Mr. Doethur, it's notable that the easier following/passing of last year seems to have been undone.
Hamilton has had a couple of races in which he appears to have more overall pace but couldn't pass Sainz. And the Spaniard was having a pretty poor weekend in Azerbaijan.
F1: interesting that Perez is down to 7 for the title. Market currently thinks it's a two bull race.
It's a two bull race - as Toto pointed out on Sunday - but that doesn't make Perez's odds are value - they aren't because there is zero chance Max will let anyone else win the title - he will insist on being No 1.
Stupid stupid stupid. Who is going to benefit from a Starmer administration?
1. There really really really is no money left.
2. Rubbish as student loan repayments are, the main beneficiaries of their abolition would be graduates who earn an absolute fortune (top city law types), since they're about the only ones who ever pay them off. Everyone else just had to wait for the write-off to kick in, which was the plan all along.
Bunging scarce cash at the very richest is the sort of thing that got Liz and Kwasi into so much trouble.
I think Starmer needs to do something on Student Loans and fees. Cutting the rate of interest , or even making them interest free would do. It would even be self funding in that most of the book is going to be written off already.
An alternative would be to raise the threshold, so repayments cut in later, but that is more expensive in the short term.
Electorally and politically it would be better to soften repayments than to abolish fees, as there are far more graduates than people at university, and also more likely to turn out.
Absolutely. Even if it were put in place quickly, a policy of abolishing new student loans taken out after Autumn 2025 would mainly benefit a tiny handful of the electorate. Whereas there is now a very big electoral chunk of former students who are trying to cope with existing loans, particularly those who were hit by the huge rise in fees from 2011 onwards after Clegg had committed his act of betrayal. Labour's attention should be concentrated there.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
I remember when unsellable houses in Sunderland were quite the scandal. Asylum seekers were being given "free" homes. As you propose they wouldn't be working (as not allowed) and would basically sit there doing nothing (as you propose).
Two problems with this freedom thing. One, the homes at the price bracket you mention are in exciting places like Plains Farm and Sliksworth. Back in the day the asylum seekers went into houses in Hendon's "Murder Mile" where *nobody* wanted to live.
The idea of buying a house on Plains Farm is funny, especially to sit and do nothing. You'd get branded a paedo and wake up on fire. There is a reason you can buy a home for that kind of money there - it is hell.
Good morning
Last year a detached 3 bedroom bungalow close to us sold for £425,000
The same bungalow has just been resold for £575,000 which is insane
Indeed we have a newly built apartment complex with prices upto £950,000
The price increases are astonishing and many put it down to wealthy English homeowners moving into this beautiful part of Wales
Of course there is anger at the use of some of these homes as holiday homes and councils are imposing much increased council tax premiums
You can increase house building, but the evidence indicates these developments are sold out at similar high prices even before they are completed
I am simply amazed and do not have any idea how this resolved
Stupid stupid stupid. Who is going to benefit from a Starmer administration?
1. There really really really is no money left.
2. Rubbish as student loan repayments are, the main beneficiaries of their abolition would be graduates who earn an absolute fortune (top city law types), since they're about the only ones who ever pay them off. Everyone else just had to wait for the write-off to kick in, which was the plan all along.
Bunging scarce cash at the very richest is the sort of thing that got Liz and Kwasi into so much trouble.
I think Starmer needs to do something on Student Loans and fees. Cutting the rate of interest , or even making them interest free would do. It would even be self funding in that most of the book is going to be written off already.
An alternative would be to raise the threshold, so repayments cut in later, but that is more expensive in the short term.
Electorally and politically it would be better to soften repayments than to abolish fees, as there are far more graduates than people at university, and also more likely to turn out.
Absolutely. Even if it were put in place quickly, a policy of abolishing new student loans taken out after Autumn 2025 would mainly benefit a tiny handful of the electorate. Whereas there is now a very big electoral chunk of former students who are trying to cope with existing loans, particularly those who were hit by the huge rise in fees from 2011 onwards after Clegg had committed his act of betrayal. Labour's attention should be concentrated there.
