Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Breaking…Sky News on the Deputy Speaker, Nigel Evans

124»

Comments

  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Stuart Wheeler in the Sunday Times

    “We could get 100 seats at the next general election.”

    The Mail have some very rich euro-sceptics smiling at UKIP.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2317993/Why-ARE-Tories-turning-UKIP.html

    Momentum and money. I'm sure the Conservatives are thrilled at the prospect of a level playing field in the electoral competition for votes. :-)
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,583
    GIN1138 said:

    Stuart Wheeler in the Sunday Times

    “We could get 100 seats at the next general election.”

    Has Wheeler gone crazy?

    The way Wheeler is talking, I'm surprised he's not predicting a UKIP majority by 2020.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,583
    edited May 2013
    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout.

    This could be the equivalent of the Greens in 1989.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,583

    The Sunday Times have done extensive pieces on the YouGov polling, but in 6 different articles not once have they mentioned the VI.

    It's presumably a 10ish lead because the "preferred government" question gives a 45-35 edge to Labour-led. But if there was a huge UKIP bounce as one would expect after all the coverage, you'd think it'd be a story.

    My theory, pace SeanT, is that there is nothing remarkable about the populist right movement getting 10-15% in polls - there is a latent 10% or so who quite fancy each extreme in most countries, though FPTP usually suppresses it in Britain. However, there's also a ceiling on people willing to embrace wild-eyed populism, and they may be reaching it.

    10ish leads sounds about right, we'll find out in the morning.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,368

    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout

    Yes, and held in areas probably more receptive to UKIP than the urban unitary authorities and boroughs.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    GIN1138 said:

    Stuart Wheeler in the Sunday Times

    “We could get 100 seats at the next general election.”

    Has Wheeler gone crazy?

    Stuart Wheeler, a rich ex tory, could be a danger to UKIP with his continuing shooting off at the mouth. He sounds and acts like real fruitcake. Farage should get rid of him and his ilk.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of the UK but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has significantly underperformed.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK London UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 171.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 184.6 173.9 178.1
    tim, especially, should note that there has been no price increase in nominal let alone real terms during the period of this coalition government.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    rcs1000 said:

    It would be good to cut the welfare bill, yes: unfortunately, their policies won't achieve that. Take pensions (which accounts for half of all welfares spending). They want a flat 'Citizen's pension" of 130 pounds per week, that is non-means tested, etc. Which is great. Unfortunately multiplying the proposed amount by the number of pensioners gets us pretty much to current spending on state pensions.

    The Coalition is offering a 144 per week state pension and are managing to cut state pension expenditure in doing so!
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,583

    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout

    Yes, and held in areas probably more receptive to UKIP than the urban unitary authorities and boroughs.

    The one thing that does cheer me up though, given the disillusionment with the three main parties, the protest vote hasn't gone to extremists such as communists or fascists as we've seen in other countries.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.9 178.1
    I thought the meme was about the top end increasing very fast as people with money try to squeeze into the least stabby catchment areas?
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151

    Also from the YouGov/Peter Kellner piece

    He (Ed Milliband) has a mountain to climb: our latest poll shows that, by two to one, voters think he is not up to the job of being prime minister.

    FPTP + 4 parties, he should be able to make it to Downing Street with the votes of the one voter in three who thinks he is.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    This could be the equivalent of the Greens in 1989.

    We'll know in 2015 - in 1992 the Greens came nowhere anywhere.

    Though UKIP should be able to avoid the internal blood-letting that happened in the Greens after 1989. The few people still around who remember it are still reluctant to talk about it.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    MrJones said:

    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.9 178.1
    I thought the meme was about the top end increasing very fast as people with money try to squeeze into the least stabby catchment areas?
    True, and other figures have shown the premium areas of London (e.g. Primrose Hill!) 'enjoy' massive increases in price, but the ONS figures don't reflect this..I believe this is because ONS weight their index to reflect a representative basket of properties.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    AveryLP said:

    MrJones said:

    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.9 178.1
    I thought the meme was about the top end increasing very fast as people with money try to squeeze into the least stabby catchment areas?
    True, and other figures have shown the premium areas of London (e.g. Primrose Hill!) 'enjoy' massive increases in price, but the ONS figures don't reflect this..I believe this is because ONS weight their index to reflect a representative basket of properties.
    That's what i was thinking - distorted average.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    MrJones said:

    AveryLP said:

    MrJones said:

    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.9 178.1
    I thought the meme was about the top end increasing very fast as people with money try to squeeze into the least stabby catchment areas?
    True, and other figures have shown the premium areas of London (e.g. Primrose Hill!) 'enjoy' massive increases in price, but the ONS figures don't reflect this..I believe this is because ONS weight their index to reflect a representative basket of properties.
    That's what i was thinking - distorted average.
    Or more accurately 'representative' average.

