The chancellor and prime minister will begin to pitch-roll tax rises and reforms from September as part of a strategy to prepare the country for a difficult budget that could be held in November, the Guardian has been told.
That, or the beginning of a long repeat cycle to decide a bunch of unpopular policies that unsurprisingly turn out to be unpopular and are ultimately ridden back on weeks and months after the budget with the only real achievement being even more unpopularity.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I'll bite slightly now. If people use "slumlord" it usually tells you more about the person using the term. It is a flag for dogmatic and hostile eg Generation Rent. Max is ideologically opposed to rental. I'm not sure why; one would hope an ardent capitalist would support free housing markets; I have not heard him argue for nationalisation of eg Grainger plc who are a rental business.
The Rushanara Ali property seems to be 8, Blondin Street, London E3 2TR, a 4/5 bed townhouse. Market rental value seems to be about £4350 per month (based on one currently advertised there as 4/5 bed) *. The previous rent of £3300 seems to be around 25% below market, which seems exceptional given that it is stated to be a fairly recent tenancy; they had a bloody good deal (which might be why they are cross at losing it and maybe thought she would cave) - absent something exceptional. 4 people, five bed (one small), 2 bath, 2 reception - 24ft kitchen-diner, and a lounge. Zoopla details of this house from 2014 are below **.
The increased advertised rent of £4000 per month seems to still be ~8-10% below market, which seems OK given that she is being up front that it is a tenancy-to-sale so not years long.
Value is £800k, so at £3300 that is £40k or 5% gross return, or 6.25% at the new rental. Which is OK for London - a big chunk will go on license etc and management, and decorating / maintenance, but it should be fine with a 2014 mortgage. It's a nice house and a good choice. After costs yield will be 3-4+% on those numbers if mortgage free.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
I've been flagged for this, lol
Now unflagged. So, not only pathetic, but cowardly and pathetic - but also entertaining. Who was it? @bondegezou? @kinabalu? Someone else ending in oo? You?
Come off it. I don't flag. Not even the most racist of your racist posts have ever driven me to that.
Flagging is the act of a pitiful poltroon, and whatever else I may think of you (much of it exaggerated on here for my personal entertainment) no, I don't take you for a poltroon, let alone a pitiful one. So, fair enough
I remember Doug Seal calling you a pontificating poltroon. Very strong post that was.
That crazy dude in Scotland, @jonquil or something. Hated motorbikes. Total meltdown, spectacular but sad. Hope he's OK
And Mister Seal, who came back recently for a bit and seemed OK. Ins'allah
Plato went off the deep end while posting here and the ghost of ..... (Can't remember the name) did and I think got banned.
You couldn't even type Martin without your post getting binned at one time during the MartinDay saga I kept slagging off Martine McCutcheon for some reason and couldn't work out for ages why my posts were disappearing
lol!
I love hearing old PB lore. It's like a folk history of an aural culture. It's never written down but the Elders Remember
Who else in the world will understand the term "Swissnick"? Only us
Baxtered, lagershed, gaylording ponceyboots, Martin Day, Martin Croxall arrested on telly, farmy farm, Creases, the Finland Rumour, on it goes. Lovely
Con Gain Bootle Ed Miliband Is Crap Is PM Tims off license
Licence.
See, it’s not just me !
😃 Let's hope it doesn't become a trend because it is irritating. PB could start having another meaning. Instead of politics it becomes pedantry. In most cases we are aware of our errors. I often use the wrong their/there, but I know the difference.
My auto correct always spells your party as the Lib Dem’s with an apostrophe.
I'm relaxed with that. Although to be honest the misuse of an apostrophe is one I have to restrain myself from being a pedant about. We all have our weak spots.
"Blackadder star Tony Robinson vents anger over ‘heightism’ The 5ft 4in actor says shorter than average frame has been a problem in life as debate rages over dating apps’ height filter"
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
There seems to be a common theme among all the Labour scandals so far, it always unnecessary low level low value greed and telling fibs. Lie about being an economist or a solicitor, lie about losing your phone, lie about where exactly you live, never turn down a freebie, etc.
When you bang on about being different and serving country not party, you surely would think people will be gunning for us on this.
We aren't anywhere near some of much more serious stuff under the Tories, but Labour are getting themselves in a mess over really stupid stuff.
This one seems particularly harsh. If she gave 4 months notice in November, she's only a couple of months short of what the new law will be once the renters rights bill goes through.
The house has apparently been on the market 9 months, and has been reduced in price. If the price was reduced in February, has been empty since around that time, and she's only just listed it, it does look like the plan was to sell.
If anything, it's a competence issue. Given her role, and the legislation going through Parliament, it seems daft that she didn't just wait the extra few weeks.
"Blackadder star Tony Robinson vents anger over ‘heightism’ The 5ft 4in actor says shorter than average frame has been a problem in life as debate rages over dating apps’ height filter"
Productivity levels in March and April will fall off a cliff.
The only game I was motivated to go out and buy on it’s release was Championship Manager 97/98
I spent many a happy hour playing that. Taking over Aston Villa, selling all their good players and signing kids on 8 year contracts and managing teams like Hartlepool to the champions league.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I'll bite slightly now. If people use "slumlord" it usually tells you more about the person using the term. It is a flag for dogmatic and hostile eg Generation Rent. Max is ideologically opposed to rental. I'm not sure why; one would hope an ardent capitalist would support free housing markets; I have not heard him argue for nationalisation of eg Grainger plc who are a rental business.
The Rushanara Ali property seems to be 8, Blondin Street, London E3 2TR, a 4/5 bed townhouse. Market rental value seems to be about £4350 per month (based on one currently advertised there as 4/5 bed) *. The previous rent of £3300 seems to be around 25% below market, which seems exceptional given that it is stated to be a fairly recent tenancy; they had a bloody good deal (which might be why they are cross at losing it and maybe thought she would cave) - absent something exceptional. 4 people, five bed (one small), 2 bath, 2 reception - 24ft kitchen-diner, and a lounge. Zoopla details of this house from 2014 are below **.
The increased advertised rent of £4000 per month seems to still be ~8-10% below market, which seems OK given that she is being up front that it is a tenancy-to-sale so not years long.
Value is £800k, so at £3300 that is £40k or 5% gross return, or 6.25% at the new rental. Which is OK for London - a big chunk will go on license etc and management, and decorating / maintenance, but it should be fine with a 2014 mortgage. It's a nice house and a good choice. After costs yield will be 3-4+% on those numbers if mortgage free.
Productivity levels in March and April will fall off a cliff.
The only game I was motivated to go out and buy on it’s release was Championship Manager 97/98
I spent many a happy hour playing that. Taking over Aston Villa, selling all their good players and signing kids on 8 year contracts and managing teams like Hartlepool to the champions league.
I wasted far too many hours on Championship Manager. But Completed It Mate.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
Fuck me, get rid of the shelf unit. It may be artisanly crafted from Finnish birch but it looks Ikea laminate all the way.
You’re not wrong. That is indeed IKEA
I’ve realised that one of the problems of a big refurb is that once you upgrade one wall or room or whatever, then it exposes everything else. And you have to upgrade all that as well
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
I've been flagged for this, lol
Now unflagged. So, not only pathetic, but cowardly and pathetic - but also entertaining. Who was it? @bondegezou? @kinabalu? Someone else ending in oo? You?
Come off it. I don't flag. Not even the most racist of your racist posts have ever driven me to that.
Flagging is the act of a pitiful poltroon, and whatever else I may think of you (much of it exaggerated on here for my personal entertainment) no, I don't take you for a poltroon, let alone a pitiful one. So, fair enough
I remember Doug Seal calling you a pontificating poltroon. Very strong post that was.
That crazy dude in Scotland, @jonquil or something. Hated motorbikes. Total meltdown, spectacular but sad. Hope he's OK
And Mister Seal, who came back recently for a bit and seemed OK. Ins'allah
Plato went off the deep end while posting here and the ghost of ..... (Can't remember the name) did and I think got banned.