But it can't be fixed - so the best bet for Labour is to do nothing, sort it out for future students and ensure the story for everyone who was a student between 2012 and 2025 is that it's the Tories fault and sadly unfixible.
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
If you look at the conflict maps around Bakhmut, over the past two months the Russians have advanced about seven miles. If you did it in a taxi it'd cost you about £20. They turned a town into a lunar landscape, fighting over the rubble of rubble, spent tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives, over a journey which is about as long as I'd have to travel to get some IKEA Billy shelves. I don't know what to say, I really don't.
Russia is working on the theory that Ukraine is on the brink of collapse, and one last heave is all that is required.
I suspect that theory is bunkum.
They appear to be channeling the ghost of Luigi Cadorna.
Who was famed for his persistence, if nothing else. Hence “The Eleventh Battle of the Isonzo”
*I think that Caporetto should be called the twelfth battle, since that makes a tidy set….
Cadorna ought to have been shot for incompetence. Like Ian Percival.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
School fees?
Seriously, if you are rent free you can actually live on £368 pm (or £578pm for a couple). We know that because those are the Universal Credit rates. (Tbf we should add circa £100pm? for Council Tax, which UC claimants get support for.)
PS As others have pointed out, who wants to do fuck all for the rest of their lives?
Mr. eek, I agree but for somewhat different reasons.
Perez has had some great weekends, notably in Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan. But both of these are circuits at which he's excelled in the past. I also expect him to have a nice time in Monaco (although losing the Red Bull straight line speed advantage may mean he'll be behind the likes of Leclerc). To beat Verstappen he needs to be able to perform on circuits like Interlagos, Spa, Silverstone. If that happens, things shall be rather tasty. But, if not, then he'll give Verstappen a run for his money but the Dutchman will ease his way to victory.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
School fees?
Seriously, if you are rent free you can actually live on £368 pm (or £578pm for a couple). We know that because those are the Universal Credit rates. (Tbf we should add circa £100pm? for Council Tax, which UC claimants get support for.)
PS As others have pointed out, who wants to do fuck all for the rest of their lives?
Indeed.
If you want an easy, well paid life where all you do is sit around drinking and gossipping while doing fuck all of value, join the DfE.
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
A few pointers: 1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes 2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work 3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate. 4. Cracks. Lots of cracks. 5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those. 6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
I think turnout will be pretty poor on Thursday. No-one is talking about it, at all, and everyone has better things to do.
Mass apathy reigns.
But when was the last local election when the potential political identity of people’s councillors was all they could talk about?
True, but I don't think anyone cares this time.
There's not the mass anger to motivate people to out and give the Government a kicking because the alternatives are meh and people have switched off.
Even those who have thought about it (myself included) just can't be arsed.
I thought that people were talking of nothing else. Not seen this fury in current lifetime etc?
We have no locals this week but we do have a councillor byelection on 1st June. ID now required of course. I received the list of what's acceptable. There's lots of things on it and most of them are specifically for the elderly. Nothing at all for young people. The impression is of a great effort to protect the voting rights for a high turnout demographic who vote tory, and rather less so for a low turnout demographic who don't. That's the impression.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
I remember when unsellable houses in Sunderland were quite the scandal. Asylum seekers were being given "free" homes. As you propose they wouldn't be working (as not allowed) and would basically sit there doing nothing (as you propose).
Two problems with this freedom thing. One, the homes at the price bracket you mention are in exciting places like Plains Farm and Sliksworth. Back in the day the asylum seekers went into houses in Hendon's "Murder Mile" where *nobody* wanted to live.
The idea of buying a house on Plains Farm is funny, especially to sit and do nothing. You'd get branded a paedo and wake up on fire. There is a reason you can buy a home for that kind of money there - it is hell.
