politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

If you’ve always been a lurker, why not Start posting, we were all once Absolute Beginners on PB, once you start posting, you’ll say to yourselves That’s Entertainment .

Read the full story here

dr_spyn

first.

Andy_JS

Second.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Are there any vanilla experts around this evening?
The free wifi in my local throws the odd fit of moral righteousness and blocks pb for being too racy.
I get round the block by using Tor. However I cannot log on to pb for love nor money.
Is there any way round this?

SquareRoot

@tim

If every pb'er( poster and lurker) had stuck in a tenner in the pot for every time you had said Osborne('s austerity) had failed, would the deficit be cleared by now?

JohnO

tim has seen the future (May 2015) and it hurts.

isam

The attempt by The New Statesman to make Farage look a hypocrite is laughable

They quote him saying "the perception of fairness" which is actually him quoting Barroso, then link to a film where he doesn't criticise legal tax evasion at all!

If a high taxing, big state loving politician was found to be evading tax then there might be a story here. That a low tax, small state ex stockbroker has done it is to be expected I would have thought.

The main point is he didn't denounce tax avoidance in the first place.

HYUFD

Slaughter and May is the top law firm in the country, shocked to see the antics there. The Rudd-Gillard article also interesting, the weekend polls will be crucial, but unless there is a clear improvement in her standing we must expect some sort of a showdown next week

SquareRoot

@tim

You don't understand the big picture do you. You flip to whatever economic guru/institute/newspaper is saying/(picking out ) what you want to hear so you can slag off Osborne. Would you like another 364 economists to agree with you?..that worked out well ..

Osborne has been dealt the most difficult hand for a Chancellor in the history of the UK. We all know why the UK is such a mess don't we..

Rather than prejudge, I would rather wait to see how things pan out over time, I mean that would be the sensible thing to do wouldn't it.

Tykejohnno

I think you're basically right on that.
And looking at the new MORI index today the core switchers who are immigration obsessed over 65, Tory, South East outside London, Daily Mail and Express readers won't giv a toss

Tim lad,are you over 65,it's bloody you who brings the subject of immigration up most times on here.

Tykejohnno

Build baby build as tim would say - front of telegraph

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/348180722542071808/photo/1

AveryLP

FPT @tim

tim said:

@Avery

Not much point comparing with 1997 is there, unlikely that negative equity is relevant if you bought then.
Look at the drops from 2007-2013, they get less as you move towards London for obvious reasons.

The issue here is whether you perpetually stoke the housing market using the last generation of negative equity victims as an excuse.
A country that does this gets addicted to property bubbles as Osborne has of course realised, hence his use of massive taxpayer subsidies to inflate the next one.

Far better to break the cycle, kill off the post 1970's British disease and concentrate on affordability rather than encouraging house price inflation which distorts the economy and punishes the young,moving resources ever more from the wealth creating sectors to the sedentary and the speculator.

Build baby, build.
And tell the BoE to target house prices of 3*incomes, end the destructive 1979-2015 consensus - it's a baby boomer racket.

tim

For the umpteenth time, Osborne is not inflating a property bubble, He is intervening in a market which had become illiquid, with demand and supply having fallen to record low levels.

As a result of his intervention, house building, mortgage lending and property sales have all stopped falling and started to grow again. However, all are still at much lower levels than pre crisis peak.

Similarly house prices have generally stopped falling and are now increasing but still at rates less than inflation and (though I haven't checked the measure) probably around the rate of real income growth. This is not unhealthy.

According to Zoopla, the total value of residential property owned by households exceeded £6 trillion at the peak of Gordon Brown's mid noughties boom. In the three years prior to 2007 the value of the UK's housing stock increased by £750 billion, some 15%. Since 2007, the total value has not recovered to pre-crisis peak levels.

There are other sources knocking about which give slightly different totals but tell the same basic story. Savills, for example, estimate that total values peaked in 2007 at £5.4 trillion and had fallen to £5.1 trillion by the end of 2012.

Savills state the value of owner-occupied property without any mortgage currently totals £1.7 trillion not far below the value of mortgaged owner-occupied propery of £1.8 trillion. This fits with BoE statistics for total residential property loans by UK banks of £1.2 trillion at end 2012.