You couldn't even type Martin without your post getting binned at one time during the MartinDay saga I kept slagging off Martine McCutcheon for some reason and couldn't work out for ages why my posts were disappearing
lol!
I love hearing old PB lore. It's like a folk history of an aural culture. It's never written down but the Elders Remember
Who else in the world will understand the term "Swissnick"? Only us
Baxtered, lagershed, gaylording ponceyboots, Martin Day, Martin Croxall arrested on telly, farmy farm, Creases, the Finland Rumour, on it goes. Lovely
Never forgetting "Ed Is Crap Is PM" which we had to read every day for about 5 years.
I've been commenting here so long I used to openly comment from brothels. I'd mention how surprisingly good the wifi was, and no one batted an eyelid
I'd probably get arrested just for saying "brothels" now, and PB would be taken down by the Online Safety Gestapo
You have definitely become more edgy or provocative. You probably don't remember but we used to discus things 20 plus years ago and without any of the currant nonsense. I remember a discussion on religion where we were on very opposite side and there was not a single insult from you. Of course it might be me that ha changed.
I really haven't changed. Or: I've mellowed if anything
I used to go into insane rants of insulting verbiage, these days I rein it in. Turned into an old softy, that's me
I used to be wild, now I talk about interior decorating
Must be me then.
Actually, you may have a point. What you are possibly detecting is a specific thing: anger
I am softer personally, and mellowed in behaviour, but I am politically angrier than I used to be, about the state of Britain. But what sane person isn't??
This anger is not aimed at other PB-ers, and if it comes across as that, I apologise
No apology necessary. In fact thinking about it I do remember you having exciting conversations with others, although I can't remember any details, but never with me. It was always cordial. That's not the case now, but then it's fair to say I do egg you on and probably didn't then, so I think it is fair to say I am probably partly responsible. Whether that is due to you being more provocative or me being more so I don't know.
I recall Leon and Plato having conversations, but can't remember whether most of them were happy or annoyed.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
Fuck me, get rid of the shelf unit. It may be artisanly crafted from Finnish birch but it looks Ikea laminate all the way.
You’re not wrong. That is indeed IKEA
I’ve realised that one of the problems of a big refurb is that once you upgrade one wall or room or whatever, then it exposes everything else. And you have to upgrade all that as well
The IKEA unit is doomed
Danish mid century teak should do it, probably ruinously expensive in that London mind.
Benjamin Netanyahu's Special Military Operation progresses with him announcing he wants to control all of Gaza.
The military think he is a moron.
The opposition think he is off his rocker.
The public are split, but a significant percentage think he is a plonker.
The courts think he's a crook.
And Hamas probably think he's a hero.
Remember the IDF is a conscript army but does not reflect the population of Israel as a whole. Arabs (21% of the population) are 'exempted'. The world's most moral army or the world's most segregated?
Arabs, Bedouin, and the Druze do serve in the IDF.
Source please.
One important point is that they will be Israeli Arabs, Bedouin and Druze (ie citizens), though many other foreigners serve. I'm familiar with them using Bedouin in desert regions, for example, in reconnaissance from say the 60s, 70s - but I think units in recent decades are now much more integrated.
It's complex. Jewish, Druze or Circassian Israeli Citizens are required to serve. Muslims also do, but a small fraction (20%of pop, 1% of IDF) when I looked it up.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Productivity levels in March and April will fall off a cliff.
The only game I was motivated to go out and buy on it’s release was Championship Manager 97/98
I spent many a happy hour playing that. Taking over Aston Villa, selling all their good players and signing kids on 8 year contracts and managing teams like Hartlepool to the champions league.
I wasted far too many hours on Championship Manager. But Completed It Mate.
Aston Villa...Wasn't Nii Lamptey the wonderkid at Villa on that 97/98 game?
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
I'll come back on your other post later. The problem with eg a 4% surcharge is that it will kill the business stone dead - that's an extra income tax of 50-150%.
What would happen to every business in the country if you put a 50-150% turnover tax on it? Or to you if we introduced a 100% income tax surcharge?
There are sections of the population who require rental - short term contractors, people who need to want to move, people with no capital, people with no credit rating or new in country, people who need short-term placement by refuges, and many others.
"They will just replace the renters" can't and won't happen, for reasons nothing to do with ownership. As a proposal it may be satisfying, but it is hopelessly naive.
"Nigel Farage halves Keir Starmer’s lead in best prime minister poll Only 35% of Britons believe the Labour leader is a better choice than the Reform UK leader as more women warm to Farage" (£)
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
Gopping.
You know they say you should never meet your heroes. Similarly you should never see evidence of a PB poster's much (self-)vaunted taste and style.
Absolutely gopping. Sozza but there it is.
Edit: Arch. Arch is one of the words I'm looking for here. Gauche, arch, naff (I appreciate this last is a word from time gone by).
It’s a surrealist painting by Magritte of a man doffing his trilby in a strange structure with an oculus. Except this is a photo - by me - of the billionaire that gave me the world’s finest ayahuasca in this, his puglian psycho temple in the Balearics and this is an hour before I met God on ayahuasca. So it’s real
I’m sorry if this slightly puts your life in the shade
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Agreed. I grew up in Denmark, where renting was the norm (though selling is getting more common now). I've almost never got into buying anywhere and spent money on other things. The lack of security is the main countervailing factor in the UK for many people - if the landlord can say he's had enough and wants to sel,l you have to move.
"Blackadder star Tony Robinson vents anger over ‘heightism’ The 5ft 4in actor says shorter than average frame has been a problem in life as debate rages over dating apps’ height filter"
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Germany has stored up a lot of problems now though as retirees are grappling with hugely increasing rents and fixed incomes. Owning one's own home is the only real security that a person will have in retirement. It's generally one of the main reasons that any attempt to attack property ownership rights for primary residences is such a huge vote loser in this country. The number one aim of most of my friends is to be mortgage free before they turn 60 if not sooner. Rent puts you at the mercy of someone else, ownership generally doesn't. I'm lucky that we've been able to buy a nice house and that we have options to sell and leave London next year but I could never imagine a scenario where I didn't own my own home, not since I've had the means, not after the awful experiences with landlords that I've had.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
(Sorry - borked the quotes) ------------- Me from here
Yes, but no, but yes. The German system has its own drawbacks, and in many continental systems tenants' rights are heavily constrained in many respects.
One example in Germany is that rentals can be very austere with tenants being responsible for supplying their own kitchen, so they traipse around with fridges and cupboards from rental to rental, or perhaps pay a pile of extra charges:
In Germany, a rental apartment without a kitchen is generally referred to as unfurnished, and it's common for these apartments to be rented without a kitchen, including fixtures and appliances. This means you'll likely need to purchase and install your own kitchen cabinets, sink, stove, and other appliances.
Plus the process can be horrible. It has become more complex / bureaucratic in the UK over time (I rented in 6 areas of London over a number of years), partly due to continual ill-informed meddling by politicians (eg what they did to pet tenancies on the last occasion), but there remains massive flexibility compared to most places on the continent.
The system here in general is far more transparent and regulated more completely than most on the continent.
Productivity levels in March and April will fall off a cliff.
The only game I was motivated to go out and buy on it’s release was Championship Manager 97/98
I spent many a happy hour playing that. Taking over Aston Villa, selling all their good players and signing kids on 8 year contracts and managing teams like Hartlepool to the champions league.
I wasted far too many hours on Championship Manager. But Completed It Mate.
Aston Villa...Wasn't Nii Lamptey the wonderkid at Villa on that 97/98 game?
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
I'll come back on your other post later. The problem with eg a 4% surcharge is that it will kill the business stone dead - that's an extra income tax of 50-150%.
What would happen to every business in the country if you put a 50-150% turnover tax on it? Or to you if we introduced a 100% income tax surcharge?
There are sections of the population who require rental - short term contractors, people who need to want to move, people with no capital, people with no credit rating or new in country, people who need short-term placement by refuges, and many others.
