How is a doubling of house price inflation to 7% "slow deflation" when pay is rising at less than 2%?
You'd be better off acknowledging that the bubble is being pumped for electoral reasons at least then you could stop tying yourself up in intellectual knots
Next year vs medium-to-long term.
There is no bubble outside London. There is a crisis averted.
Debatable whether there is a bubble in London, or whether there has been a sea-change in valuations due to foreign demand. I struggle to justify current valuations. But equally I sold in Chelsea at £800 psf 10 year ago because I thought it was toppy.
I've noticed a trend while lurking. Once Tim gets a meme in his head he doesn't seem to be able to let it go, quite sad really. At least he's combining two today with 'Osborne's housing bubble' and 'Toxic Crosby'.
PoliticsHome @politicshome Former Labour minister Chris Mullin says Tory strategist Lynton Crosby is “demeaning politics”. “In my view he needs to be run out of town.”
Gawd - first chicken little tim then Mullin wanting the ugly ducking to "get out of town" - and I thought the last thread had only a poultry number of replies..
I want Crosby to stay, he's retoxifying the Tory brand and helping UKIP.
Wait - don't tell me you will make a super prediction that in a years time at the Euro election, Ukip will have risen from their July 2013 ICM polling level !
Proof that Crosby is toxic surely ?
Forget the previous one's - here's your new avatar.
I've noticed a trend while lurking. Once Tim gets a meme in his head he doesn't seem to be able to let it go, quite sad really. At least he's combining two today with 'Osborne's housing bubble' and 'Toxic Crosby'.
It's all a bit ridiculous though.
Spot on. Tim symbolises the current Labour headless chicken syndrome. As all the economic indicators turn positive there is total panic in the party - and this is before any major polling shifts. lord helpem if they start to trend below 36%
Essentially you have a group of buyers who put a higher value on London property than most UK citizens do.
Indeed, and they have the spare money kicking around to back their valuations.
Many of the buyers are very wealthy Russians and Chinese who know exactly what it is like to live in a country where everything you own is by the grace of the government.
They are more than happy to invest in property here even if its worth a few per cent less in 10-year than it is now (unlikely).
Fact is, if the UK's history is anything to go by, it is always yours.
If we only knew it, probity and respect for property are amongst our greatest exports. We tamper with them at our peril.
In my home town in the north-east my mum's house is still valued about £5000 less than 2010 and my old house in Catford - south-east london is valued around £250000 which is what i sold it for in 2009.
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
For me Bubbles occur when huge amounts of speculative or leveraged money charges into a market in the hope of making a fast buck
Thing is, Foreigners aren't buying UK property for price appreciation, they are buying for safety. It's bolthole, rainy day money.
Prime central London property is traded by foreign buyers more like a discretionary asset purchase, say a painting by a valued artist or a piece of furniture at the top end of the antiques market.
The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.
This will make London prime property much more volatile than the rest of the UK property market.
It may surprise many on PB to learn that prime central London property fell in value in June. Here is the evidence:
Home prices in seven of London’s eight most-expensive neighborhoods fell in June as the number of properties bought with cash dropped, Acadametrics Ltd. said.
Homes in the City of London financial district had the biggest decrease, falling 2.5 percent, the real estate researcher and LSL Property Services Plc (LSL) said in a report today. That was followed by the City of Westminster, which includes the affluent Mayfair area, where prices fell 2.4 percent from a month earlier.
Essentially you have a group of buyers who put a higher value on London property than most UK citizens do.
Indeed, and they have the spare money kicking around to back their valuations.
Many of the buyers are very wealthy Russians and Chinese who know exactly what it is like to live in a country where everything you own is by the grace of the government.
They are more than happy to invest in property here even if its worth a few per cent less in 10-year than it is now (unlikely).
Fact is, if the UK's history is anything to go by, it is always yours.
If we only knew it, probity and respect for property are amongst our greatest exports. We tamper with them at our peril.
Just popped onto the Savills web-site over lunch and was amazed at the number of London properties going at £30m+, any PBers got that in their back pockets as spare change?
Also a lot of these properties had been renovated to the highest luxury specification, including basement swimming pools and staff flats etc. Most obviously aimed at the rich overseas investor, to whom losing the odd £5m will never matter, whereas in many parts of the country £10m will buy a very nice small estate.
"We're not suggesting any law has been broken," a Labour source told Reuters. "Tesco and Next are anecdotal examples," the source added, saying the party wanted to spotlight the problem so it could be solved"
Labour spokesperson August 2013
"(Tory MP) Chris Skidmore's argument about ... immigration was a disgrace, not based on evidenced facts, but on surmise, anecdote and prejudice."