Given that the level of intervention by Osborne in the housing mortgage market is capped at £130 billion (theoretical maximum) then his intervention will be at most 10% of market value. Hardly enough to create a housing boom and crash!

If any part of the housing market has gained in share since the crisis it is the private rented sector. Savills again:

The UK’s housing stock is estimated to be worth around 6.5% less than at the peak of the market in 2007. By contrast, the private rented sector has grown to such an extent that its aggregate value has risen by 36% in the same five year period. Since 2002, the volume of private rental stock has grown by 61%, while its value has risen by an astonishing 153%. This has happened over a decade when the total value of all housing stock has risen by 72%.

Now surprise, surprise ... what or who is responsible for this increase?

In the five years pre-peak, from 2002-2007, the sharp rise in house prices both restricted accessibility to home ownership amongst would-be first time buyers and underpinned demand from buy to let investors.

The dynamic has changed – for investors at least. With lower prevailing and forecast rates of capital growth, income yield has become increasingly important amongst investors looking for balanced mid-term returns.

Oh, Gord, it can't be can it?

Property owners have traditionally realised gains from both increases in capital value and rental income. With stagnant property values, they have had to increase rents to compensate for loss of gains from capital appreciation. In other words, for rents to fall, both housing supply must be increased and property values must start rising again.

Osborne is attempting to correct the distortions introduced by Brown's boom. Stimulating new building of residential property, assisting first time purchasers and providing liquidity to the general housing sale markets is simply "doing the right thing".

Now just imagine the impact on the banking sector and economy as a whole if Osborne sought to deflate house prices to a multiple of three times average incomes. Just count the trillions and you will soon see why shock therapy will kill rather than cure the patient.

Any rebalancing of house price ratios will take decades of consistent and prudent economic management. It is not an overnight job, tim.

SquareRoot

As I said tim, clinging on to whatever message you think will serve you best. From what I have read, it would seem the UK economy is improving, people are spending money again. Let's wait and see rather than prejudge. The first two years of the Coalition were incredibly difficult, trying to turn around a juggernaut of mal administration.

Pulpstar

Thought that might come from Sir Wiggo.

Chris Froome is a phenomenon, he is ridiculously on form at the moment and could well dominate cycling for many many years to come.

He should maybe put on some weight and have a crack at Paris-Roubaix though.

Sunil_Prasannan

tim said:

Times Front page reckons the Tories are so paranoid about losing women's votes they are dropping an 80mph Motorway speed limit.
So sacking the misogynist public schoolboy clique that's taken over ther party wouldnt be more effective?

Do you think there'll ever be a woman Labour PM in your lifetime, tim?

AveryLP

tim said:

@Avery

Similarly house prices have generally stopped falling and are now increasing but still at rates less than inflation and (though I haven't checked the measure) probably around the rate of real income growth.

Damn right you haven't checked that measure, take out the bonus bonus of the 45p rate last month and house prices are already rising at seven times income rises, much more in London.
And more worrying for the public purse rents are rising at 10-20 times wage growth.
But the taxpayer is funding it all,and paying the benefits to the landlords so who cares in austerity Britain?

timbo

May I politely suggest that you enter into an arrangement with OGH, under which all of your posts between 8.00 pm on a Friday and 2:00 am on a Saturday are either deleted or quietly reattributed to Pork.

I think you have misunderstood what I meant by liquidity.

Sean_F

JohnO said:

tim has seen the future (May 2015) and it hurts.

There seems little reason to doubt that Britain's economy will be in a better place in May 2015 than it was in May 2010. One can dispute how much credit should be given to the government for this, but clearly things are improving.

Sean_F

tim said:

Tykejohnno said:

I think you're basically right on that.
And looking at the new MORI index today the core switchers who are immigration obsessed over 65, Tory, South East outside London, Daily Mail and Express readers won't giv a toss

Tim lad,are you over 65,it's bloody you who brings the subject of immigration up most times on here.

Two national tragedies Tyke, one our country is addicted to house price inflation which screws every young generation following the baby boomers who benefit most.
Two our country wants to blame immigration for it's faults.

Look at this polling

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/348052686807105537/photo/1

We should be ashamed of ourselves.
How many of the worlds big growing economies over the next couple of decades will be running scared of immigration?
None.

We have a national agenda set by one generation of property owning baby boomers who this govt assumes are quite content if the country maintains it's property Ponzi scheme and keeps out foreigners.
A tragic interlude that must be ended.