    You may dream of buying a £125 million house in Eaton Square and prices for foreign oligarchs make good tabloid headlines but it is better they are not allowed to distort the index for a broad range of buyers in London. Far more people buy 2 bedroom apartments in the outer boroughs than single houses in Belgravia!

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Back to Tebbit, I know I'm not the first to say or think it, but I really don't see the logic of how promising a date for an EU referendum would draw people back to the Cameroon Tories, because Cameron still wants to be in the EU, and they don't. They'll like the opportunity to vote sooner, but won't thank the Cameroons for it.

    I also think people over-estimate how important Europe is to UKIP support. Really, this is all about the fact that a great many people feel that the metropolitan elite have taken over the Conservative Party, and that they want something more traditional. UKIP today is Veritas, only with a better leader. Even if Europe were to disappear as an issue, there would still be strong support for a traditional, right-Wing, conservative (with a small 'c') party.

    Historically, the Conservative Party has been an alliance between business and the metropolitan elites on the one side, and the small 'c' conservatives in the shires. Together they were almost unbeatable.

    However, these two elements are diverging - big business and the urban elite, by and large, want close links with Europe, and are keen on freedom of movement. The small 'c' conservatives in the shires, feel that these things dilute British-ness, and change the country in ways they don't like. They feel - rightly or wrongly - that they are the ones who are competing for jobs with immigrants, while investment bankers in Hampstead enjoy cheaper builders and cleaners.

    There is no clean way to heal this divide, because the two main sponsors of Conservatism are moving in different directions.

    Neither strand of Conservatism has enough support in the country as a whole to get a majority. If these strands cannot heal their differences - which is quite possible - then the country is going to have four main political parties (and the SNP, yes yes yes), and we will start having some very unpredictable and potentially unrepresentative election results. UKIP on 20%, and the Conservatives on 30% at the general election would almost certainly result in a staggeringly large Labour majority - even though 'right wing' parties garnered half the votes. But that is another issue all together.
    Also worth saying that this is happening all over the place. The French right blew up, the Japanese right split in two (although one half still won), the US right had its Tea Party insurgency.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    Mr Jones and Socrates lecturing us on racial politics is always a delight, as the BNP disappear and London improves.

    Pleased to see you are not asleep, tim, otherwise you might be trying to instill nightmares about Boy George creating a property price boom.

    We can all now look forward to sweet dreams.

  • Options
    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK London UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 171.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 184.6 173.9 178.1
    tim, especially, should note that there has been no price increase in nominal let alone real terms during the period of this coalition government.
    Of the available indices, I find the ONS the least convincing. Indices mask the actual prices. Here's the Nationwide data with the change since peak: London is at its peak.

    NORTH -16.0% £112,989
    YORKS & HSIDE -16.0% £131,470
    NORTH WEST -16.9% £132,159
    EAST MIDS -11.0% £139,718
    WEST MIDS -12.3% £144,860
    EAST ANGLIA -10.7% £164,191
    OUTER S EAST -8.3% £197,564
    OUTER MET -4.4% £247,830
    LONDON 0.0% £306,919
    SOUTH WEST -9.7% £184,591
    WALES -14.2% £132,971
    SCOTLAND -15.7% £128,594
    N IRELAND -52.4% £108,610
    UK -11.4% £163,056
    London prices are almost twice UK average, and nearly three times prices in the cheapest regions.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151

    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout

    Yes, and held in areas probably more receptive to UKIP than the urban unitary authorities and boroughs.

    The one thing that does cheer me up though, given the disillusionment with the three main parties, the protest vote hasn't gone to extremists such as communists or fascists as we've seen in other countries.
    IIRC Farage says one achievement he's very proud of is crowding out the BNP with a non-racist party. I think he' right to be.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    I have added the peak house price index figures (Oct 2007) to the charts to give a better representation of price movements over the past decade.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 184.4 179.2 221.6 225.2 276.7
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 220.2 209.2 214.5 192.1 185.4 166.2 171.0 164.9 180.7
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK London UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 184.4 171.0 188.0 196.3
    2010 Jun 177.1 171.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 184.6 173.9 178.1
    The real shocker is to see the bubble in Northern Ireland and the consequences of it bursting.
  • Options
    Another way to look at regional house prices is to compare with the post 1990 low price, to see how much "bubble" there may be left. Again, using Nationwide data:

    NORTH 270%
    YORKS & HSIDE 283%
    NORTH WEST 271%
    EAST MIDS 308%
    WEST MIDS 283%
    EAST ANGLIA 324%
    OUTER S EAST 367%
    OUTER MET 359%
    LONDON 461%
    SOUTH WEST 351%
    WALES 295%
    SCOTLAND 261%
    N IRELAND 353%
    UK 325%
    As Bob Dylan sings...it's a hard,hard rain's gonna fall...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AveryLP said:

    I have added the peak house price index figures (Oct 2007) to the charts to give a better representation of price movements over the past decade.