Good morning
Last year a detached 3 bedroom bungalow close to us sold for £425,000
The same bungalow has just been resold for £575,000 which is insane
Indeed we have a newly built apartment complex with prices upto £950,000
The price increases are astonishing and many put it down to wealthy English homeowners moving into this beautiful part of Wales
Of course there is anger at the use of some of these homes as holiday homes and councils are imposing much increased council tax premiums
You can increase house building, but the evidence indicates these developments are sold out at similar high prices even before they are completed
I am simply amazed and do not have any idea how this resolved
There is a disconnect between the price of houses and people's wages. In so many cases people can only afford mega prices because they are trading in something else where they have lots of equity, but that only continues being mortgaged until they retire. As I will be.
The solution is to disconnect house prices from speculators. In urban areas there is likely to be more churn as people start a home for themselves then start a family and want to move to something bigger.
Why should people be stuck renting from private landlords? All the money they spend paying market rents is money they are not spending elsewhere in the economy.
I am a big advocate for StateCo corporate entities and the same is true for LocalCo. Let the council - or preferably a consortium of councils - build starter homes and better still nice apartments. Rent them at prices people can afford. Disconnect the speculators from the next generation coming through so that they have a chance to actually be able to afford something themselves when they reach the point in their lives where they need space for a family.
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
A few pointers: 1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes 2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work 3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate. 4. Cracks. Lots of cracks. 5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those. 6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
And I live in a (relatively) new build, in a new development. And whilst I agree (and have posted on here many times passim) that there can be build quality issues with new builds, calling them 'shitboxes' *is* sneering - especially when you consider that old houses can have significant issues as well.
For one thing, I'd much rather let kids run around on the road outside one of those houses than on the ones fronting the road at the top (and that is a massive part of liveability).
By all means call me a 'prannock'; it doesn't make your sneering, condescending view correct.
Belgians, coming over here, winning our snooker! What was the point of Brexit!?!
Quite exciting, isn't it? First time someone without English as a first language has won it. I genuinely wonder how aware Belgium is about this. I hope it gets the attention it deserves. He's a remarkable player and it would be a shame were it not as appreciated as it deserves to be. I wonder if we'll get any more Europeans involved as a result?
He’s pretty fluent in English though, perhaps dare I say it more so than some previous winners..
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
A few pointers: 1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes 2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work 3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate. 4. Cracks. Lots of cracks. 5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those. 6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
And I live in a (relatively) new build, in a new development. And whilst I agree (and have posted on here many times passim) that there can be build quality issues with new builds, calling them 'shitboxes' *is* sneering - especially when you consider that old houses can have significant issues as well.
For one thing, I'd much rather let kids run around on the road outside one of those houses than on the ones fronting the road at the top (and that is a massive part of liveability).
By all means call me a 'prannock'; it doesn't make your sneering, condescending view correct.
Laughable. Your entire premise was that I have no clue what new builds are like and was sneering at them from my posh pad in the country. And how marvellous those new houses look!
Wrong on every front. Have a look at the floor plans of some of the houses. A "bedroom" where you can just about squeeze a single in behind the door. But can barely move if you then add anything other than a small wardrobe.
No room to swing a cat. Inevitable build quality issues because they're being done on a mega tight budget and they don't care once they have your money. Regular flooding. And just £338k! Lovely.
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
A few pointers: 1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes 2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work 3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate. 4. Cracks. Lots of cracks. 5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those. 6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
Drainage problems seem to be a common theme across new builds in the Highlands/Moray/Aberdeenshire too. I have friends who are going through the endless remedial work you describe.
Another issue - the new build flats in Leith often dedicate a huge amount of space to parking. I don't get it - we have a tram, buses, can cycle everywhere. And massive congestion issues. Weird, car-centric design.
Traditional tenements work really well. Just build more of them (with dedicated cycle storage).
Stupid stupid stupid. Who is going to benefit from a Starmer administration?
I’m not a Starmer fan but his and his shadow cabinet’s cowardice is becoming his biggest failing afaIac (not that he gives a feck). At least Blair breezily leavened the centrist sludge with a hint of progressive jam tomorrow.