It's heartbreaking. We should set it to one of the gloomier bits of Elgar.

Mick_Pork

AveryLP said:

tim said:

@Avery

Similarly house prices have generally stopped falling and are now increasing but still at rates less than inflation and (though I haven't checked the measure) probably around the rate of real income growth.

Damn right you haven't checked that measure, take out the bonus bonus of the 45p rate last month and house prices are already rising at seven times income rises, much more in London.
And more worrying for the public purse rents are rising at 10-20 times wage growth.
But the taxpayer is funding it all,and paying the benefits to the landlords so who cares in austerity Britain?

timbo

May I politely suggest that you enter into an arrangement with OGH, under which all of your posts between 8.00 pm on a Friday and 2:00 am on a Saturday are either deleted or quietly reattributed to Pork.

I think you have misunderstood what I meant by liquidity.

Seth.

Might I suggest that someone so hilariously out of touch as to think Lansley would be PM, as you did, may not be best placed to suggest a reattribution of posts for anyone other than themselves?

Your amusingly inept spin for omnishambles Osbrowne is just as effective as it was for Lansley.

MonikerDiCanio

Sunil_Prasannan said:

tim said:

Times Front page reckons the Tories are so paranoid about losing women's votes they are dropping an 80mph Motorway speed limit.
So sacking the misogynist public schoolboy clique that's taken over ther party wouldnt be more effective?

Do you think there'll ever be a woman Labour PM in your lifetime, tim?

Flint to Brown ;

" Several of the women attending Cabinet - myself included - have been treated by you as little more than female window dressing. "

I hope that Labour have moved on from their neanderthal recent past.

Alanbrooke

Mick_Pork said:

AveryLP said:

tim said:

@Avery

Similarly house prices have generally stopped falling and are now increasing but still at rates less than inflation and (though I haven't checked the measure) probably around the rate of real income growth.

Damn right you haven't checked that measure, take out the bonus bonus of the 45p rate last month and house prices are already rising at seven times income rises, much more in London.
And more worrying for the public purse rents are rising at 10-20 times wage growth.
But the taxpayer is funding it all,and paying the benefits to the landlords so who cares in austerity Britain?

timbo

May I politely suggest that you enter into an arrangement with OGH, under which all of your posts between 8.00 pm on a Friday and 2:00 am on a Saturday are either deleted or quietly reattributed to Pork.

I think you have misunderstood what I meant by liquidity.

Seth.

Might I suggest that someone so hilariously out of touch as to think Lansley would be PM as you did, may not be best placed to suggest a reattribution of posts for anyone other than themselves?

Your amusingly inept spin for omnishambles Osbrowne is just as effective as it was for Lansley.

Auf englisch bitte.

Alanbrooke

MonikerDiCanio said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

tim said:

Times Front page reckons the Tories are so paranoid about losing women's votes they are dropping an 80mph Motorway speed limit.
So sacking the misogynist public schoolboy clique that's taken over ther party wouldnt be more effective?

Do you think there'll ever be a woman Labour PM in your lifetime, tim?

Flint to Brown ;

" Several of the women attending Cabinet - myself included - have been treated by you as little more than female window dressing. "

I hope that Labour have moved on from their neanderthal recent past.

Yeah but didn't Caroline do a bit of modelling to make her case ?

AndreaParma_82

Labour shortlist for Enfield North

Joan Ryan
Feryal Demirci (Hackney Cllr)
Ayfer Orhan (Edmonton Cllr, Hemel Hempstead 2010 GE candidate)
Annajoy David (entrepreneur from Ilford, 2010 GE candidate in Scarborough and Whitby)
Jayne Buckland (Edmonton Cllr)

Let's just say there is a vocal anti Ryan faction within the CLP briefing the media...on Sunday we will see how widespread or convincing they are.

john_zims

@Tim

'And let's have an election with housing at the centre, about bloody time.'

Bring it on.
Labour's 13 years in government which combined mass immigration with the worst social house building record since the second world war.

Any voters going to believe Labour with that awesome record?

MonikerDiCanio

john_zims said:

@Tim

'And let's have an election with housing at the centre, about bloody time.'

Bring it on.
Labour's 13 years in government which combined mass immigration with the worst social house building record since the second world war.