"They will just replace the renters" can't and won't happen, for reasons nothing to do with ownership. As a proposal it may be satisfying, but it is hopelessly naive.
As I said the piggies would squeal for a while because their snouts are being forcibly removed from the trough. Buy to let isn't a business, it's leechcraft dressed up as a business.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
I'll come back on your other post later. The problem with eg a 4% surcharge is that it will kill the business stone dead - that's an extra income tax of 50-150%.
What would happen to every business in the country if you put a 50-150% turnover tax on it? Or to you if we introduced a 100% income tax surcharge?
There are sections of the population who require rental - short term contractors, people who need to want to move, people with no capital, people with no credit rating or new in country, people who need short-term placement by refuges, and many others.
"They will just replace the renters" can't and won't happen, for reasons nothing to do with ownership. As a proposal it may be satisfying, but it is hopelessly naive.
I think renters groups and activist journalists on this issue need to be careful what they wish for as this new law may cause more problems than it solves and yet they still lobby for rent controls.
A couple who are friends of my wife have three properties that are buy to lets. Due to the renters reform bill they served their tenants notice last year, one of whom had been in the house for over a decade, and have turned all three to short term lets. Aimed at contractors and people working away for a period of time. It’s been more profitable and less risky than renting to tenants.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
Gopping.
You know they say you should never meet your heroes. Similarly you should never see evidence of a PB poster's much (self-)vaunted taste and style.
Absolutely gopping. Sozza but there it is.
Edit: Arch. Arch is one of the words I'm looking for here. Gauche, arch, naff (I appreciate this last is a word from time gone by).
It’s a surrealist painting by Magritte of a man doffing his trilby in a strange structure with an oculus. Except this is a photo - by me - of the billionaire that gave me the world’s finest ayahuasca in this, his puglian psycho temple in the Balearics and this is an hour before I met God on ayahuasca. So it’s real
I’m sorry if this slightly puts your life in the shade
I once appeared in an episode of car booty where Richard Arnold pressured me into buying a suit with someone from Little Mix's makeup stain on it. Rather puts your life into the shade.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Germany has stored up a lot of problems now though as retirees are grappling with hugely increasing rents and fixed incomes. Owning one's own home is the only real security that a person will have in retirement. It's generally one of the main reasons that any attempt to attack property ownership rights for primary residences is such a huge vote loser in this country. The number one aim of most of my friends is to be mortgage free before they turn 60 if not sooner. Rent puts you at the mercy of someone else, ownership generally doesn't. I'm lucky that we've been able to buy a nice house and that we have options to sell and leave London next year but I could never imagine a scenario where I didn't own my own home, not since I've had the means, not after the awful experiences with landlords that I've had.
Contracting enabled me to pay my mortgage off in 7 years. I’ve been mortgage free for over a decade.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Germany has stored up a lot of problems now though as retirees are grappling with hugely increasing rents and fixed incomes. Owning one's own home is the only real security that a person will have in retirement. It's generally one of the main reasons that any attempt to attack property ownership rights for primary residences is such a huge vote loser in this country. The number one aim of most of my friends is to be mortgage free before they turn 60 if not sooner. Rent puts you at the mercy of someone else, ownership generally doesn't. I'm lucky that we've been able to buy a nice house and that we have options to sell and leave London next year but I could never imagine a scenario where I didn't own my own home, not since I've had the means, not after the awful experiences with landlords that I've had.
You may not welcome the comment, but I think part of that is down to choosing your landlord to meet your needs, just as for the LL it is down to choosing your tenant to meet your needs.
As an example, in London I lived in Clapham South, City, Walthamstow, South Hampstead, Chiswick Grove Park, and Chiswick nr High Road. I never used a lettings agent, and often used various community networks to find places. Though one I got out of the Evening Standard.
I only once had a problem, and that was a 3 person shared flat where the owner decided I was her forever partner without me noticing a thing, so it ended up with a difficult and abrupt request to leave 28 days before Christmas Day at 28 days notice. It was like being in the Christmas Story and leaving the Inn for Egypt.
On the other side, for example, if I was getting a dog tenant I would not do the standard wash and brush up and mini refurb on the house, and it would be unfurnished, so they can do the painting and the dog rubs on their stuff not mine. So at a stroke there's no need to spend money (that I have to get back from the T) on furniture audits, and as I have not mini-refurbed I can drop the rent by perhaps 3-4%. And dog tenants stay for a long time.
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
The thing to remember is that renting is not necessarily bad. The Germans do pretty well out of it.
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
Germany has stored up a lot of problems now though as retirees are grappling with hugely increasing rents and fixed incomes. Owning one's own home is the only real security that a person will have in retirement. It's generally one of the main reasons that any attempt to attack property ownership rights for primary residences is such a huge vote loser in this country. The number one aim of most of my friends is to be mortgage free before they turn 60 if not sooner. Rent puts you at the mercy of someone else, ownership generally doesn't. I'm lucky that we've been able to buy a nice house and that we have options to sell and leave London next year but I could never imagine a scenario where I didn't own my own home, not since I've had the means, not after the awful experiences with landlords that I've had.
Have you ever heard of 'paragraphs'? Specifically, 'short paragraphs'?
There seems to be a common theme among all the Labour scandals so far, it always unnecessary low level low value greed and telling fibs. Lie about being an economist or a solicitor, lie about losing your phone, lie about where exactly you live, never turn down a freebie, etc.
When you bang on about being different and serving country not party, you surely would think people will be gunning for us on this.
We aren't anywhere near some of much more serious stuff under the Tories, but Labour are getting themselves in a mess over really stupid stuff.
This one seems particularly harsh. If she gave 4 months notice in November, she's only a couple of months short of what the new law will be once the renters rights bill goes through.
The house has apparently been on the market 9 months, and has been reduced in price. If the price was reduced in February, has been empty since around that time, and she's only just listed it, it does look like the plan was to sell.
If anything, it's a competence issue. Given her role, and the legislation going through Parliament, it seems daft that she didn't just wait the extra few weeks.
Assuming your post is correct on the dates it because there is a huge difference between launching to market in April and in June.
Others 7% (including 12% 18 to 29 y.o. and 10% in the London subsample)
Changes from 30th July [Find Out Now, 6th August, N=2,627]
No sign that Reform has peaked. Slow decline of Lab and Con. I have a detailed model by constituency. It currently shows the Tories with just one seat. Harrow East. Lab with 276 seats and Reform with 244. LD with 87.
Sorry. Found a major bug! Swapped the Labour and Tory previous share around! Should be: Lab 137 Con 27 LD 85 Ref 335 Green 9 SNP 35 PC 4 NI 18
I remain a Lib Dem sceptic for 2029. Time will tell. I think Holyrood and the Senedd will be illuminating for the big two ability tk actually turn out voters under extreme pressure and give a bit more of a steer on what 2029 may hold
My guess is that the LDs will hold up in their traditional parts but not elsewhere. In almost every English seat they hold it's a LD v Tory fight. The voters' determination to scatter the Tories to the four winds does not extend to the LDs, nor in LD parts does it extend to a huge love for Reform.
They'll hold a fair few i think but the desire to get the Tories out no longer exists as they are out and I suspect the Tory focus will be blue wall based as they will be totally irrelevant in most of the red wall. As such the general total inefficiency of their vote in 2024 will reverse a little and they'll become a bit more efficient but a lot more patchy and regional. I expect the LDs to be behind the Tories on seats but not too far. 50 LDs, 80 to 100 Tories (current expectation)
Personally, I don't think the Conservatives will be gaining many seats from the LDs, given the LDs are likely to be up a couple of points on their 2024 share, while the Conservatives will have dropped. And it's not like Reform will be egging them on; they'll both be fighting for right of centre votes.
Three and a half years is plenty of time for Reform to crash and burn.
Put them under ome scrutiny. See how they look when their answer to everything is "Er...."