Mr Pioneer’s mention of Hollingworth Lake brought back memories. Our first home after marriage was on the shore of Hollingworth Lake. Mrs C. used to sit in the window upstairs and look out over the lake, watching the comings and goings. Happy days! I sometimes wonder why we moved South. Now we live about 10 miles from Colchester, and the amount of building around Colchester is amazing. Don’t seem to be any pubs or shops though.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
School fees?
Seriously, if you are rent free you can actually live on £368 pm (or £578pm for a couple). We know that because those are the Universal Credit rates. (Tbf we should add circa £100pm? for Council Tax, which UC claimants get support for.)
PS As others have pointed out, who wants to do fuck all for the rest of their lives?
It's an academic exercise. I'm interested in views on for how little full financial independence and "freedom" could be achieved. Not on it's desirability as a life choice.
There is good news for Josiah. The developer we're talking about now wants to build another 100 or so houses on the neighbouring field. Another flood plain.
Where are all those people supposed to go? The *only* road in and out is the single carriageway A58. It cannot be widened. It cannot be bypassed. There is no money to build new schools. Shops. Facilities of any kind. Its just keep crushing more houses in literally anywhere you can and don't worry about liveability.
I think this phase of the general housing debate came because Starmer said he wanted to build new towns. A much much better idea. My friends until recently lived in the Hamptons in Peterborough. Build an entire new community with places to shop and learn and get around without being in a car for every trip. A much better solution.
I posted an example of a "fuck you" housing development yesterday. 100 houses. On a flood plain. One road in and out which is already at crush capacity. No space for new roads, nothing spent on schools or doctors or facilities.
And how much do they want for a shitbox 2-bed semi in this hellhole? £240k! And for one with a bit more room, say a 4 bed detached (almost touching the one next door with at least one bedroom you can't fit a bed it)? £338k!
This is on the edge of Rochdale. Who can afford these? Thats a lot of mortgage for not a lot of house. And did I mention flood plain, traffic hell and no facilities?
This is the problem with housing in this country. Yes, house building prices have doubled. But wages haven't. And developers are throwing up austerity homes in the wrong location to make everyone's lives miserable.
I find condescending comments on new-builds from very well-off people who can afford 'nice' houses to be quite hilarious. 'Shitbox' indeed.
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
A few pointers: 1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes 2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work 3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate. 4. Cracks. Lots of cracks. 5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those. 6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
And I live in a (relatively) new build, in a new development. And whilst I agree (and have posted on here many times passim) that there can be build quality issues with new builds, calling them 'shitboxes' *is* sneering - especially when you consider that old houses can have significant issues as well.
For one thing, I'd much rather let kids run around on the road outside one of those houses than on the ones fronting the road at the top (and that is a massive part of liveability).
By all means call me a 'prannock'; it doesn't make your sneering, condescending view correct.
Laughable. Your entire premise was that I have no clue what new builds are like and was sneering at them from my posh pad in the country. And how marvellous those new houses look!
Wrong on every front. Have a look at the floor plans of some of the houses. A "bedroom" where you can just about squeeze a single in behind the door. But can barely move if you then add anything other than a small wardrobe.
No room to swing a cat. Inevitable build quality issues because they're being done on a mega tight budget and they don't care once they have your money. Regular flooding. And just £338k! Lovely.
I am well aware of the issues with new builds - I have been banging on about them on here for years. My point is - and you singularly fail to address it - is that calling them 'shitboxes' is incorrect. And yes, I think that saying you are 'sneering' is correct. Sadly.
For instance, what are they like compared to other houses in the area? For tranport, what is the proximity to public transport? To playgrounds for kids? what's the parking situation like (and this is a *big* issue). I cannot speak for this development, but these are often much better in new-build developments than they are in old-style streets - especially on main roads.
There is good news for Josiah. The developer we're talking about now wants to build another 100 or so houses on the neighbouring field. Another flood plain.
Where are all those people supposed to go? The *only* road in and out is the single carriageway A58. It cannot be widened. It cannot be bypassed. There is no money to build new schools. Shops. Facilities of any kind. Its just keep crushing more houses in literally anywhere you can and don't worry about liveability.