Any voters going to believe Labour with that awesome record?

New Labour's record on housing ;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204154/Tony-Blair-takes-4-2m-loan-central-London-des-res-U-S-bank-advises.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1151892/New-questions-David-Milibands-property-empire.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2028356/Lord-Mandelsons-8m-mansion-Questions-Labour-ministers-wealth.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2213675/Ed-Miliband-A-2-3m-house-400-000-mortgage--Labour-leader-Ed-Millionaire.html

Andy_JS

Someone was asking about this on the previous thread about this:

The seats that remained grey on my Labour target list were ones which either didn't have elections this year or only partially voted this year such as Rossendale & Darwen.

Sean_F

tim said:

Sean_F said:

JohnO said:

tim has seen the future (May 2015) and it hurts.

There seems little reason to doubt that Britain's economy will be in a better place in May 2015 than it was in May 2010. One can dispute how much credit should be given to the government for this, but clearly things are improving.

I'll have a bet with you that real pay is lower in May 2015 than it was in May 2010 if you want.

It probably will be. GDP per head fell by 7% in 2008/9, and that's bound to be reflected in subsequent years' wages. OTOH, unemployment, inflation, and the public deficit are likely to be substantially below the levels the government inherited, barring some black swan event.

john_zims

@Tim

'Thanks for making the point though, I'm sure you thought you were somehow undermining my argument'

Your argument is undermined by Labour's record in government.

Andy_JS

Early 90s classic — Craig McLachlan and Check 1-2 with "Mona". It reached number 2 in August 1990, blocked from the top spot by Teenage Hero Ninja Turtles and Partners in Kryme:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2ZW_uTlhEQ&amp

MonikerDiCanio

tim said:

Sean_F said:

tim said:

Sean_F said:

JohnO said:

tim has seen the future (May 2015) and it hurts.

There seems little reason to doubt that Britain's economy will be in a better place in May 2015 than it was in May 2010. One can dispute how much credit should be given to the government for this, but clearly things are improving.

I'll have a bet with you that real pay is lower in May 2015 than it was in May 2010 if you want.

It probably will be. GDP per head fell by 7% in 2008/9, and that's bound to be reflected in subsequent years' wages. OTOH, unemployment, inflation, and the public deficit are likely to be substantially below the levels the government inherited, barring some black swan event.

And the govt had the choice, the Obama route to deficit reduction that works or the Osborne route that doesn't

Obama has been in power since 2008/9 and has had 5 years to correct the Bush/Blair/Brown disaster. The Coalition has only had 3 years.

Pulpstar

MonikerDiCanio said:

john_zims said:

@Tim

'And let's have an election with housing at the centre, about bloody time.'

Bring it on.
Labour's 13 years in government which combined mass immigration with the worst social house building record since the second world war.

Any voters going to believe Labour with that awesome record?

New Labour's record on housing ;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204154/Tony-Blair-takes-4-2m-loan-central-London-des-res-U-S-bank-advises.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1151892/New-questions-David-Milibands-property-empire.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2028356/Lord-Mandelsons-8m-mansion-Questions-Labour-ministers-wealth.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2213675/Ed-Miliband-A-2-3m-house-400-000-mortgage--Labour-leader-Ed-Millionaire.html

I may sound very naive here, but what does Mr Blair tell JP Morgan thats worth them paying him £2.5m a year ?

Andy_JS

Nick Boles, planning minister:

It's okay to build on fields.

As long as they're sufficiently boring:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10135739/Build-on-boring-fields-says-minister.html

SouthamObserver

It's Slaughter and May. They're very particular about that.

Best law firm name, Leamington Spa's very own Wright Hassell.

Pulpstar

Andy_JS said:

Nick Boles, planning minister:

It's okay to build on fields.

As long as they're sufficiently boring:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10135739/Build-on-boring-fields-says-minister.html

What exactly makes a field 'boring' ?? The man is a muppet - this is precisely why CON voters could well stay at home in key rural marginals come 2015.
By all means build more flats. Stack em high - I hear there is a 60 storey or some such being built in London. Thats fine. Concreting over this green and pleasent land ? Not so much a fan of that - and neither will the rural voters be come 2015.

NickPalmer

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

Nick Boles, planning minister:

It's okay to build on fields.

