again, the Brexiteers paranoid fever dreams suggest that the EU applying its own laws to the UK as much as the rest of the world is being "vindictive". In the meantime I'm advising clients left, right and centre on how to make redundancies as they relocate service sector jobs to the EU.
Poor little UK, we're so hard done by, why can't we have our cake and eat it? Why?
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
You do realise not everyone else has EU customers, don't you?
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
That’s not how it works. The U.K. will be seen as a jurisdiction where people’s data is not safe and the EU will put obstacles in the way of data being sent here. I’m currently offshoring a client’s 45 jobs to the Netherlands because their customers are concerned that the data centres they run here will no longer be considered safe by the EU. 45 redundancies because of Brexit. But, hey, what’s the loss of British jobs to your annoyance at cookie notifications.
Not much point calling for a closer relationship with the EU if the EU is still in a vindictive mood, then, is there?
That's your perception. But the real issue is simply that it would itself be a criminal offence to send data from the EU to an area where the standards of security are inadequate (e.g. because it has been made compulsory for hospitals and/or researchers eomployed on public grant moneys to give data to UKG/DoH nominated "partners").
Off topic. I may have mentioned that I am having trouble with HMRC returning necessary documents: so I can avoid double taxation on some significant foreign income
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. After EIGHT MONTHS. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
*heads off for coffee in sunny Colorado*
HMRC were shit and inefficient when they were in the office five days a week. I can't see how hauling them back into the office is magically going to make them a paragon of efficiency and sparkling customer service.
Indeed, we had this discussion with @Richard_Nabavi when he falsely claimed the 1990s was a bad time to be a First Time Buyer following the house price falls, when the facts and figures show the polar opposite - we had record FTBs in the early to mid 90s and its been falling ever since. [snip]
Utter poppycock. I didn't 'falsely claim' anything of the sort. I correctly pointed out that the period of sharp price falls (circa 1989-1991) was a bad time to be first time buyer, and you and @williamglenn then started quoting figures from 1995/6, which was exactly when the market eventually started to recover. Please don't lie about what I said.
You specifically said the "mid 1990s", if I recall correctly?
No I didn't.
OK, I'll take your word for it even though it differs from my recollection. This is where it would be helpful if the Vanilla search was better than useless.
Just go to Richard's profile. It's easy to check what he did and didn't say on the matter (spoiler, he didn't say it).
He sort of did. Direct line of responses to each other:
Nabavi: The trouble is that a big fall in house prices combined with higher interest rates doesn't help younger buyers, quite the opposite. What happens is that the mortgage providers get nervous about affordability and negative equity, and require bigger deposits, whilst at the same time sellers don't put their houses on the market. The whole market seizes up, leaving only a few forced sellers whose properties get bought at low prices by people with cash.
Williamglenn: This is only true if you take an extremely short-term perspective. The mid-90s was a good time to be a first-time buyer.
Nabavi: For those who held on long enough and didn't go bust in the meantime. Prices took nearly a decade to recover from 1989.
Williamglenn: That's completely irrelevant if you were a first-time buyer in the 1990s. Your argument that such people were locked out of the market doesn't match the reality of what happened.
Nabavi: Yes, it does, I remember it very well.
The problem is his memory doesn't match the facts. William was right.
LOL! Thanks for showing that I was indeed correct! Although it would have been even clearer if you'd quoted the next few posts.
You were wrong throughout the entire thread, like doubling down on the idea that 1995 was recovery when 1993 and other years of the 90s also had fantastic FTB sale levels, which is why collectively the three years to 1995 were the peak.
If you still want to claim this ridiculous notion that 1990s price falls harmed first time buyers, please name any years in the 1990s where first time buyer levels were consistently lower than recent years? Because its just not true. Nothing your claiming is substantiated in facts, quite the opposite.
Just a little prick, and I was in and out in five minutes.
For the avoidance of doubt, I've just had my flu jab!
Had mine yesterday. I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
Our local surgery is running them every Saturday so as to avoid messing up normal appointments. They have been pretty rammed every Saturday apparently.
I've got my COVID booster booked in for next week. At Matalan! Yes I was surprised.