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Given how many *Speeches of a Lifetime* EdM has already delivered I assume he's either a cat or really is a Buddhist when it comes to reincarnation.
Guido's website is often a source of amusement and interest and I give him great credit for the way he has been the scourge of greedy politicians but he has a serious blind spot over Israel. For a supposed libertarian he is very predisposed to the Israelis = Good, Palestinians = BAD, way of thinking.
Anyone who believes or pushes the argument that the conflict there is as clear-cut as that arouses my suspicion.
Guido is more of a contrarian than libertarian.
His support for Israel counters traditional British establishment, particularly FCO, support for the Palestine
It's difficult to read across from the US to the UK for four reasons:
1) differences in funds 2) differences in ground troops 3) differences in voters' interaction with technology 4) the next UK general election will be three years after the US election.
It's fairly clear that the Conservatives are going to have to fight the next election on emaciated troop numbers. To get the most out of them, they're going to have to get much better at finding their voters.
The technological possiblities need to be exploited much more effectively by the political parties. No doubt Mr Messina has much to say on that front.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Guido's website is often a source of amusement and interest and I give him great credit for the way he has been the scourge of greedy politicians but he has a serious blind spot over Israel. For a supposed libertarian he is very predisposed to the Israelis = Good, Palestinians = BAD, way of thinking.
Anyone who believes or pushes the argument that the conflict there is as clear-cut as that arouses my suspicion.
Guido is more of a contrarian than libertarian.
His support for Israel counters traditional British establishment, particularly FCO, support for the Palestine
Avery, I wouldn't think so. For example, does the UK recognise a Palestinian State currently?
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
I posted the above comment on Guido's current thread - and he promptly moderated it! LOL!
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
I guess they swapped a bad debt for a high risk loan - I wonder how what rate of interest they charged for this facility ? Market rate ?
'''The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.'''
True but the London Property also cannot be stolen by a corrupt communist party official who fancies it during a clampdown. Unlike a chair or a painting. And unlike a swiss bank account it can be used as a home if things get hot, domestically. And it can soak up quite large amounts of capital over many years without officialdom sniffinf around it. And the market is liquid enough for it to disposed of reasonably quickly if necessary.
Thus London property is a uniquely attractive asset for these guys.
While the new-build part of 'Help to Buy' makes some sense, the second part is absolutely f@@king insane. If a labour government proposed this exact same generalised mortgage guarantee scheme the tories would be furious.
I guess, at least we can be grateful Gordon didn't think it up in 2007.
The London market has all the hallmarks of a bubble. The market outside London does not.
I'm quite wary about London's property market in the longer term. When the demand is driven by buyers for whom such a purchase is optional, they might collectively decide very quickly that they no longer wish to exercise that option. If so, then prices might crater surprisingly quickly.
Weak demand and rising production in China, combined with efforts by South Korean suppliers to cut manufacturing charges in order to stimulate demand, is resulting in pronounced price reductions in the third quarter for popular sizes of liquid-crystal display television (LCD TV) panels.
The Chinese government’s move to discontinue its eco-subsidy program at the end of May had a broad impact on panel sales, but the biggest repercussion was in the 32-inch size. And because 32-inch is the most popular size in China, sales and pricing for this dimension plunged worldwide.
Meanwhile, production capacity for 32-inch panels still exceeds demand. The combination of weak demand and oversupply is expected to drive down the lowest price of 32-inch open cell panels to $90 in the first quarter of 2014, down from $96 during this year’s first quarter.
Samsung’s aggressive stance on 40-inch panels also has impacted prices for similar-sized LCDs. As a result, prices for 39- and 42-inch panels are expected to decline by 5.2 percent and 4.2 percent, respectively, in the third quarter.
South Korean makers in general reportedly are planning to produce 48- and 49-inch panels in 2014, and both 46- and 47-inch panels will then be phased out. Anticipation of such developments caused a $4 to $5 price deduction in June for the 46- and 47-inch panel categories.
For their part, Taiwanese manufacturers cut prices for 50-inch panels to maintain a reasonable gap with 46- and 47-inch panels. And like the South Koreans, the Taiwanese are planning to offer panels in new 48- and 49-inch sizes. This is likely to further drive down pricing for 50-inch LCD TV panels.
'''The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.'''