As long as they're sufficiently boring:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10135739/Build-on-boring-fields-says-minister.html

What exactly makes a field 'boring' ?? The man is a muppet - this is precisely why CON voters could well stay at home in key rural marginals come 2015.
By all means build more flats. Stack em high - I hear there is a 60 storey or some such being built in London. Thats fine. Concreting over this green and pleasent land ? Not so much a fan of that - and neither will the rural voters be come 2015.

Building tall blocks of flats is what almost every other country does for just that reason - either we build outwards or upwards. But we're obsessed with every family having a house and garden.

Pulpstar

NickPalmer said:

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

Nick Boles, planning minister:

It's okay to build on fields.

As long as they're sufficiently boring:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10135739/Build-on-boring-fields-says-minister.html

What exactly makes a field 'boring' ?? The man is a muppet - this is precisely why CON voters could well stay at home in key rural marginals come 2015.
By all means build more flats. Stack em high - I hear there is a 60 storey or some such being built in London. Thats fine. Concreting over this green and pleasent land ? Not so much a fan of that - and neither will the rural voters be come 2015.

Building tall blocks of flats is what almost every other country does for just that reason - either we build outwards or upwards. But we're obsessed with every family having a house and garden.

This is another reason you will win Broxtowe. Anna Soubry wants to keep the green belt, Mr Bowles doesn't.
If Ed most likely gets into power - please I ask just lets keep the green belt of this country green. Please tell me you'll try and do that !

isam

What was the name of the solicitors in the Steptoe and Son film? Pratt, Pratt and Wikinson?

NickPalmer

Pulpstar said:

NickPalmer said:

Pulpstar said:

Andy_JS said:

Nick Boles, planning minister:

It's okay to build on fields.

As long as they're sufficiently boring:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/10135739/Build-on-boring-fields-says-minister.html

What exactly makes a field 'boring' ?? The man is a muppet - this is precisely why CON voters could well stay at home in key rural marginals come 2015.
By all means build more flats. Stack em high - I hear there is a 60 storey or some such being built in London. Thats fine. Concreting over this green and pleasent land ? Not so much a fan of that - and neither will the rural voters be come 2015.

Building tall blocks of flats is what almost every other country does for just that reason - either we build outwards or upwards. But we're obsessed with every family having a house and garden.

This is another reason you will win Broxtowe. Anna Soubry wants to keep the green belt, Mr Bowles doesn't.
If Ed most likely gets into power - please I ask just lets keep the green belt of this country green. Please tell me you'll try and do that !

Absolutely. As an MP I was censured by the Labour group on the council for opposing a Green Belt development that they favoured. But we need to get serious about urban renewal (e.g. removing VAT from refurbishment and allowing taller blocks in cities). Stuff the skyline - I'm paying £1300/month for a 1-bedroom flat in a rough bit of north London, and that's nuts.

Quincel

Bloody hell Nick, where in North London is that?! I knew it was bad in the 'burbs, but that's insane.

HYUFD

Aussie newspaper The Age has called for Gillard to step down for the 'good of the nation'
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-22/the-age-newspaper-calls-for-prime-minister-julia-gillard-to-quit/4773460

fitalass

Dan Hodges in the Telegraph - These rebel Tories are not mature parliamentarians, they are political fruitcakes

Dan Hodges hit the nail squarely on the head with this article. I know the Conservative party are a broad church, but this alternative Queens Speech needs to be filed under one from the Twilight Zone.

theProle

The weird thing with the Tory alternative queens speech is that quite a lot of it is very sensible, but unfortunately they included some completely mad ideas, which make the whole of it a laughing stock.

Did it not occur to any of them that having a bank holiday for Thatcher wouldn't play well with the masses, probably even with those who thought she was the best prime minister in years.

Load, aim at feet, fire...

As for housing of course we should build on farmland. It's not as if much of england is built on - believe it or not, only about 10% of england is urban, and only 2.5% actully has buildings on it.

There are 2 problems with high rise flats - One is of course that people don't want to live in them very much. I can't say I blame them, I'd find living 200' above ground levels in a building with hundreds of other people pretty depressing if I'm honest.
Secondly there is also a practical infrastructure problem - hundreds of people living on a very small footprint creates serious problems with transport links to say nothing of car parking.