There’s an article in the magnificent Spectator which says 45% of British voters want zero new migrants and a large scale remigration programme (YouGov - if the Spec is quoting correctly)
Half of Britons are of the opinion that got @williamglenn banned on here for being too fash
Like it or not the British have swung wildly to the right on all this and - I suspect - this time they won’t be satisfied with “oh we’ve moved them from hotels to big houses on your street” and “we send back two a week to France. Sometimes”
And remember immigration is now the single most important issue for voters
Do you not see how this pans out? All Farage has to do is promise minimal migration; the end of the boats: the deportation of much of the Boriswave - and he will easily win. That’s it
Everyone has now belatedly realised that many of our other problems stem directly from obscene levels of net immigration
Everyone has realised that the huge increase in immigration has given wrong uns the opportunity to blame immigration for the government's many failings.
You were claiming the other day that I was an interior decorating fool for putting my own photos on my wall, not art, as I do up my flat
This is just one corner of my new living room
Top right is a photo with no colour filter. It’s a woman serving me a gin and tonic in Nashville Tennessee. Halfway through a fucking amazing roadtrip I did from Nashville down to Natchez then to New Orleans. Epic
Bottom left is a photo of the billionaire (doffing his hat) who gave me ayahuasca. That’s taken in his special “ayahuasca taking” pyramid-dome, with the oculus, on the Balearics
We are about to sit down and consume little cups of the sacred vine. An hour after this photo I was chatting with God about global warming
Now, who the feck wants someone else’s stupid art on the wall when I can have THAT
Gopping.
You know they say you should never meet your heroes. Similarly you should never see evidence of a PB poster's much (self-)vaunted taste and style.
Absolutely gopping. Sozza but there it is.
Edit: Arch. Arch is one of the words I'm looking for here. Gauche, arch, naff (I appreciate this last is a word from time gone by).
It’s a surrealist painting by Magritte of a man doffing his trilby in a strange structure with an oculus. Except this is a photo - by me - of the billionaire that gave me the world’s finest ayahuasca in this, his puglian psycho temple in the Balearics and this is an hour before I met God on ayahuasca. So it’s real
I’m sorry if this slightly puts your life in the shade
I once appeared in an episode of car booty where Richard Arnold pressured me into buying a suit with someone from Little Mix's makeup stain on it. Rather puts your life into the shade.
I have such a good story to tell. But it needs illustration. Depends if I can get away with more than one photo
Yep. The actual sequencing looks fine, the optics dreadful.
It's the fact her government is currently outlawing exactly what she did which makes it super awks.
Really? I didn't see that bit. She gave due 4 months notice - are the govt going to change that?
They are outlawing the ability to kick people out then relist for higher rents until I believe you have waited 6 months.
ah ok - so 4 months plus 6 months.
Seems super intrusive whatever it is telling landlords what they can or can't do with their properties.
Well that is our current government answer to most things.
I think Rushnara (sp?) Ali is basically in the clear on this one, and I'm not really sure why quite so many have jumped on this unless they have not done their homework. "Homelessness Minister" may have been too juicy a headline.
GB News are really shouting about it, but imo are as silly as usual. A complaint to Ofcom could be funny.
The previous guy with his behind-the-business block of flats was vulnerable, and I think with research there were (and maybe are) probably a few other targets around on the Lab benches.
Some interventions are winding up around Article 4 Planning Directives and Home Office lettings of HMOs. I'm hearing noises from Broxtowe. I'm not sure how that will play out, because they seem to be looking at versions of some of the restrictive licensing done by eg Nottingham City and London Boroughs, which is very complicated to run. I'm not sure if too many District Councils are up to running that stuff.
Oh look the slum lord defending other slum lords. The only thing I hoped Labour would do is put all of you out of business, I've been disappointed just the same as everything else Labour have failed to do.
If Labour are to raise taxes I hope they target slum lords. A 4% value surcharge per year should be good, wipe out all rental yield and turn as many as possible into forced sellers or face bankruptcy.
How would they define a Slum lord ?
Any landlord. They're all pretty scummy. Look at this Labour MP, she's not the only scummy landlord out there, this is just normal behaviour for them.
Would that even apply to the likes of Legal and General who have built flats to let to generate a regular income ?
I always got the impression MattW was pretty responsible.
I have no issue with build to let, that's still a high risk investment. Scummers buying existing property, pushing up prices for owner occupiers and ripping off young people, fouling up areas with HMOs should absolutely be put out of business and in the most brutal way possible, hopefully holding huge losses and paying 40% CGT on any forced sales they have to make to stem losses.
There's no such thing as a reasonable landlord when it comes to existing property and buy to let, they are all various shades of scum leeching off younger generations, providing no real value to the economy. I see no difference between them and the private equity leeches who load up existing companies with debt and pay themselves fabulous dividends while allowing the asset to fall into ruin. The only difference is that property in the UK is a one way bet so they can leave it to rot and still take huge capital gain plus rinse the tenants for every penny they have.
I've moved in with my partner and rent out my flat to a friend (at below market price, enough to cover my mortgage and expenses). It makes perfect financial sense because it's safe, the value is rocketing, there's a tax allowance for part of the mortgage and expenses, and it's a simple way for me to go 50:50 with partner when the time comes.
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
Indeed, hence my suggestion of a 4% annual surcharge for rental properties for buy to let and a non transferable 25-40 year zero rate for build to let. It would turn the slum lords into forced sellers and force them to either invest the money into higher risk equities or higher risk build to let projects. The piggies would squeal for a while but it's time to destroy the sector once and for all. I'd hoped Labour would step up but as with everything they do they're just a big disappointment.
I'll come back on your other post later. The problem with eg a 4% surcharge is that it will kill the business stone dead - that's an extra income tax of 50-150%.
What would happen to every business in the country if you put a 50-150% turnover tax on it? Or to you if we introduced a 100% income tax surcharge?
There are sections of the population who require rental - short term contractors, people who need to want to move, people with no capital, people with no credit rating or new in country, people who need short-term placement by refuges, and many others.
"They will just replace the renters" can't and won't happen, for reasons nothing to do with ownership. As a proposal it may be satisfying, but it is hopelessly naive.
I think renters groups and activist journalists on this issue need to be careful what they wish for as this new law may cause more problems than it solves and yet they still lobby for rent controls.
A couple who are friends of my wife have three properties that are buy to lets. Due to the renters reform bill they served their tenants notice last year, one of whom had been in the house for over a decade, and have turned all three to short term lets. Aimed at contractors and people working away for a period of time. It’s been more profitable and less risky than renting to tenants.
I stopped debating this publicly in a big way a decade ago. It's a complex debate and the 'campaigners' are mainly London based (informed only by London problems) and have not got a clue.
OTOH, there was heavy reform along current lines in Scotland around 2015, and that has mainly been successful. One of the things that needs to be taken out of the English market, or made less prominent, is money men being disincentivised to treat it as a make-money-now-and-bugger-the-tenant thing (again a London problem in large measure), and to tip the balance of advantage to the provision of long-term homes for long-term tenants.
As an example, one of my properties has a safe off road route to a primary school, and is a very high quality but resilient refurb so cheap to run, so my ideal tenants would be with kids aged about 3-4, and I would design a below market rental level based on an aim that they stay until the youngest kid leaves primary school (ie 7-10 years), and look after it because it is so good, and perhaps buy their own place once they are over the cost bulge of baby/toddler kit and have saved up.
As it happens it is also an accessible bungalow, and the current Ts are a couple in their 70s - one disabled - who asked about it when their LL across the street was selling up. When we had the conversation they said they plan to stay until one of them passes away. We are currently talking about changing the airing cupboard into a walk-in shower, as one is getting too frail to use a bath, and it is a high quality fitout and I don't want to gut it.