True but the London Property also cannot be stolen by a corrupt communist party official who fancies it during a clampdown. Unlike a chair or a painting. And unlike a swiss bank account it can be used as a home if things get hot, domestically. And it can soak up quite large amounts of capital over many years without officialdom sniffinf around it. And the market is liquid enough for it to disposed of reasonably quickly if necessary.
Thus London property is a uniquely attractive asset for these guys.
How much do these high value properties skew the London data - Whats happening to a semi detached in ooh I don't know an 'average' London borough like perhaps say Ealing..
Now now - Ed will be along at conference soon to deliver a barnstorming speech where the country will once again be aware of his predistribution of hardwired in fairness.
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
I posted the above comment on Guido's current thread - and he promptly moderated it! LOL!
Scrub that - he's released it, now after nearly an hour
@Pulpstar I can't give you data but I can give you an anecdote from what I'm now advised by estate agents to call Shoreditch. My downstairs neighbour sold her flat in June for £925,000. I may well be selling one of the two flats in the block that I own in the next few months. It has been valued at £1 million. On present trajectories, that will be seriously out of date by the time that I get around to putting it on the market.
And of course a liability contingent on prices falling. It can't both be true that this would be a cost to taxpayers, and stabilise/boost prices (let alone lead to a bubble).
Don't be silly - the whole point of a situation being defined as a bubble is that it is followed by the bubble bursting, and prices rapidly falling thereafter.
It is precisely a situation that has prices rising rapidly at one point in time and then falling rapidly shortly afterwards - triggering the taxpayer liability.
Trust your cats have not devoured your tea again before you got it inside. If you won that battle then something has changed.
I regaled my Twitter followers of #PizzaCats the other day as they stalked the box, stuffed paws in the hole where the *free dip* nobody uses was - today we're playing #RoastChicken
That involves them lying nonchalantly about but within 3ft for when I open the bag - I will then be mugged trying to make a sandwich.
HurstLlama recommended that I make cheese on toast and cut it into little squares first as a diversion strategy. I can see merit in his thinking.
'''The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.'''
True but the London Property also cannot be stolen by a corrupt communist party official who fancies it during a clampdown. Unlike a chair or a painting. And unlike a swiss bank account it can be used as a home if things get hot, domestically. And it can soak up quite large amounts of capital over many years without officialdom sniffinf around it. And the market is liquid enough for it to disposed of reasonably quickly if necessary.
Thus London property is a uniquely attractive asset for these guys.
How much do these high value properties skew the London data - Whats happening to a semi detached in ooh I don't know an 'average' London borough like perhaps say Ealing..
'''The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.'''
True but the London Property also cannot be stolen by a corrupt communist party official who fancies it during a clampdown. Unlike a chair or a painting. And unlike a swiss bank account it can be used as a home if things get hot, domestically. And it can soak up quite large amounts of capital over many years without officialdom sniffinf around it. And the market is liquid enough for it to disposed of reasonably quickly if necessary.
Thus London property is a uniquely attractive asset for these guys.
How much do these high value properties skew the London data - Whats happening to a semi detached in ooh I don't know an 'average' London borough like perhaps say Ealing..
We just had our three-bed terraced house in Ilford North (London Borough of Redbridge) valued, it's about 320K.
"Deborah Mattinson, who was Mr Brown's personal polling adviser, said that Mr Miliband was failing to define his party's platform and was not speaking "in a language that people understand".
Labour is offering voters so little information about its plans that they are "almost not noticing it," she said.
Ms Mattinson's criticisms in a BBC interview are the latest sign of unease in the Labour Party about its performance under Mr Miliband. Signs of an economic recovery have coincided with polls suggesting the Conservative Party is starting to gain ground lost to Labour since 2010.
The number of people who believe the Tories are more capable of managing the economy has risen from 28 per cent in June to 40 per cent. Labour has seen a lower rise in public confidence – increasing from 19 per cent to 24 per cent, according to an ICM poll measuring "economic competence" for The Guardian.
""When the demand is driven by buyers for whom such a purchase is optional, they might collectively decide very quickly that they no longer wish to exercise that option. If so, then prices might crater surprisingly quickly. ""
Quite. Changes in the law might make this happen, such as if some f8ckwit politician decided to slap a very punitive mansion tax on anything over two million.
That is, in my view, by far the biggest risk to the London market.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million . The Conservatives on the other hand ended 2012 with net debts of £ 7.74 million and have been in practice bankrupt for some years but like a drunken spendthrift think they can still splurge perhaps £ 1 million on hiring Messina .