I'm fairly sure that the main problem with housing lies with negative equity - how is it possible to engineer affordable house prices, by whatever means, without leaving those who have bought in the last 10 years in massive negative equity, and before saying tough luck, consider that the results of that would be to make banks fall over again - but really really badly.

I'm fairly sure politicians of all stripes know this which is why rather than trying to sort the house price problem the keep instead trying to blow the bubble back up. Sooner or later, it's all going to come home to roost, and when does it'll really hurt.

edmundintokyo

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Are there any vanilla experts around this evening?
The free wifi in my local throws the odd fit of moral righteousness and blocks pb for being too racy.
I get round the block by using Tor. However I cannot log on to pb for love nor money.
Is there any way round this?

Try logging directly into
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/
...then reload the regular site and see if you're logged it.

Andy_JS

New spreadsheet:

UKIP share of vote in local elections ranked by division/ward:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dFZZaXFjaVVfd1k1Sl8wa2ZMMXYydmc#gid=0

The purples scored more than 50% of the vote in 7 of the 2,208 divisions/wards being contested:

1. Huntingdonshire — Ramsey: 66.7%
2. Adur — Lancing: 53.8%
3. East Lindsey — Wainfleet & Burgh: 52.9%
4. Swale — Swale West: 51.4%
5. Guildford — Shalford: 50.7%
6. Fareham — Fareham Crofton: 50.4%
7. Isle of Wight — Wootton Bridge: 50.1%

Andy_JS

Something interesting I noticed in that spreadsheet is that UKIP received at least 15% of the vote in 90.48% of the divisions/wards they were contesting: 1,511 out of 1,670 divisions/wards. That's maybe a bit surprising given what we already know, which is that UKIP polled 20% overall and 24% in the divisions they contested.

old_labour

Film 4 is showing Ken Loache's, The Spirit of '45 on Tuesday, 25th June at 9PM.

http://www.film4.com/reviews/2013/the-spirit-of-45

I'll find out then if it gives me as much viewing pleasure as Jeremy Forrest looking at a St Trinian's film ;-)

CarlottaVance

fitalass said:

Dan Hodges in the Telegraph - These rebel Tories are not mature parliamentarians, they are political fruitcakes

Dan Hodges hit the nail squarely on the head with this article. I know the Conservative party are a broad church, but this alternative Queens Speech needs to be filed under one from the Twilight Zone.

ConHome has an explanation:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2013/06/bone-and-hollobone-the-bialystock-and-bloom-of-the-conservative-backbenches.html

GeoffM

CarlottaVance said:

ConHome has an explanation:

An amusing post by ConHome and they are correct, I think, that it was more done to wind up Cameron than lefties.

Having said that, and leaving out the obvious Lady Thatcher Bank Holiday tongue-in-cheek idea, I'd certainly vote for anybody who had the other policies in their manifesto.

JohnLoony

Plato

I simply can't even watch a Justin Bieber video without feeling dirty. Despite all his fame, I'd no idea what he was actually famous for so Googled a video of his last chart topper on YouTube - I had to switch it off within about 30secs.

The quality of his music or his singing ability is not what his fans care about. If you were at a Justin Bieber concert, all you would be able to hear would be screaming teenage girls all around you. That's why it didn't matter that he went ahead as planned with a UK tour while his voice was breaking.

-----------------

DavidL

There is something slightly bizarre about this in that the charge was abduction. She very clearly was not abducted.

She was abducted. She was taken out of the legal custody of her parents, without her parents' permission, at an age when she was not mature enough to make a responsible decision for herself in going with him.

-----------------


Plato

For an urban myth - the Guardian seemed to think it was true at the time and quoted the victim www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society

Self-styled vigilantes attacked the home of a hospital paediatrician after apparently confusing her professional title with the word "paedophile", it emerged yesterday.

The real incident was one (relatively serious) incident of graffiti on someone's house, but with no physical harm to any person. The "urban myth" is that the story was distorted to become a story of rampaging mobs chasing paediatricians down the street, beating them up, and the idea that there were severl such incidents.

------------

old_labour

I wonder how much the papers are willing to pay the young woman in the teacher case for her story if she is willing to waive her anonymity.

What "young woman"? Surely you don't mean the 15-year-old girl who was abducted, whose name we all remember, and who has shown no indication of wanting to be anonymous in the first place? I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that she will be free to tell her story (and/or be identified) when she reaches the age of consent (18).