Reform finally have a hold of a held seat - a very comfortable ine in Easington DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208 Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523 Hood, Chris (Independent) 520 Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179 Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60 Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47 Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27 Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
I had a drink with an old pal today, who told me his ethnically Chinese wife is almost certainly going to vote Reform, and his Anglo-Chinese daughter - in her mid 20s - is also tempted
Both very middle class, live on the fringes of Richmond (on Thames). If people like this are tempted by Reform then we are in terra incognita
Reform finally have a hold of a held seat - a very comfortable ine in Easington DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208 Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523 Hood, Chris (Independent) 520 Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179 Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60 Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47 Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27 Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
There seems to be a common theme among all the Labour scandals so far, it always unnecessary low level low value greed and telling fibs. Lie about being an economist or a solicitor, lie about losing your phone, lie about where exactly you live, never turn down a freebie, etc.
When you bang on about being different and serving country not party, you surely would think people will be gunning for us on this.
We aren't anywhere near some of much more serious stuff under the Tories, but Labour are getting themselves in a mess over really stupid stuff.
This one seems particularly harsh. If she gave 4 months notice in November, she's only a couple of months short of what the new law will be once the renters rights bill goes through.
The house has apparently been on the market 9 months, and has been reduced in price. If the price was reduced in February, has been empty since around that time, and she's only just listed it, it does look like the plan was to sell.
If anything, it's a competence issue. Given her role, and the legislation going through Parliament, it seems daft that she didn't just wait the extra few weeks.
Assuming your post is correct on the dates it because there is a huge difference between launching to market in April and in June.
My interpretation of the notice is that the first set of tenants were perhaps in their 12 month starting fixed period, and she said "I'm selling it at the end" at month 7 or 8, and said "you can stay on whilst it sells on a rolling tenancy" (which is the legal default), and they did not like that - perhaps because they were expecting either another 12 month fixed term, or were wanting to stay for several years.
I think she mucked up her comms and tenant relationship. I'd surmise that she maybe let an agent handle it, who treated it as a routine thing, where it needed some personal TLC and flexibility.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Reform finally have a hold of a held seat - a very comfortable ine in Easington DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208 Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523 Hood, Chris (Independent) 520 Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179 Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60 Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47 Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27 Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
I’d have been astonished if they’d lost this one.
Yep, very little change on May, very small swing to Labour (about 2%)
Reform finally have a hold of a held seat - a very comfortable ine in Easington DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208 Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523 Hood, Chris (Independent) 520 Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179 Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60 Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47 Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27 Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
I’d have been astonished if they’d lost this one.
It's actually the first time they've held a seat since the May elections.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
About as upper-working class and white as you can get. Not poor at all, but not wealthy either. A lot of bungalows which is usually a sign of Reform strength.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
About as upper-working class and white as you can get. Not poor at all, but not wealthy either. A lot of bungalows which is usually a sign of Reform strength.
Interesting!
It would be genuinel;y fascinating to map British voting patterns to domestic architecture. Someone should do it. I had no idea "bungalows = Reform"
Reform finally have a hold of a held seat - a very comfortable ine in Easington DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208 Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523 Hood, Chris (Independent) 520 Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179 Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60 Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47 Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27 Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
Tories, LibDedms and Greens combined are well behind the third of three Independent candidates!
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
One of the downsides of getting rid of the hereditaries, the only ones who had any experience outside of politics!
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
Starmer was a QC, barrister and head of the CPS. Kemi studied Computer Systems Engineering and was a software engineer and systems analyst before election. Farage never went to university and was a stockbroker. Indeed only Ed Davey of the main UK wide parties studied PPE and while he worked as a LD economics researcher even Davey did a few years in the private sector as a management consultant
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
One of the downsides of getting rid of the hereditaries, the only ones who had any experience outside of politics!
Will Farage bring back some of the hereditary peers?
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
Starmer was a QC, barrister and head of the CPS. Kemi studied Computer Systems Engineering and was a software engineer and systems analyst before election. Farage never went to university and was a stockbroker. Indeed only Ed Davey of the main UK wide parties studied PPE
I didn't say all, I said too many. We have a cabinet without a single one of them has ever setup or run a business of any kind, a chancellor who has lied about her CV because her experience isn't as great as she would like people to know, a business secretary who falsely claimed to be a solicitor and a technology minister who expertise is in foreign aid.
I had a drink with an old pal today, who told me his ethnically Chinese wife is almost certainly going to vote Reform, and his Anglo-Chinese daughter - in her mid 20s - is also tempted
Both very middle class, live on the fringes of Richmond (on Thames). If people like this are tempted by Reform then we are in terra incognita
Chinese westerners often vote for very rightwing parties, if they have escaped Communist China they want low tax and small state government and they also are not usually in favour of significant numbers of Muslim immigrants for example
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
One of the downsides of getting rid of the hereditaries, the only ones who had any experience outside of politics!
Will Farage bring back some of the hereditary peers?
No, Farage voted for the LD amendment for a fully elected upper house
I had a drink with an old pal today, who told me his ethnically Chinese wife is almost certainly going to vote Reform, and his Anglo-Chinese daughter - in her mid 20s - is also tempted
Both very middle class, live on the fringes of Richmond (on Thames). If people like this are tempted by Reform then we are in terra incognita
Chinese westerners often vote for very rightwing parties, if they have escaped Communist China they want low tax and small state government and they also are not usually in favour of significant numbers of Muslim immigrants for example
A fair point. We need more Chinese immigrants. Fewer of “the others”
Sort of on topic. You wonder why we have a problem with politicians in this country...
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
Starmer was a QC, barrister and head of the CPS. Kemi studied Computer Systems Engineering and was a software engineer and systems analyst before election. Farage never went to university and was a stockbroker. Indeed only Ed Davey of the main UK wide parties studied PPE
I didn't say all, I said too many. We have a cabinet without a single one of them has ever setup or run a business of any kind, a chancellor who has lied about her CV because her experience isn't as great as she would like people to know, a business secretary who falsely claimed to be a solicitor and a technology minister who expertise is in foreign aid.
That is as it is a Labour government. Socialist and social democratic governments by definition are sceptical of business, even downright hostile to it in some parts as they want to tax it more to fund an expanded public sector and welfare state and regulate and unionise it heavily to protect the workers.
Plenty of Tories like Hunt and Stride set up and ran their own businesses
Not a good start, I asked it to check some code I wrote based upon an academic paper (which I know is correct as I have the reference implementation) and it started telling me I had things wrong which aren't. And talked absolute bullshit about something that is very clear in the paper.
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
Move over Nick Clegg and Leon, it looks like Prince Andrew could even give Casanova, Warren Beatty, JFK and Julio Iglesias a run for his money in terms of numbers of lovers.
'When William comes to power, Andrew will be toast. He sees him as a liability to the monarchy and Andrew has not always been very polite about Catherine. William is very protective of his wife', the author and journalist said.
Speaking to Palace Confidential host Jo Elvin, Mr Lownie believes Andrew has had between 1,000 and 3,000 lovers and viewed himself as a sex God because women 'threw themselves' at him.
But this led to the Duke of York being blackmailed by Jeffrey Epstein and also made him an 'easy target' for hostile foreign states, Mr Lownie claims.
'Jeffrey Epstein provided women and course then used it to blackmail people and Andrew, I'm afraid, fell into that honey trap, not just with Epstein but many other people as well', he said.'
I had a drink with an old pal today, who told me his ethnically Chinese wife is almost certainly going to vote Reform, and his Anglo-Chinese daughter - in her mid 20s - is also tempted
Both very middle class, live on the fringes of Richmond (on Thames). If people like this are tempted by Reform then we are in terra incognita
Chinese westerners often vote for very rightwing parties, if they have escaped Communist China they want low tax and small state government and they also are not usually in favour of significant numbers of Muslim immigrants for example
A fair point. We need more Chinese immigrants. Fewer of “the others”
A discussion about the diversity amongst immigrants
Not a good start, I asked it to check some code I wrote based upon an academic paper (which I know is correct as I have the reference implementation) and it started telling me I had things wrong which aren't. And talked absolute bullshit about something that is very clear in the paper.
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
(Imitates Spinal Tap)
But don't you understand, it goes up to 5! 5 is better than 4, yeah?