This thread piece is very like the contribution that I made the day after this was announced. Basically Jim will be hamstrung because he will not have the resources, the manpower, the polling or the foot soldiers to do anything like he did for Obama. He uses and manipulates data that is not available to anything like the same extent.
This does not by any means make him a waste of time. Even within the much tighter limits of a UK campaign budget I have no doubt all of the parties spend far too much money on unfocussed, poorly thought through marketing. How many votes did the tories get for all their posters at the last election? Very few I suspect. Is putting unfocussed leaflets through peoples' doors really useful? Doubt it.
So I think he will help the tories to focus on spending smarter, getting a bigger return on their investments and working harder at finding the key information that is actually going to help persuade relevant voters (those in marginals) to get out and vote or to help the genuinely uncertain to make the right decision. Will this be enough to offset the superior Labour ground game? Not sure but it will help.
The worry for the tories might be if Labour can learn from their campaign and then add it to the better data base collected by more canvassing. But that will be 2020 and Cameron will have retired by then.
Guido's website is often a source of amusement and interest and I give him great credit for the way he has been the scourge of greedy politicians but he has a serious blind spot over Israel. For a supposed libertarian he is very predisposed to the Israelis = Good, Palestinians = BAD, way of thinking.
Anyone who believes or pushes the argument that the conflict there is as clear-cut as that arouses my suspicion.
Guido is more of a contrarian than libertarian.
His support for Israel counters traditional British establishment, particularly FCO, support for the Palestine
Avery, I wouldn't think so. For example, does the UK recognise a Palestinian State currently?
I was referring more to attitudes than actions, Sunil.
It is more centre of gravity than absence of difference.
A bit like saying "Not every Old Etonian votes Conservative", not everyone in the FCO supports the Palestinian cause. The statement is indisputably true, but the truth is not told.
""When the demand is driven by buyers for whom such a purchase is optional, they might collectively decide very quickly that they no longer wish to exercise that option. If so, then prices might crater surprisingly quickly. ""
Quite. Changes in the law might make this happen, such as if some f8ckwit politician decided to slap a very punitive mansion tax on anything over two million.
That is, in my view, by far the biggest risk to the London market.
You mean Cleggy and his friends as outlined in their document "Fairer Taxes".
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
Kay Burley @KayBurley Catalonians side with Gibraltar in its border row with Spain claiming 'the rock' is being bullied...
The Catalans will cheer on anybody or anything who annoy the Spanish in Madrid - they just know what the response will be if they vote of independence.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million .
From the Tele (Labour)
"The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
The Conservatives would say getting themselves back into power (and keeping Labour out) is in the national interest.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million . The Conservatives on the other hand ended 2012 with net debts of £ 7.74 million and have been in practice bankrupt for some years but like a drunken spendthrift think they can still splurge perhaps £ 1 million on hiring Messina .
Talking of party finances, the Lib Dems will be in trouble if they ever feel like returning the £2.4 million donation from the convicted fraudster, Michael Brown. Not that they will.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million . The Conservatives on the other hand ended 2012 with net debts of £ 7.74 million and have been in practice bankrupt for some years but like a drunken spendthrift think they can still splurge perhaps £ 1 million on hiring Messina .
Talking of party finances, the Lib Dems will be in trouble if they ever feel like returning the £2.4 million donation from the convicted fraudster, Michael Brown. Not that they will.
Mark seems to have given up on the LDs - since Huhne fell victim to a "vicious smear" he spends most of his time on here defending Labour ...
It may surprise many on PB to learn that prime central London property fell in value in June. Here is the evidence:
Home prices in seven of London’s eight most-expensive neighborhoods fell in June as the number of properties bought with cash dropped, Acadametrics Ltd. said.
Homes in the City of London financial district had the biggest decrease, falling 2.5 percent, the real estate researcher and LSL Property Services Plc (LSL) said in a report today. That was followed by the City of Westminster, which includes the affluent Mayfair area, where prices fell 2.4 percent from a month earlier.
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million .
From the Tele (Labour)
"The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Lab GAIN Senior ??
Loans to Labour are backed up by significant assets . Loans to the Conservatives are backed up by thin air . They sold off their Smiths Square asset a few years ago now and have been to all intents and purposes trading as bankrupt for the last few years .
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
How much further price deflation do you think would be in the national interest?