GeoffM

JohnLoony said:

She was abducted. She was taken out of the legal custody of her parents, without her parents' permission, at an age when she was not legally mature enough to make a responsible decision for herself in going with him.

Mr Loony, I've added a word to what you've written so that I can ask you - do you think that my edit is a more accurate way to view the verdict and sentence? People don't become physically or mentally mature at midnight on a certain day just because they have been alive for a certain time. The law has drawn an arbitrary line in the sand which it occasionally blurs depending on circumstance. But an arbitrary line is what it is.

SouthamObserver

Meanwhile over in China a massive and very worrying story is brewing:

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23000323

This will be a huge test for the country's leadership. Extraordinary things have happened there over the last 20 years, but if you've been a few times you also start to understand just how fragile it all is. Managing what looks like it is going to be a hard core readjustment will be quite a challenge. The sensible thing for the Chinese to do would be to look outwards and to work with the rest of the world on a number of fronts to enhance trade lines, create a more transparent money system and so on; the huge concern is that they will look inwards - set up barriers, become more prescriptive, crackdown on their citizens etc. The world needs China, but - without doubt - China also needs the world. A China cris could be the aftershock that brings us all down.

JosiasJessop

SouthamObserver said:

Meanwhile over in China a massive and very worrying story is brewing:

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23000323

This will be a huge test for the country's leadership. Extraordinary things have happened there over the last 20 years, but if you've been a few times you also start to understand just how fragile it all is. Managing what looks like it is going to be a hard core readjustment will be quite a challenge. The sensible thing for the Chinese to do would be to look outwards and to work with the rest of the world on a number of fronts to enhance trade lines, create a more transparent money system and so on; the huge concern is that they will look inwards - set up barriers, become more prescriptive, crackdown on their citizens etc. The world needs China, but - without doubt - China also needs the world. A China cris could be the aftershock that brings us all down.

Another aspect of the asset prices (especially property) in China is quality. From what I have heard from architects and others, the buildings are being thrown up at such speed and in such quantity that the quality is suffering to a large degree. A building that should have a 30+ year lifespan may just have a few years before substantial repairs are needed.

This obviously effects the asset's value and the confidence that you are getting what you paid for.

It is even a problem with the high-profile buildings:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-03/21/china-concrete-sand-quality-scandal

And new structures such as bridges:
http://www.whatsontianjin.com/news-4387-china-s-construction-quality-questioned-after-6-bridges-collapse-within-a-year.html

All down to a massive haste to get things built, rampant corruption and blind regulation at the local an national government levels.

redcliffe62

SouthamObserver said:

Meanwhile over in China a massive and very worrying story is brewing:

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23000323

This will be a huge test for the country's leadership. Extraordinary things have happened there over the last 20 years, but if you've been a few times you also start to understand just how fragile it all is. Managing what looks like it is going to be a hard core readjustment will be quite a challenge. The sensible thing for the Chinese to do would be to look outwards and to work with the rest of the world on a number of fronts to enhance trade lines, create a more transparent money system and so on; the huge concern is that they will look inwards - set up barriers, become more prescriptive, crackdown on their citizens etc. The world needs China, but - without doubt - China also needs the world. A China cris could be the aftershock that brings us all down.

As per a comment from me before, when China sneezes and growth falls below 8% then Oz catches syphilis. Oz economy based on China and real signs of panic in market. Even more than in 2008, when Oz knew it could handle it.

Scott_P

Paywall

Nick Clegg will make electoral reform the price of going into coalition with David Cameron or Ed Miliband after the next election. A mansion tax, income tax cuts for millions and new green targets are likely to form other “red lines” for the Lib Dems in any negotiations in May 2015.

The party, which will set out key policies for the next parliament on the front page of its 2015 manifesto, is set to revive efforts to change the voting system. After voters overwhelmingly rejected the alternative vote in the 2011 referendum, Mr Clegg will lower his sights and call for a proportional system of voting in council elections — most likely a Scottish-style single transferable vote system. Lib Dems believe that this would not require a referendum but would act as a stepping stone towards voting changes in general elections.