Not a good start, I asked it to check some code I wrote based upon an academic paper (which I know is correct as I have the reference implementation) and it started telling me I had things wrong which aren't. And talked absolute bullshit about something that is very clear in the paper.
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
(Imitates Spinal Tap)
But don't you understand, it goes up to 5! 5 is better than 4, yeah?
Not a good start, I asked it to check some code I wrote based upon an academic paper (which I know is correct as I have the reference implementation) and it started telling me I had things wrong which aren't. And talked absolute bullshit about something that is very clear in the paper.
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
It’s getting trashed on Reddit. Yet Ethan Mollick loves it
How weird I have try to chat to it about some very mathematical / technical subject and it asked me do I like its personality. Its talking bullshit again BTW.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
About as upper-working class and white as you can get. Not poor at all, but not wealthy either. A lot of bungalows which is usually a sign of Reform strength.
Interesting!
It would be genuinel;y fascinating to map British voting patterns to domestic architecture. Someone should do it. I had no idea "bungalows = Reform"
I assume it's a confounder for ages and/or retirement status.
Not a good start, I asked it to check some code I wrote based upon an academic paper (which I know is correct as I have the reference implementation) and it started telling me I had things wrong which aren't. And talked absolute bullshit about something that is very clear in the paper.
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
It’s getting trashed on Reddit. Yet Ethan Mollick loves it
I reserve judgement. Let us know your experience?
I saw your post where you were saying you were planning to drive your oldest daughter up to St Andrews in September, where has the time gone? I still remember you posting here as an expectant first time Dad back in the early days of PB.
It would be probably fatal if Ukraine became a candidate member in the vaguest way.
Ukraine has been a candidate since 1994 and has been stuck at stage 3 out of 6 of the accession process since 2005. Although they did try to skip Stage 4 (Membership Application Plan) in 2022 and got told to get fucked by Biden.
Doesn't sound good for GPT5. I'll have a go tomorrow.
I haven't tried it working with prose yet. I do need to rewrite some documents, so I will give that a go. See if it is still far too over-excitable and inserts - , - , -, -, into everything.
They have taken away my access. Seems our AI overlords are listening into PB.
I thought Kemi was very impressive on TV last evening in the interview with Amol Rajan. It's just a shame she's on 17% in the polls. Not sure what she can do to turn it around.
It still also fails for the ask it a well known riddle e.g. the farmer with the fox, the grain, etc, but don't mention anything about having to use boat and it still goes off on telling the solution that you will find on wikipedia.
I thought Kemi was very impressive on TV last evening in the interview with Amol Rajan. It's just a shame she's on 17% in the polls. Not sure what she can do to turn it around.
Kemi is definitely growing into the role of main Opposition leader as her performances at PMQs showed in the run up to recess, she is certainly doing the ground work and leaving the stunts to Robert Jenrick and others in the Shadow Cabinet. I like her, I voted for her and I think that far too many people are underestimating her. Being the new leader of a party so brutally punished at the last GE means that its going to take time and a lot of effort before the electorate are prepared to even give you a hearing again and that isn't going to change even if you replace the current new leader right now. If anything, it would just be another reminder of why the Conservatives lost the last GE.
I am not surprised that you found her quite impressive in that interview last night, she comes across well in that type of format. There has definitely been some changes behind the scenes to her PMQs prep and her media operation and its already starting to show. Kemi Badenoch is quite refreshing in that she says it as it is, but the key is going to be whether she can cut through and get that hearing from the electorate over the next couple of years. I doubt he would be interested in a return to Conservative party politics, but persuading George Osborne to take on a role as a political/comms adviser to her Office would be a very smart move.
The government’s proposed levy on international student fees could cost universities in England more than £600m a year if it goes ahead, a study has found.
The 6% surcharge on tuition fees paid by overseas students, floated in the Home Office’s recent immigration white paper, would particularly hit leading universities such as University College London (UCL) and the University of Manchester, based on the figures compiled by the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi).
The policy would leave universities in a difficult decision over whether to pass on the cost of the levy to students or absorb some or all of it from the fees they charged, in effect cutting their income.
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
Btw I wonder if GPT5 is struggling because of overwhelming demand. I’m using 4.1 right now and it’s slow and dumb - could be that OpenAI’s compute power is being hammered
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
Btw I wonder if GPT5 is struggling because of overwhelming demand. I’m using 4.1 right now and it’s slow and dumb - could be that OpenAI’s compute power is being hammered
It would explain the speed, but not the inference. Its also failing variants of the "strawberry" test,
"how many r's are there in molecular"
The word "molecular" has two r’s — one in “molecular” and one in “r” at the end.
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
About as upper-working class and white as you can get. Not poor at all, but not wealthy either. A lot of bungalows which is usually a sign of Reform strength.
Evidence excluded from the trial as prejudicial...
Mushroom murderer's alleged attempts to kill husband revealed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy3ngr2n3vo ...In lengthy (pre trial) hearings last year, he had detailed what he suspected was a years-long campaign to kill him with tainted food. The court heard that one poisoning attempt left Mr Patterson so ill he spent weeks in a coma and his family was told to say their goodbyes twice. He told the court that Patterson had tried to kill him with a curry, a wrap, Bolognese pasta, and even with chocolate cookies she claimed their daughter had made him. He became suspicious so started making notes, realising he often became sick when she fed him, the court heard. Mr Patterson shared his suspicions with a couple of relatives - including, critically, his father Don Patterson - then a GP, but didn't take things further. He said he thought he was the only one in danger - and this is why he refused to come to the lunch. When his parents became desperately ill, though, Mr Paterson pulled his relatives into the hospital chapel and told them he suspected his estranged wife had been trying to poison him for years. Police believed rat poison may have been used on at least one occasion, the pre-trial hearings were told.
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
They ought to be getting cricket back imo.
They have the Hundred....but when BBC show it, Sky also stream their coverage free on YouTube, so its a no-brainer which to watch.
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
Btw I wonder if GPT5 is struggling because of overwhelming demand. I’m using 4.1 right now and it’s slow and dumb - could be that OpenAI’s compute power is being hammered
It would explain the speed, but not the inference. Its also failing variants of the "strawberry" test,
"how many r's are there in molecular"
The word "molecular" has two r’s — one in “molecular” and one in “r” at the end.
This sounds bizarrely bad. Quite strange
I didn’t watch it but I heard the livestream was very lame, and apparently the graphs used to show benchmarks were comically wrong
This is a company worth (as was) £300bn. wtf?
I wonder if they have been unnerved by DeepMind on one side and the Chinese on the other, plus Zuckerberg buying all the possible talent
The government’s proposed levy on international student fees could cost universities in England more than £600m a year if it goes ahead, a study has found.
The 6% surcharge on tuition fees paid by overseas students, floated in the Home Office’s recent immigration white paper, would particularly hit leading universities such as University College London (UCL) and the University of Manchester, based on the figures compiled by the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi).
The policy would leave universities in a difficult decision over whether to pass on the cost of the levy to students or absorb some or all of it from the fees they charged, in effect cutting their income.
Netanyahu's office has released a statement detailing the approved plans to occupy Gaza City and "five principles for ending the war," which it says the cabinet adopted by majority vote.
"The IDF will prepare to take control of Gaza City while providing humanitarian aid to the civilian population outside the combat zones," it says, detailing the following principles for "ending the war":
Disarmament of Hamas. Return of all hostages - both living and dead. Demilitarization of the Gaza Strip. Israeli security control over the Gaza Strip. The existence of an alternative civilian government that is not Hamas or the Palestinian Authority.
I was travelling round this ward this afternoon and predicted Reform would get over 50%. Almost tailer-made territory for them. Interesting fact is that the ward almost reaches 1,000 feet since it's next to Cannock Chase itself.
Why tailor-made? White working class?
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
About as upper-working class and white as you can get. Not poor at all, but not wealthy either. A lot of bungalows which is usually a sign of Reform strength.
Interesting!