Seems to me Ed Miliband is heading to number 10 unless the Tories can overcome three big problems.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
Loans to Labour are backed up by significant assets . Loans to the Conservatives are backed up by thin air . They sold off their Smiths Square asset a few years ago now and have been to all intents and purposes trading as bankrupt for the last few years .
Trading as bankrupt (even if only "to all intents and purposes") would be a criminal offence.
I'm sure you can back up your allegation with a link, or self-moderate.
After all, we wouldn't want OGH to have to contribute to the the Tory warchest by way of apology...
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
How much further price deflation do you think would be in the national interest?
20-25%, but in the form of flat nominal values over a period of time
Seems to me Ed Miliband is heading to number 10 unless the Tories can overcome three big problems.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
I've asked several times in the past, but no one has given a good answer.
Labour under Brown outperformed significantly in Scotland vs England (IIRC they actually gained a seat in Scotland). Cameron did very well in England and pretty well in Wales all things considered.
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
i.e. is a significant part of the Brown2010 flaky?
Two hungry thieves sparked a five-hour police siege after breaking into a café to eat some quiche.
The pair barricaded themselves inside Cafe@Marshalls in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, and armed themselves with knives when police surrounded the premises.
Café owner Angela Marshall said she received a call at 1am from police informing her 15 patrol cars had been deployed as a result of a break-in.
‘Apparently they were hungry and wanted some quiche,’ she told the Journal. ‘There was a little bit of money in the till, but I think they just wanted food and then it got out of hand.’
Five hours later the men gave themselves up and were arrested on suspicion of aggravated burglary.
‘At 12.35am on Monday, officers on patrol disturbed two intruders inside a cafe at Derwent Water Terrace in Berwick,’ a spokesperson said. ‘The two men who were armed with knives refused to come out of the premises and threatened police.
‘After speaking with officers the two men, aged 21 and 20, were arrested on suspicion of aggravated burglary. No-one was injured during the incident.’
Loans to Labour are backed up by significant assets . Loans to the Conservatives are backed up by thin air . They sold off their Smiths Square asset a few years ago now and have been to all intents and purposes trading as bankrupt for the last few years .
Trading as bankrupt (even if only "to all intents and purposes") would be a criminal offence.
I'm sure you can back up your allegation with a link, or self-moderate.
After all, we wouldn't want OGH to have to contribute to the the Tory warchest by way of apology...
The Conservatives last had net assets over liabilities in 2003 . Net liabilities peaked at £ 18 million in 2005 prior to the sale of Smith Square . Their best recent year was 2009 when they had net liabilities of £ 2.8 million . At the end of 2012 it was £ 7.8 million .
Seems to me Ed Miliband is heading to number 10 unless the Tories can overcome three big problems.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
I've asked several times in the past, but no one has given a good answer.
Labour under Brown outperformed significantly in Scotland vs England (IIRC they actually gained a seat in Scotland). Cameron did very well in England and pretty well in Wales all things considered.
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
i.e. is a significant part of the Brown2010 flaky?
If Ed isn't polling as well as Brown in Scotland then he must be doing very well in the north and London.
Loans to Labour are backed up by significant assets . Loans to the Conservatives are backed up by thin air . They sold off their Smiths Square asset a few years ago now and have been to all intents and purposes trading as bankrupt for the last few years .
Trading as bankrupt (even if only "to all intents and purposes") would be a criminal offence.
I'm sure you can back up your allegation with a link, or self-moderate.
After all, we wouldn't want OGH to have to contribute to the the Tory warchest by way of apology...
The Conservatives last had net assets over liabilities in 2003 . Net liabilities peaked at £ 18 million in 2005 prior to the sale of Smith Square . Their best recent year was 2009 when they had net liabilities of £ 2.8 million . At the end of 2012 it was £ 7.8 million .
Not the same as trading as bankrupt if they can convince their auditors they have the ability to raise sufficient funds to meet their liabilities in future
Of course, those are the recorded prices at completion, which will lag some of the other indices. Nonetheless, it's still as far as you can get from a 'bubble' as it's possible to imagine, outside London.
Seems to me Ed Miliband is heading to number 10 unless the Tories can overcome three big problems.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
I've asked several times in the past, but no one has given a good answer.
Labour under Brown outperformed significantly in Scotland vs England (IIRC they actually gained a seat in Scotland). Cameron did very well in England and pretty well in Wales all things considered.
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
i.e. is a significant part of the Brown2010 flaky?
If Ed isn't polling as well as Brown in Scotland then he must be doing very well in the north and London.
Don't want to get into Scottish sub-samples...