I think this phase of the general housing debate came because Starmer said he wanted to build new towns. A much much better idea. My friends until recently lived in the Hamptons in Peterborough. Build an entire new community with places to shop and learn and get around without being in a car for every trip. A much better solution.
What you are essentially saying is that *no* new housing can be built anywhere on that road, or where that road is the access. You also ignore my point about the proximity to the station. In fact, I've just looked at the bus timetables as well - there are busses every ten to fifteen minutes into Rochdale, Littleborough, Halifax etc. I'd argue that's rather well-served.
Why are you so car-obsessed?
I like the idea of new towns - I've spoken positively about them in the past (including mentioning proposed ones just yesterday). But they're not the whole answer in any way, and are very tricky to get right. It also is not up to an individual developer - such as the one you appear to so dislike - to propose them.
I might also suggest that if you are going to mention my name, you at least spell it correctly. Not doing so makes you look either illiterate or a sh*t.
Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:
(1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this. (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm? (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm
Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.
You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.
But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.
School fees?
Seriously, if you are rent free you can actually live on £368 pm (or £578pm for a couple). We know that because those are the Universal Credit rates. (Tbf we should add circa £100pm? for Council Tax, which UC claimants get support for.)
PS As others have pointed out, who wants to do fuck all for the rest of their lives?
It's an academic exercise. I'm interested in views on for how little full financial independence and "freedom" could be achieved. Not on it's desirability as a life choice.
Work with me here.
One of the Governments is paying people to relocate to (one of the?) Western Isles just off the North-West coast of Scotland. It's very remote and will probably not work in one's later years when access to medical help is a priority, but is doable for people who are young/middle-aged
Comments
Hamilton has had a couple of races in which he appears to have more overall pace but couldn't pass Sainz. And the Spaniard was having a pretty poor weekend in Azerbaijan.
Last year a detached 3 bedroom bungalow close to us sold for £425,000
The same bungalow has just been resold for £575,000 which is insane
Indeed we have a newly built apartment complex with prices upto £950,000
The price increases are astonishing and many put it down to wealthy English homeowners moving into this beautiful part of Wales
Of course there is anger at the use of some of these homes as holiday homes and councils are imposing much increased council tax premiums
You can increase house building, but the evidence indicates these developments are sold out at similar high prices even before they are completed
I am simply amazed and do not have any idea how this resolved
But haven't Osbourne and others done so well...
Looking at this development on Google Maps, it is a 15-minute walk from a station that has half-hourly services to Manchester and beyond. Yes, the houses might be small, but they appear bigger (and with better parking) than the stone (and faux-stone) houses opposite the entrance to the development. The train costs £3.50 for a return, with the journey taking 20 minutes
I don't know the area, and I know you do. But from the looks of it, the development is *better* quality and in a more livable environment than most of the other houses in the area.
I had a conversation on this years ago with a BBC bod, who said that he felt a new development near Kettering was empty and soulless. He, of course, was writing from his thatched cottage in mid-Wales, and didn't seem to comprehend that not everyone could phone-in their work...
Seriously, if you are rent free you can actually live on £368 pm (or £578pm for a couple). We know that because those are the Universal Credit rates. (Tbf we should add circa £100pm? for Council Tax, which UC claimants get support for.)
PS As others have pointed out, who wants to do fuck all for the rest of their lives?
Perez has had some great weekends, notably in Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan. But both of these are circuits at which he's excelled in the past. I also expect him to have a nice time in Monaco (although losing the Red Bull straight line speed advantage may mean he'll be behind the likes of Leclerc). To beat Verstappen he needs to be able to perform on circuits like Interlagos, Spa, Silverstone. If that happens, things shall be rather tasty. But, if not, then he'll give Verstappen a run for his money but the Dutchman will ease his way to victory.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/wealthy-brits-should-be-forced-to-pay-compensation-to-descendants-of-slavery-they-can-afford-it/ar-AA1ay9ep?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=f6793772719f44b3b022a8b0d894d92d&ei=20
Sam Allardyce in advanced talks to take over from Javi Gracia as Leeds manager
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/may/02/sam-allardyce-leeds-talks-javi-gracia-manager
If you want an easy, well paid life where all you do is sit around drinking and gossipping while doing fuck all of value, join the DfE.