    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 184.4 179.2 221.6 225.2 276.7
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 220.2 209.2 214.5 192.1 185.4 166.2 171.0 164.9 180.7
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK London UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2007 Oct 184.4 171.0 188.0 196.3
    2010 Jun 177.1 171.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 184.6 173.9 178.1
    The real shocker is to see the bubble in Northern Ireland and the consequences of it bursting.
    London is the only place still going up though, so that may be the explanation for the perception. NI seems to have followed the Irish property bubble.

    tim is clearly wrong about property, as he is about so much else.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013

    AveryLP said:

    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    Selective education always exists. The only difference is whether it's based on wealth or ability.

    Before grammar schools were abolished, it was based on ability. Now it's based on whether you can afford it or not. You can either pay for it directly, or indirectly by buying a house in the catchment area of a top school.

    And the staggering thing about Londons improvement is that kids on free school meals outperform kids not on free school meals outside London

    That has to be down to the staggering increase in London house prices...

    I have been looking at house prices over the past few days and this meme about London prices far outstripping prices elsewhere in the UK needs challenging.

    Yes, London prices have outperformed the rest of England and Wales but not by a large amount. Scotland and Wales for example have significantly outperformed England and Northern Ireland has seen a significant decline.
    UK House Price Index [ONS]                                
    UK Eng. Wal. Sco. N.I.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 173.0 210.9 222.1 174.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 173.2 204.9 209.7 136.3


    N.E. N.W. York. E.M. W.M. East Lon. S.E. S.W.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 212.7 197.1 197.3 181.8 175.0 160.7 171.1 161.6 170.3
    2013 Feb 196.7 186.4 189.3 173.8 169.0 160.5 184.6 161.5 168.0


    UK London UK excl. UK excl.
    London London & S.E.

    2002 Feb 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
    2010 Jun 177.1 171.1 178.7 184.8
    2013 Feb 176.2 184.6 173.9 178.1
    tim, especially, should note that there has been no price increase in nominal let alone real terms during the period of this coalition government.
    Of the available indices, I find the ONS the least convincing. Indices mask the actual prices. Here's the Nationwide data with the change since peak: London is at its peak.

    NORTH -16.0% £112,989
    YORKS & HSIDE -16.0% £131,470
    NORTH WEST -16.9% £132,159
    EAST MIDS -11.0% £139,718
    WEST MIDS -12.3% £144,860
    EAST ANGLIA -10.7% £164,191
    OUTER S EAST -8.3% £197,564
    OUTER MET -4.4% £247,830
    LONDON 0.0% £306,919
    SOUTH WEST -9.7% £184,591
    WALES -14.2% £132,971
    SCOTLAND -15.7% £128,594
    N IRELAND -52.4% £108,610
    UK -11.4% £163,056
    London prices are almost twice UK average, and nearly three times prices in the cheapest regions.
    Yes, the different sources of pricing information all need to be taken into account.

    The most reliable (but least timely) source for actual prices is HM Land Registry.

    The main reason why London prices are shown as having stronger rises than elsewhere in the UK is that the top end of the market has been highly liquid. Owners are cashing in by selling to foreign purchasers. In the mid and lower ends volumes have been very low as owners hold on hoping for a reversal of the price declines preferring to let rather than sell if they have to move.

    What ONS attempts to do with their weighting is to even out the distortions caused by the differentials in volume of sales between the different bands of property value. This is the right approach in my opinion but I am not competent enough to know whether they have achieved their objectives in their current index.



  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    I remember buying a house in Yorkshire in 1998 for £150k, and selling it 7 years later for £390k.

    I was happy as a clam, coming back to the US, but the UK property market was clearly overheated.
  • Options

    AveryLP said:




    The real shocker is to see the bubble in Northern Ireland and the consequences of it bursting.

    London is the only place still going up though, so that may be the explanation for the perception. NI seems to have followed the Irish property bubble.

    tim is clearly wrong about property, as he is about so much else.

    The Irish bubble is the lesson that it takes a very large oversupply to crash prices, but when they crash, they crash. It's much better to squeeze buyers via positive real interest rates. Then there aren't tumbleweed empty properties and the foot can be taken off the brake.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    AveryLP said:




    The real shocker is to see the bubble in Northern Ireland and the consequences of it bursting.