I'm just challenging the assumption of the 35% floor that so many people are keen on.
I think both the 29% (Brown floor) and the 6% (LibDem shift) could be flaky under pressure of an election
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Would have thought that the co-op had had enough of dodgy loans... clearly not.
Why do you say dodgy loans ? Labour have been reducing their debts rapidly over the last few years mostly because of Short money and at the end of 2012 they were down to net £1.9 million .
From the Tele (Labour)
"The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Lab GAIN Senior ??
Loans to Labour are backed up by significant assets . Loans to the Conservatives are backed up by thin air . They sold off their Smiths Square asset a few years ago now and have been to all intents and purposes trading as bankrupt for the last few years .
Lets not forget that The Labour Party sold their HQ too, in 2006, and avoided paying £210K in Stamp Duty thanks to some clever accounting..
If you want to know why a significant number in Labour remain sceptical of Ed Miliband's plan to reform trade union funding, you just need to look at the latest political donation figures. In quarter two, affiliated unions were responsible for 77 per cent (£2.4m) of all donations to the party, with Labour receiving just £354,692 in individual donations, £2,506,590 less than the Tories and £32,537 less than the Lib Dems (although it's worth remembering that the Electoral Commission only publishes donations over £7,500, so smaller sums are excluded). Unite was the largest donor (£772,195), followed by the GMB (£485,830), UNISON (£458,080), USDAW (£411,137) and the CWU (£143,121).
It's figures like these that prompt union general secretaries, such as the GMB's Paul Kenny and the CWU's Billy Hayes, to ask just how Labour intends to make up the huge shortfall that will inevitably result from the introduction of an opt-in system for donations from union members. At present, if around 10 per cent of the current 2.7 million levy-payers choose to affiliate themselves to the party (the estimate used by Labour officials), the party will see funding fall from £8m to less than £1m. It's likely that Labour will increase the £3 affiliation fee but unless it also widens its donor base it will go into the election at a significant disadvantage.
Seems to me Ed Miliband is heading to number 10 unless the Tories can overcome three big problems.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
I've asked several times in the past, but no one has given a good answer.
Labour under Brown outperformed significantly in Scotland vs England (IIRC they actually gained a seat in Scotland). Cameron did very well in England and pretty well in Wales all things considered.
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
i.e. is a significant part of the Brown2010 flaky?
If Ed isn't polling as well as Brown in Scotland then he must be doing very well in the north and London.
Don't want to get into Scottish sub-samples...
I'm just challenging the assumption of the 35% floor that so many people are keen on.
I think both the 29% (Brown floor) and the 6% (LibDem shift) could be flaky under pressure of an election
England GE 2010 Labour were down 7.2% at 28% Scotland GE 2010 Labour were up 2.5% at 42%
Brown had some sort of effect on the Scottish voter ...
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done it since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
How much further price deflation do you think would be in the national interest?
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
I don't know, and I guess no-one does (apart from those privy to some in-depth quant-qual internal party polling perhaps)
Personally, I suspect not much. Any more than some upper class southerners voted for Cameron because he was "their goblin".
It was a very notable anomaly at the last general election that not a single seat changed hands in Scotland, in marked contrast to the large losses Labour sustained in the rest of the country.
Scottish Nationalists will take heart from this result to believe that Scotland is a land apart, and will vote for independence in 2014. Setting that aside for now, it does raise the possibility that having outperformed in 2010, Labour in Scotland could underperform in 2015. In 2010 the Labour PM and Chancellor both represented Scottish constituencies, while in 2015 it looks likely that the Leader of the Opposition and shadow Chancellor will both represent English constituencies.
These are the sorts of things that can create surprises for the unwary, and possibly profits for the political punter. However, the 2014 independence referendum exists as a major potential confounding factor.
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done in since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
Can I direct you to an article by those capitalist running dogs at the Staggers ?
"The answer is that personal ratings are frequently a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intentions. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance (sometimes by as much as 24 points), but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister."
If you want to know why a significant number in Labour remain sceptical of Ed Miliband's plan to reform trade union funding, you just need to look at the latest political donation figures. In quarter two, affiliated unions were responsible for 77 per cent (£2.4m) of all donations to the party, with Labour receiving just £354,692 in individual donations, £2,506,590 less than the Tories and £32,537 less than the Lib Dems (although it's worth remembering that the Electoral Commission only publishes donations over £7,500, so smaller sums are excluded). Unite was the largest donor (£772,195), followed by the GMB (£485,830), UNISON (£458,080), USDAW (£411,137) and the CWU (£143,121).