It would be genuinel;y fascinating to map British voting patterns to domestic architecture. Someone should do it. I had no idea "bungalows = Reform"
Even in the 2005GE and GE2010 elections, when I was campaigning for the Conservatives in Eastleigh and Southampton, areas with bungalows and fixed homes often had a good canvass - and immigration came up a lot.
Charity rowing crew mistaken for ‘illegal migrants’ by Rupert Lowe
A charity rowing crew was contacted by the coastguard near Great Yarmouth after Rupert Lowe mistook them for “illegal migrants”.
Mr Lowe, elected as a Reform UK MP but now sitting as an Independent, posted a picture on Instagram on Thursday night showing a boat near some wind turbines off the Norfolk coast.
He included the message: “Dinghies coming into Great Yarmouth, RIGHT NOW.
“Authorities alerted, and I am urgently chasing. If these are illegal migrants, I will be using every tool at my disposal to ensure these individuals are deported.
“Enough is enough. Britain needs mass deportations. NOW.”
Comments
https://x.com/kobeissiletter/status/1953563253663203813?s=61
One of the two.
The Rushanara Ali property seems to be 8, Blondin Street, London E3 2TR, a 4/5 bed townhouse. Market rental value seems to be about £4350 per month (based on one currently advertised there as 4/5 bed) *. The previous rent of £3300 seems to be around 25% below market, which seems exceptional given that it is stated to be a fairly recent tenancy; they had a bloody good deal (which might be why they are cross at losing it and maybe thought she would cave) - absent something exceptional. 4 people, five bed (one small), 2 bath, 2 reception - 24ft kitchen-diner, and a lounge. Zoopla details of this house from 2014 are below **.
The increased advertised rent of £4000 per month seems to still be ~8-10% below market, which seems OK given that she is being up front that it is a tenancy-to-sale so not years long.
Value is £800k, so at £3300 that is £40k or 5% gross return, or 6.25% at the new rental. Which is OK for London - a big chunk will go on license etc and management, and decorating / maintenance, but it should be fine with a 2014 mortgage. It's a nice house and a good choice. After costs yield will be 3-4+% on those numbers if mortgage free.
* https://www.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/67994004
** https://www.zoopla.co.uk/property-history/8-blondin-street/london/e3-2tr/31999344/ (Need to log in eg with Google)
1. Yvette Cooper today uttering the phrase "France is a safe country".
2. Reform UK averaging 30% in the polls for the first time.
The 5ft 4in actor says shorter than average frame has been a problem in life as debate rages over dating apps’ height filter"
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/aug/07/blackadder-star-tony-robinson-vents-anger-over-heightism
I'm what some people call an "accidental" landlord - I didn't intend to let it out when I bought it. What some people don't understand is that if there was a property tax I'd have sold it immediately, opening a flat up to a first time buyer. Even worse, SDLT (stamp duty) would mean that selling and buying again later* would cost me a small fortune in tax. So the entire system is set up to make renting it out the best option because each house transaction is so ridiculously expensive.
*In the event my relationship collapses.
The house has apparently been on the market 9 months, and has been reduced in price. If the price was reduced in February, has been empty since around that time, and she's only just listed it, it does look like the plan was to sell.
If anything, it's a competence issue. Given her role, and the legislation going through Parliament, it seems daft that she didn't just wait the extra few weeks.
Swings and roundabouts (child sized obviously).
"Farage is right, don't vote for him" isn't a recipe for electoral success.
I spent many a happy hour playing that. Taking over Aston Villa, selling all their good players and signing kids on 8 year contracts and managing teams like Hartlepool to the champions league.
ANyway.... Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Pfft....
I’ve realised that one of the problems of a big refurb is that once you upgrade one wall or room or whatever, then it exposes everything else. And you have to upgrade all that as well
The IKEA unit is doomed
It's complex. Jewish, Druze or Circassian Israeli Citizens are required to serve. Muslims also do, but a small fraction (20%of pop, 1% of IDF) when I looked it up.
There's a lot in Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces
What I haven't worked out is whether such a tax (or a simple property tax) might actually lead us to mirror that system, because suddenly the market is for somewhere nice to live, rather than the most important financial asset in most people's lives. If the rental market can deliver the former then there is no need for anyone to actually own a house in the first place, except perhaps as a broad investment in a company that provides high-quality rentals.
What would happen to every business in the country if you put a 50-150% turnover tax on it? Or to you if we introduced a 100% income tax surcharge?
There are sections of the population who require rental - short term contractors, people who need to want to move, people with no capital, people with no credit rating or new in country, people who need short-term placement by refuges, and many others.
"They will just replace the renters" can't and won't happen, for reasons nothing to do with ownership. As a proposal it may be satisfying, but it is hopelessly naive.
Only 35% of Britons believe the Labour leader is a better choice than the Reform UK leader as more women warm to Farage" (£)
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/latest-poll-farage-starmer-reform-kfthf7vvw
I’m sorry if this slightly puts your life in the shade
The system here in general is far more transparent and regulated more completely than most on the continent.
Taribo West in a free was a must have.
A couple who are friends of my wife have three properties that are buy to lets. Due to the renters reform bill they served their tenants notice last year, one of whom had been in the house for over a decade, and have turned all three to short term lets. Aimed at contractors and people working away for a period of time. It’s been more profitable and less risky than renting to tenants.
A breed I thought was dead. But no. Like Amy Winehouse meets Barbara Windsor with a dash of Streisand
https://www.jazzwise.com/features/article/emma-smith-interview-on-meshuga-baby-her-jewish-heritage-and-how-she-s-had-to-deal-with-the-misogyny-that-s-still-rife-in-the-jazz-world
More importantly, Soho was buzzing. Absolutely heaving. Perhaps London is not doomed
I don’t regret it at all.
As an example, in London I lived in Clapham South, City, Walthamstow, South Hampstead, Chiswick Grove Park, and Chiswick nr High Road. I never used a lettings agent, and often used various community networks to find places. Though one I got out of the Evening Standard.
I only once had a problem, and that was a 3 person shared flat where the owner decided I was her forever partner without me noticing a thing, so it ended up with a difficult and abrupt request to leave 28 days before Christmas Day at 28 days notice. It was like being in the Christmas Story and leaving the Inn for Egypt.
On the other side, for example, if I was getting a dog tenant I would not do the standard wash and brush up and mini refurb on the house, and it would be unfurnished, so they can do the painting and the dog rubs on their stuff not mine. So at a stroke there's no need to spend money (that I have to get back from the T) on furniture audits, and as I have not mini-refurbed I can drop the rent by perhaps 3-4%. And dog tenants stay for a long time.
Ukip got 5 votes and beat TUSC who got....... 1!
Hednesford Green Heath (Cannock Chase) Council By-Election Result:
➡️ RFM: 51.5% (+31.8)
🌹 LAB: 22.6% (-18.6)
🌳 CON: 12.4% (-13.1)
🌍 GRN: 9.9% (-0.3)
🙋 Ind: 3.0% (New)
💷 UKIP: 0.5% (New)
🧑🔧 TUSC: 0.1% (New)
No Ind (-3.5) as previous.
Reform GAIN from Labour.
Changes w/ 2024.
OTOH, there was heavy reform along current lines in Scotland around 2015, and that has mainly been successful. One of the things that needs to be taken out of the English market, or made less prominent, is money men being disincentivised to treat it as a make-money-now-and-bugger-the-tenant thing (again a London problem in large measure), and to tip the balance of advantage to the provision of long-term homes for long-term tenants.
As an example, one of my properties has a safe off road route to a primary school, and is a very high quality but resilient refurb so cheap to run, so my ideal tenants would be with kids aged about 3-4, and I would design a below market rental level based on an aim that they stay until the youngest kid leaves primary school (ie 7-10 years), and look after it because it is so good, and perhaps buy their own place once they are over the cost bulge of baby/toddler kit and have saved up.