1. I spent 15 years living in a newly built Barrett house on a sprawling multi-developer estate which eventually hit 1,100 homes
2. We had waterlogging issues with the garden. Developer hadn't put suitable drains in, was forced to come and do a load of remedial work
3. Developer had pumped a tiny amount of insulation into the wall cavity but sold it as fully insulated. 8 years in and after they were successfully pursued by the NHBC regulations they hired a team to come and properly insulate the entire estate.
4. Cracks. Lots of cracks.
5. Ours was one of the bigger ones on the development. Neighbour had a bedroom you could only just fit a single bed into. And they built 100+ of those.
6. The more liveable environment you mention on that development *is on a flood plain*. Interesting that the development marketing brochure uses a photo of nearby Hollingworth Lake on the cover. Apposite considering that residents will be flooded next time the Roch gets swamped by a big storm dumping excessive rain.
As for affording "nice" houses and passing "condescending comments". My house cost £220k. I could not afford the daft money being asked on that development. We also looked at moving across the Tees into a new development in Stockton. £330k starting, tiny rooms upstairs, unaffordable.
I moved up here because I *can't* afford those you prannock, not because I am rich and want to sneer.
The solution is to disconnect house prices from speculators. In urban areas there is likely to be more churn as people start a home for themselves then start a family and want to move to something bigger.
Why should people be stuck renting from private landlords? All the money they spend paying market rents is money they are not spending elsewhere in the economy.
I am a big advocate for StateCo corporate entities and the same is true for LocalCo. Let the council - or preferably a consortium of councils - build starter homes and better still nice apartments. Rent them at prices people can afford. Disconnect the speculators from the next generation coming through so that they have a chance to actually be able to afford something themselves when they reach the point in their lives where they need space for a family.
For one thing, I'd much rather let kids run around on the road outside one of those houses than on the ones fronting the road at the top (and that is a massive part of liveability).
By all means call me a 'prannock'; it doesn't make your sneering, condescending view correct.
NEW THREAD
Wrong on every front. Have a look at the floor plans of some of the houses. A "bedroom" where you can just about squeeze a single in behind the door. But can barely move if you then add anything other than a small wardrobe.
No room to swing a cat. Inevitable build quality issues because they're being done on a mega tight budget and they don't care once they have your money. Regular flooding. And just £338k! Lovely.
Another issue - the new build flats in Leith often dedicate a huge amount of space to parking. I don't get it - we have a tram, buses, can cycle everywhere. And massive congestion issues. Weird, car-centric design.
Traditional tenements work really well. Just build more of them (with dedicated cycle storage).
Now we live about 10 miles from Colchester, and the amount of building around Colchester is amazing. Don’t seem to be any pubs or shops though.
Work with me here.
Where are all those people supposed to go? The *only* road in and out is the single carriageway A58. It cannot be widened. It cannot be bypassed. There is no money to build new schools. Shops. Facilities of any kind. Its just keep crushing more houses in literally anywhere you can and don't worry about liveability.
I think this phase of the general housing debate came because Starmer said he wanted to build new towns. A much much better idea. My friends until recently lived in the Hamptons in Peterborough. Build an entire new community with places to shop and learn and get around without being in a car for every trip. A much better solution.
For instance, what are they like compared to other houses in the area? For tranport, what is the proximity to public transport? To playgrounds for kids? what's the parking situation like (and this is a *big* issue). I cannot speak for this development, but these are often much better in new-build developments than they are in old-style streets - especially on main roads.
Why are you so car-obsessed?
I like the idea of new towns - I've spoken positively about them in the past (including mentioning proposed ones just yesterday). But they're not the whole answer in any way, and are very tricky to get right. It also is not up to an individual developer - such as the one you appear to so dislike - to propose them.
I might also suggest that if you are going to mention my name, you at least spell it correctly. Not doing so makes you look either illiterate or a sh*t.