    London is the only place still going up though, so that may be the explanation for the perception. NI seems to have followed the Irish property bubble.

    tim is clearly wrong about property, as he is about so much else.

    The Irish bubble is the lesson that it takes a very large oversupply to crash prices, but when they crash, they crash. It's much better to squeeze buyers via positive real interest rates. Then there aren't tumbleweed empty properties and the foot can be taken off the brake.

    An even bigger problem than Ireland is Spain where there are 700,000 empty properties mostly repossessed by banks from developers and held in the books at values well above market.

    Spain is where the Eurozone will fail.

  • Options
    AveryLP said:


    Yes, the different sources of pricing information all need to be taken into account.

    The most reliable (but least timely) for actual prices is HM Land Registry.

    The main reason why London prices are shown as having stronger rises than elsewhere in the UK is that the top end of the market has been highly liquid. Owners are cashing in by selling to foreign purchasers. In the mid and lower ends volumes have been very low as owners hold on hoping for a reversal of the price declines preferring to let rather than sell if they have to move.

    What ONS attempts to do with their weighting is to even out the distortions caused by the differentials in volume of sales between the different bands of property value. This is the right approach in my opinion but I am not competent enough to know whether they have achieved their objectives in their current index.



    Land Registry allows you to look borough by borough in London, so you can see that the Nationwide numbers are realistic and not just based on Russians playing property spoof in Mayfair, Kensington and Hampstead.

    The ONS methodology was heavily influenced by the (Kate) Barker review, and Stephen Nickell who were both instrumental in trying to hide the extent of Brown's bubble while justifying it and voting for the low interest rates that pumped it up. Even the Land Registry data is massaged: it excludes auction sales, sales after repossessions and sales of newbuilds, inter alia IIRC.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013

    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout

    Yes, and held in areas probably more receptive to UKIP than the urban unitary authorities and boroughs.

    The one thing that does cheer me up though, given the disillusionment with the three main parties, the protest vote hasn't gone to extremists such as communists or fascists as we've seen in other countries.
    IIRC Farage says one achievement he's very proud of is crowding out the BNP with a non-racist party. I think he' right to be.
    The counter argument is that Farage has absorbed the BNP's voters and is using his EU exit policy as a "reputational shield" to cover his 'racist' policies.

    The truth probably lies somewhere between the two interpretations.

  • Options
    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:




    The real shocker is to see the bubble in Northern Ireland and the consequences of it bursting.

    London is the only place still going up though, so that may be the explanation for the perception. NI seems to have followed the Irish property bubble.

    tim is clearly wrong about property, as he is about so much else.

    The Irish bubble is the lesson that it takes a very large oversupply to crash prices, but when they crash, they crash. It's much better to squeeze buyers via positive real interest rates. Then there aren't tumbleweed empty properties and the foot can be taken off the brake.

    An even bigger problem than Ireland is Spain where there are 700,000 empty properties mostly repossessed by banks from developers and held in the books at values well above market.

    Spain is where the Eurozone will fail.

    You might be shocked by how many of those Spanish "golf homes" were financed by Irish speculators. The problem isn't just Spain's, and it's why the Irish crash has been so severe: they've been called on their overseas speculation as well.

  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2013
    "Syrian state TV says Israeli rockets have hit a military research centre on the outskirts of the capital Damascus.

    Huge explosions have been heard in the Mount Qassioun area of the city. The research centre there was the target of a Israeli strike in January. "


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22417482
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    AveryLP said:

    The Sunday Times does make a valid point, far too many people are reading too much into an election with 30% turnout

    Yes, and held in areas probably more receptive to UKIP than the urban unitary authorities and boroughs.

    The one thing that does cheer me up though, given the disillusionment with the three main parties, the protest vote hasn't gone to extremists such as communists or fascists as we've seen in other countries.
    IIRC Farage says one achievement he's very proud of is crowding out the BNP with a non-racist party. I think he' right to be.
    The counter argument is that Farage has absorbed the BNP's voters and is using his EU exit policy as a "reputational shield" to cover his 'racist' policies.

    The truth probably lies somewhere between the two interpretations.
    Not seeing that - what UKIP policies are racist, or even partway to being racist?
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2013
    You can't have it both ways: asserting how wonderful it is that the BNP have been wiped out, but then saying most of them have started voting UKIP so it's not so great after all.

    I remember reading somewhere that a lot of black radicals weren't impressed when the National Front was wiped out in 1979 because they said they were simply voting for Thatcher instead. Even if that was true (which is debatable), it still represented a big improvement in the state of politics.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,164
    SeanT - Blair of course lost votes and seats to the LDs Respect and the Greens in 2005
This discussion has been closed.