As it happens it is also an accessible bungalow, and the current Ts are a couple in their 70s - one disabled - who asked about it when their LL across the street was selling up. When we had the conversation they said they plan to stay until one of them passes away. We are currently talking about changing the airing cupboard into a walk-in shower, as one is getting too frail to use a bath, and it is a high quality fitout and I don't want to gut it.
DURHAM Easington and Shotton
Penders, Louise Anne (Reform UK) 1,208
Surtees, Angela (Labour Party) 523
Hood, Chris (Independent) 520
Cochrane, Ivan (Independent) 179
Ashfield, Stephen James (Green Party) 60
Stubbs, Tony (The Conservative Party Candidate) 47
Okuchukwu, Chukwuka (Liberal Democrats) 27
Childs, Arlene Helen (Independent) 23
I had a drink with an old pal today, who told me his ethnically Chinese wife is almost certainly going to vote Reform, and his Anglo-Chinese daughter - in her mid 20s - is also tempted
Both very middle class, live on the fringes of Richmond (on Thames). If people like this are tempted by Reform then we are in terra incognita
I think she mucked up her comms and tenant relationship. I'd surmise that she maybe let an agent handle it, who treated it as a routine thing, where it needed some personal TLC and flexibility.
I went there a couple of years ago and it seemed moderately prosperous, not down at heel post industrial Red Wall, but maybe I got the wrong impression
It would be genuinel;y fascinating to map British voting patterns to domestic architecture. Someone should do it. I had no idea "bungalows = Reform"
Rushanara Ali, PPE degree, straight into politics, bag carrier for a couple of people including Oona King (more later), then a bit of civil service, think tank, then MP. Oona King, politics degree, straight into politics as a bag carrier, then MP, then Lords, then on the DEI gravy train at tech companies. Oona King was bag carrier for Glyn Ford, who after 10 years in academia, rest of life a politician.
This isn't just a Labour problem, but you don't need your full six degrees of Kevin Bacon to find too many appear to know nothing but university and politics.
Ref 694
PC 489
Lab 380
LD 26
Con 14
Gwlad 6
Turnout: 39.37%
Reform GAIN
Ref 43.13%
PC 30.39% -7.17%
Lab 23.62% -38.82%
LD 1.62%
Con 0.87%
Gwlad 0.37%
Previous election: Lab and PC were the only candidates.
I wont be backing Con gain Llanelli
Edit - looks like they rarely bother standing here
Plenty of Tories like Hunt and Stride set up and ran their own businesses
Funnily enough ChatGPT 4 help me write the code it was checking.
Reading the technical document hallucinations aren't that much improved GPT5 vs GPT4.
'When William comes to power, Andrew will be toast. He sees him as a liability to the monarchy and Andrew has not always been very polite about Catherine. William is very protective of his wife', the author and journalist said.
Speaking to Palace Confidential host Jo Elvin, Mr Lownie believes Andrew has had between 1,000 and 3,000 lovers and viewed himself as a sex God because women 'threw themselves' at him.
But this led to the Duke of York being blackmailed by Jeffrey Epstein and also made him an 'easy target' for hostile foreign states, Mr Lownie claims.
'Jeffrey Epstein provided women and course then used it to blackmail people and Andrew, I'm afraid, fell into that honey trap, not just with Epstein but many other people as well', he said.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-14979493/Prince-Andrew-biography-Trump-Epstein-assassination-plot-Palace-Confidential.html
https://youtu.be/YeJHuzLQb3g?si=PhvPV2odSUe__i7Q
But don't you understand, it goes up to 5! 5 is better than 4, yeah?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMQZG9u4Sjg
I reserve judgement. Let us know your experience?
They have taken away my access. Seems our AI overlords are listening into PB.
...
South Dakota ✅
...
Name all the US states with an "i" in their name...
...
Kentucky ✅
Tennessee ✅
Vermont ✅
Wyoming ❌
....
How many billions have they spent training this?
It still also fails for the ask it a well known riddle e.g. the farmer with the fox, the grain, etc, but don't mention anything about having to use boat and it still goes off on telling the solution that you will find on wikipedia.
I am not surprised that you found her quite impressive in that interview last night, she comes across well in that type of format. There has definitely been some changes behind the scenes to her PMQs prep and her media operation and its already starting to show. Kemi Badenoch is quite refreshing in that she says it as it is, but the key is going to be whether she can cut through and get that hearing from the electorate over the next couple of years. I doubt he would be interested in a return to Conservative party politics, but persuading George Osborne to take on a role as a political/comms adviser to her Office would be a very smart move.
The 6% surcharge on tuition fees paid by overseas students, floated in the Home Office’s recent immigration white paper, would particularly hit leading universities such as University College London (UCL) and the University of Manchester, based on the figures compiled by the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi).
The policy would leave universities in a difficult decision over whether to pass on the cost of the levy to students or absorb some or all of it from the fees they charged, in effect cutting their income.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/aug/08/international-student-levy-could-cost-english-universities-600m-a-year
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/articles/cr74z4jkez5o
BBC done up like a kipper. Boxxer only have about 3 decent fighters and all their contracts are just about done and they need other people to fight, and opponents will only fight on DAZN for big money. Its why Sky wouldn't pay Boxxer anymore.
Its like when they signed to show Bellator MMA, only for Bellator to get bought up and shut down.
"how many r's are there in molecular"
The word "molecular" has two r’s — one in “molecular” and one in “r” at the end.
Easington, Llanelli, Cannock Chase.
2 former Labour working class strongholds and a classic bellwether.
Mushroom murderer's alleged attempts to kill husband revealed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy3ngr2n3vo
...In lengthy (pre trial) hearings last year, he had detailed what he suspected was a years-long campaign to kill him with tainted food.
The court heard that one poisoning attempt left Mr Patterson so ill he spent weeks in a coma and his family was told to say their goodbyes twice.
He told the court that Patterson had tried to kill him with a curry, a wrap, Bolognese pasta, and even with chocolate cookies she claimed their daughter had made him.
He became suspicious so started making notes, realising he often became sick when she fed him, the court heard.
Mr Patterson shared his suspicions with a couple of relatives - including, critically, his father Don Patterson - then a GP, but didn't take things further.
He said he thought he was the only one in danger - and this is why he refused to come to the lunch.
When his parents became desperately ill, though, Mr Paterson pulled his relatives into the hospital chapel and told them he suspected his estranged wife had been trying to poison him for years.
Police believed rat poison may have been used on at least one occasion, the pre-trial hearings were told.
I didn’t watch it but I heard the livestream was very lame, and apparently the graphs used to show benchmarks were comically wrong
This is a company worth (as was) £300bn. wtf?
I wonder if they have been unnerved by DeepMind on one side and the Chinese on the other, plus Zuckerberg buying all the possible talent
And yet some users say it’s great
We probably need time to let it settle
"The IDF will prepare to take control of Gaza City while providing humanitarian aid to the civilian population outside the combat zones," it says, detailing the following principles for "ending the war":
Disarmament of Hamas.
Return of all hostages - both living and dead.
Demilitarization of the Gaza Strip.
Israeli security control over the Gaza Strip.
The existence of an alternative civilian government that is not Hamas or the Palestinian Authority.
A charity rowing crew was contacted by the coastguard near Great Yarmouth after Rupert Lowe mistook them for “illegal migrants”.
Mr Lowe, elected as a Reform UK MP but now sitting as an Independent, posted a picture on Instagram on Thursday night showing a boat near some wind turbines off the Norfolk coast.
He included the message: “Dinghies coming into Great Yarmouth, RIGHT NOW.
“Authorities alerted, and I am urgently chasing. If these are illegal migrants, I will be using every tool at my disposal to ensure these individuals are deported.
“Enough is enough. Britain needs mass deportations. NOW.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/08/charity-rowing-crew-mistaken-for-illegal-migrants/
Exclusive: Five Ukraine clubs failed to win similar payments due to allegedly being located in ‘zone of military operations’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/08/uefa-paid-russian-football-clubs-solidarity-funds-invasion-ukraine