Off topic. I may have mentioned that I am having trouble with HMRC returning necessary documents: so I can avoid double taxation on some significant foreign income
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. After EIGHT MONTHS. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
*heads off for coffee in sunny Colorado*
HMRC were shit and inefficient when they were in the office five days a week. I can't see how hauling them back into the office is magically going to make them a paragon of efficiency and sparkling customer service.
I mean, rubber stamps? In 2022?
That's because the IRS makes things complex and insist on paper documents with stamps. Did you see how they still do their tax returns when in the UK it's been 99% automated.
Comments
I was late for the appointment, but there was absolutely no one else there apart from the staff. If everywhere's like that, take-up will be pretty low.
I spent hours ringing them two weeks ago and they finally got a grip and said “you’ll have them within days”
They still have not appeared. After EIGHT MONTHS. I’ve now been told that the main problem is so many people working from home “where they don’t have the official rubber stamps” - so they all wait for someone to actually go into the office and stamp the documents
This is embarrassingly shit. This is 17th century shit. Scrap working from home. It’s a fucking disaster. Get back to the office you workshy twats you are fucking the UK economy
*heads off for coffee in sunny Colorado*
Actually in every year of the early 1990s the level of FTBs was higher than recent years. You were completely 100% wrong and were wrong because your entire theory was based not on facts or figures from first time buyers but instead a Four Yorkshiremen memory of how bad things were and figures on *overall* sales rather than FTB sales.
Of course FTB make a bigger proportion of sales after a downturn when their LTV ratio has improved while their competitors has worsened. But you only looked at total sales. People using increased housing equity and buying 2nd, 3rd and 4th homes to let count as house sales but aren't first time buyers.
https://twitter.com/PrivacyMatters/status/1582394546981199873
UK Minister: "I am announcing that we will be replacing GDPR with our own business & consumer-friendly, British data protection system" https://conservatives.com/news/2022/our-plan-for-digital-infrastructure--culture--media-and-sport Jesus, Mary and Joseph and the wee donkey
Given that everything I do also has EU customers I still need to meet GDPR requirements so how does this help me or anyone else?
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations?areaType=nation&areaName=England
Backbenchers can't really initiate things because they don't get given time to debate them. Best they can do is an Early Day Motion which is purely symbolic because not debated.
Anyone can call one. But only one by the LOTO, in the accepted language is automatically timetabled for the next day.
Any other can be ignored.
In 1995, they bought their first property, a one-bedroom flat in Redcliffe Square, Earl's Court, London. Using a £6,000 loan from their grandmother, the brothers renovated the £122,000 apartment while living in it. Eighteen months later they sold it for £172,000, making a £50,000 profit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_and_Nick_Candy
You can choose to apply GDPR, just as American or Australian firms can choose to do so too.
Firms that don't have EU customers, won't need to. They'll be free to choose, which is fair enough in a free society.
Silly little nuisance but for me the first thing to be scrapped in a British GDPR is getting rid of that stupid cookie notification every time you go to a website. Though like you, some websites could choose to still meet GDPR, even if they don't need to.
https://twitter.com/seaniegriff/status/1582341652735479808
On the plus side, they do seem to be utterly incompetent so they will probably not manage to change anything.
None of them solve the problem of the succession being decided by the same MPs who put Hunt last and Truss second last time, and the venal insanity of the party membership, a plurality of whom want Truss or Boris as PM.
https://twitter.com/WayneDavid_MP/status/1582320460284407808?s=20&t=i_tJk7c_wofoqRvDnV38Og
To be honest right now I am more worried about bird flu (not for me but my chickens and ducks)
Total sales fell, but first time buyer sales increased ultimately to record highs.
But then because the stupid, ridiculous notion set in that "negative equity" was to be avoided, rather than part of the ups and downs of any market, those who leverage their equity have done incredibly well while those who are trying to get on the ladder are finding it pulled out of their reach.
We are often told that Dugin is a peripheral figure. With no influence on Putin or Kremlin thinking. Yet here he is, meeting the president of Putin’s most crucial current ally
Interesting why that would be.
If you want to reduce red tape by aligning with one or the other, absolutely embrace the land of the First Amendment.
America doesn't get everything right, but that one, absolutely.