It's figures like these that prompt union general secretaries, such as the GMB's Paul Kenny and the CWU's Billy Hayes, to ask just how Labour intends to make up the huge shortfall that will inevitably result from the introduction of an opt-in system for donations from union members. At present, if around 10 per cent of the current 2.7 million levy-payers choose to affiliate themselves to the party (the estimate used by Labour officials), the party will see funding fall from £8m to less than £1m. It's likely that Labour will increase the £3 affiliation fee but unless it also widens its donor base it will go into the election at a significant disadvantage.
Whilst the figures given are significant , they are not as important as the fact that Labour in the last quarter received £ 2.24 million of public funds ( mostly Short money ) . I suspect that they could be soon in real financial problems if they win the next GE and lose this income .
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done in since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
Can I direct you to an article by those capitalist running dogs at the Staggers ?
"The answer is that personal ratings are frequently a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intentions. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance (sometimes by as much as 24 points), but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister."
But his ratings have been crap for ages, and it has not effected the Labour percentage. Callaghan had better ratings than Thatcher....even after Thatcher was PM.
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done it since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
I guess they'll carry on right to the election (and probably beyond), and with some justification as there is some polling to suggest they're onto something.
Though the Labour "core" does now seem to be mid-30s, it's not something that they should take for granted, and Miliband does need to continue convincing those supporters (and the masses of other anti-Tory tacticals at the margins) that he's a better alternative.
He's not doing to too badly in that respect so far, with some good ideas, bold positions and increasing confidence as a performer, but, now well zen-rested over the summer, it's time for the long run-in, Ed!
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done in since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
Can I direct you to an article by those capitalist running dogs at the Staggers ?
"The answer is that personal ratings are frequently a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intentions. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance (sometimes by as much as 24 points), but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister."
But his ratings have been crap for ages, and it has not effected the Labour percentage. Callaghan had better ratings than Thatcher....even after Thatcher was PM.
Crap and getting crapper - if you aren't worried by this then chillax like a Buddha.
TGOHF - Chillaxing as ever, just don't see the benefit of the party keep pushing the line if it is not moving Labours percentage. Though I can see why the PB Tories repeatedly push it.
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done in since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
Can I direct you to an article by those capitalist running dogs at the Staggers ?
"The answer is that personal ratings are frequently a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intentions. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance (sometimes by as much as 24 points), but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister."
But his ratings have been crap for ages, and it has not effected the Labour percentage. Callaghan had better ratings than Thatcher....even after Thatcher was PM.
Well, Miliband's ratings might be "priced in", and a core will vote Labour despite this, and any improvement might further increase their vote.
On the other hand it might be mid-term protesty, and current supporters won't actually vote Labour when push comes to shove if they think "Ed is crap" (this is the Tory hope, and an article of faith amongst PBTories)
TGOHF - Chillaxing as ever, just don't see the benefit of the party keep pushing the line if it is not moving Labours percentage. Though I can see why the PB Tories repeatedly push it.
Remember when Brown was made PM ? he was the messiah , a financial wizard, he saved the world, he was a great clunking fist - to Labour supporters anyway....
Turns out he was Mr 28% in England.
Labour PB posters have form in ignoring the crapness of their leaders - they are ostrichesque about it.
Just how long do you think the Tories are going to play the hand Ed is crap (PB always reminds me of how the Tories play their hand on anything, once they do something the PB Tories do it to death). They have more or less done it since he was elected and has had no significant change to Labours percentage. It has stuck between 36% and 40% give or take a few polls MOE right the way through. The Lib Dem 2010 limpets are sticking with Labour no matter what and are either not impressed with the "Ed is crap" line or not interested. Somewhere along the line somewhere has got to say, we need to change tack it is not working or will they just keep at it(PB Tory stylee) and hope something breaks?
I guess they'll carry on right to the election (and probably beyond), and with some justification as there is some polling to suggest they're onto something.
Though the Labour "core" does now seem to be mid-30s, it's not something that they should take for granted, and Miliband does need to continue convincing those supporters (and the masses of other anti-Tory tacticals at the margins) that he's a better alternative.
He's not doing to too badly in that respect so far, with some good ideas, bold positions and increasing confidence as a performer, but, now well zen-rested over the summer, it's time for the long run-in, Ed!
It's a strange situation. Red goes on holiday, the party and their friends in the press have a free for all against him and hardly anything moves within moe (well maybe the Tory/UKIP percentages but that's about it).