GeoffM

Scott_P said:

.... the price of going into coalition .... After voters overwhelmingly rejected .... Lib Dems believe that this would not require a referendum

The electorate are annoying, aren't they, when they won't do as they're told? Just like our european enemies, the Lib Dem weasels at home never take No for an answer when on a power grabbing trip.

dr_spyn

One day someone will press for the banning of Trinian's films on moral or pc grounds....

PBModerator

new thread

NickPalmer

Quincel said:

Bloody hell Nick, where in North London is that?! I knew it was bad in the 'burbs, but that's insane.

On Holloway Road. I wanted to live within easy reach of my job and it's only a gew bus stops away. I looked at loads of places around there - one had a steel gate because the door itself had been broken into, the carpet was heavily stained and the heating didn't work (but the agent offered me a 3-bar electric fire): that one was £1200/month. The flat I rent is tiny and traffic noise is constant 24*7 but it's a modern block and I like the area even though it's a bit rough - the kids on the flat roof over the road party most nights in the summer have dragged out some old furniture and it's good to see people having fun.

I'm not complaining for myself as I have two jobs and can make ends meet, but London rent level are nuts and it needs a serious building effort to do something about it. I grew up in an 8-floor block and it was great - and frankly wouldn't most people rather pay £800/month for that than £1300/month for a flat in a low-rise above a shop?

SouthamObserver

JosiasJessop said:

SouthamObserver said:

Meanwhile over in China a massive and very worrying story is brewing:

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23000323

This will be a huge test for the country's leadership. Extraordinary things have happened there over the last 20 years, but if you've been a few times you also start to understand just how fragile it all is. Managing what looks like it is going to be a hard core readjustment will be quite a challenge. The sensible thing for the Chinese to do would be to look outwards and to work with the rest of the world on a number of fronts to enhance trade lines, create a more transparent money system and so on; the huge concern is that they will look inwards - set up barriers, become more prescriptive, crackdown on their citizens etc. The world needs China, but - without doubt - China also needs the world. A China cris could be the aftershock that brings us all down.

Another aspect of the asset prices (especially property) in China is quality. From what I have heard from architects and others, the buildings are being thrown up at such speed and in such quantity that the quality is suffering to a large degree. A building that should have a 30+ year lifespan may just have a few years before substantial repairs are needed.

This obviously effects the asset's value and the confidence that you are getting what you paid for.

It is even a problem with the high-profile buildings:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-03/21/china-concrete-sand-quality-scandal

And new structures such as bridges:
http://www.whatsontianjin.com/news-4387-china-s-construction-quality-questioned-after-6-bridges-collapse-within-a-year.html

All down to a massive haste to get things built, rampant corruption and blind regulation at the local an national government levels.

Completely agree. In the rush to modernise and get rich quality has not been factored in. You see it not only in infrastructure, but also in terms of innovation (which is generally me-too or very low level), manufacturing (low level investment in plant and machinery, labour intensive, low productivity) and much of the education system. Extraordinary things have been achieved, without question, but it has been so quick that a lot that, ideally, would have been done has been forgotten. You can get away with that while you grow exponentially, but when things slow down it becomes a real problem; especially as so many Chinese now have no memory of how things used to be and have certain lifestyle expectations that they will not want to give up on. How the leadership manages the slowdown, the loss of spending power, the many scandals that will come to light, the failing businesses, the assetless banks and so on will have a significant impact on all of us.

Gerry_Mander

NickPalmer said:

Quincel said:

Bloody hell Nick, where in North London is that?! I knew it was bad in the 'burbs, but that's insane.

On Holloway Road. I wanted to live within easy reach of my job and it's only a gew bus stops away. I looked at loads of places around there - one had a steel gate because the door itself had been broken into, the carpet was heavily stained and the heating didn't work (but the agent offered me a 3-bar electric fire): that one was £1200/month. The flat I rent is tiny and traffic noise is constant 24*7 but it's a modern block and I like the area even though it's a bit rough - the kids on the flat roof over the road party most nights in the summer have dragged out some old furniture and it's good to see people having fun.

I'm not complaining for myself as I have two jobs and can make ends meet, but London rent level are nuts and it needs a serious building effort to do something about it. I grew up in an 8-floor block and it was great - and frankly wouldn't most people rather pay £800/month for that than £1300/month for a flat in a low-rise above a shop?

Or perhaps the jobs could be moved out of London. I know many people in your position who rent during the week and then go home. Why?