She says It was the sickest she’s ever been and she is sure that, without the jab, she would have died
🤷♂️
He was also a simplifier: one of only three great tax simplifiers in the last half century.
You were wrong. Categorically and completely wrong.
At no stage of the early to mid 90s was it a worse time to be a first time buyer than now. The house price falls in the early 90s allowed property to become affordable for first time buyers. It absolutely should happen again.
1. Thank Christ I fixed until 2024
2. Do we think, assuming that Jeremy Hunt (or at least his policies) are still in force next Spring, that the Government will have the gumption to do what it says and target support only at relatively narrow groups (such as the severely disabled and hospitality businesses?)
I may just be being a terrible old cynic again, but I can't see them instructing the grey vote to suck it up. The Tories' polling position is absolutely dire, and you'd think the one thing that they could afford less than anything else would be to lumber their core voter demographic with colossal price hikes that will wipe out the increase in value in their state pensions many, many times over. Followed immediately by much screaming from Labour, various charities and the newspapers (especially the Dementia Press) about heat or eat dilemmas.
To borrow a phrase oft used by a notable PBer, I can see this all ending with the dwindling base of middle income working taxpayers being shafted like Turkish conscripts yet again - told they have to pay full whack for gas and leccy, and simultaneously being left on the hook for yet another gargantuan bung for pensioners, in the form of either price-capped social tariffs bankrolled by the Treasury, or straightforward handouts (a bit like the Winter Fuel Payment, but worth something like £3,000 a year.)
Once again, it feels like there's little reason left for anyone below pensionable age to vote Conservative, save perhaps if you are an expectant heir to a hugely valuable property, and are concerned that a new Government might choose to hike death duties to help plug the deficit.
Nabavi: The trouble is that a big fall in house prices combined with higher interest rates doesn't help younger buyers, quite the opposite. What happens is that the mortgage providers get nervous about affordability and negative equity, and require bigger deposits, whilst at the same time sellers don't put their houses on the market. The whole market seizes up, leaving only a few forced sellers whose properties get bought at low prices by people with cash.
Williamglenn: This is only true if you take an extremely short-term perspective. The mid-90s was a good time to be a first-time buyer.
Nabavi: For those who held on long enough and didn't go bust in the meantime. Prices took nearly a decade to recover from 1989.
Williamglenn: That's completely irrelevant if you were a first-time buyer in the 1990s. Your argument that such people were locked out of the market doesn't match the reality of what happened.
Nabavi: Yes, it does, I remember it very well.
The problem is his memory doesn't match the facts. William was right.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/10889/just-30-of-ge2019-con-voters-say-truss-would-be-best-pm-politicalbetting-com/p4
Richard responded to the facts showing 1995 to be the peak by claiming that was when it started to recover, but a recovery from 1995 would show in the three years to 1997 if the years before it were atrocious.
If the three years to 1995 are the highest ever, then that means that collectively 1993, 1994 and 1995 were the highest ever. Which means the price falls in 1991 and 1992 far from locking out first time buyers as claimed, opened the doors to them instead.
All we have heard as far as I know is that there will be cuts to social services, although Hodges thinks this is part of a kite flying expedition.
My tarriff renews Nov 1, EoN will only offer me the variable. Single, 2 bed flat, they state my annual use is ca 2500 kwh leccy and 6600 gas, both below the UK average, gas by some distance. Currently pay £86 per month and am £320 in credit.
They want £214 per month. They want me to pay as much as the cap on the average UK use household.
I believe they can fuck off
Poor little UK, we're so hard done by, why can't we have our cake and eat it? Why?
I mean, rubber stamps? In 2022?
If you still want to claim this ridiculous notion that 1990s price falls harmed first time buyers, please name any years in the 1990s where first time buyer levels were consistently lower than recent years? Because its just not true. Nothing your claiming is substantiated in facts, quite the opposite.
Red Wall Voting Intention (16-17 October):
Labour 61% (–)
Conservative 21% (-2)
Reform UK 8% (+5)
Liberal Democrat 5% (-2)
Green 3% (-1)
Plaid Cymru 1% (–)
Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 3-4 October
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-red-wall-voting-intention-16-17-october-2022 https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1582401118700568576/photo/1