Excellent article, thanks Stephen. A couple of comments:
snip>
There's no reason why this can't be done street-by-street, even if it can't be done house-by-house.
3) Finally, don't underestimate the sophistication of direct mail nowadays. It costs money, but you can get very targeted delivery.
DM is extremely sophisticated if you gather the data and use if smartly - just using MOSIAC database info transforms market targeting.
I find it most peculiar that so many fail to appreciate what a specialist field this is when done well. Like all marketing - crap in/crap out and if your leaflets are amateurish/using lots of fonts/bad pix/stuffed with info they'll fail.
That such basics have eluded politics for so long is bizarre - I could strangle the eager who think marketing is a logo or lots of logos and a festival of Comic Sans.
No matter what the Tories sent me it would be crap and straight to bin
TGOHF - Chillaxing as ever, just don't see the benefit of the party keep pushing the line if it is not moving Labours percentage. Though I can see why the PB Tories repeatedly push it.
Remember when Brown was made PM ? he was the messiah , a financial wizard, he saved the world, he was a great clunking fist - to Labour supporters anyway....
Turns out he was Mr 28% in England.
Labour PB posters have form in ignoring the crapness of their leaders - they are ostrichesque about it.
In fairness, Miliband has outpolled Cameron in leader ratings for much of this Parliament. If Ed is "crap", dunno what that makes Dave.
TGOHF - Chillaxing as ever, just don't see the benefit of the party keep pushing the line if it is not moving Labours percentage. Though I can see why the PB Tories repeatedly push it.
Remember when Brown was made PM ? he was the messiah , a financial wizard, he saved the world, he was a great clunking fist - to Labour supporters anyway....
Turns out he was Mr 28% in England.
Labour PB posters have form in ignoring the crapness of their leaders - they are ostrichesque about it.
There maybe some truth in that but when do you think there will be a change of tack from the party if the Labour percentage doesn't move? 12 months before the election, six months, or just keep flying with it and hope upon hope eventually it will fall?
O/T.. "Wow, how did 12lbs of cocaine get into my suitcase, wrapped in food wrappers and hidden under my underwear" Not the best defence in the world, and particularly in Peru. I wonder how long those two will get, and how long before we get the bleeding hearts saying they were innocent/forced into it/didn't know what cocaine was/doing it for a friend who has a sick mum..
On news last night they were saying that the police were handing out food bank vouchers to poor souls caught shoplifting, unbelievable.
Unpopular Opinion Warning - I'd like to see these, just as I wouldn't censor the Canterbury Tales or Lady Chatterley
"Picture this gloriously silly scene from a Tom And Jerry cartoon. In a jungle clearing, trapped in a steaming cauldron, is Tom the cat. He’s the prisoner of Jerry the mouse, who is perched on the pot’s rim.
With a bone tied between his ears, a grass skirt, and his fur blackened with soot, Jerry is waving a little spear and pretending to be a cannibal.
‘Peel dem potatoes!’ he roars, and Tom obeys miserably. ‘Chop dem carrots,’ bellows Jerry, and the cat adds them to the hot water he’s stewing in. Then he reaches for an onion. ‘Hold de onion!’ barks Jerry.
*No soot allowed: The next Tom And Jerry Blu-ray disc from cartoon giant Warner Bros - the Golden Collection Volume Two - will be missing two episodes originally scheduled for inclusion *
What’s wrong with that picture? Logically, just about everything — the mouse is talking, the cat is dicing vegetables and is terrified, despite his kitchen knife being much bigger than Jerry’s spear… and anyway, a cannibal mouse would eat mice, not cats. It’s perfect nonsense.
Even if you’re a Tom And Jerry fan, you might not have seen that cannibal scene. It’s from a 1951, seven-minute cartoon called His Mouse Friday, where the duo get shipwrecked on a desert island, like Robinson Crusoe. It is never shown on TV now, for fear of causing racial offence.
The problem isn’t so much Jerry’s deep-fried accent, or that when the real cannibals show up, they’re talking hep Fifties jive, like jazz stars Duke Ellington and Sammy Davis Jr. No, the problem is the soot.
Jerry rubs his face and body with soot from the cauldron to disguise himself. He blacks up...
Unpopular Opinion Warning - I'd like to see these, just as I wouldn't censor the Canterbury Tales or Lady Chatterley
"Picture this gloriously silly scene from a Tom And Jerry cartoon. In a jungle clearing, trapped in a steaming cauldron, is Tom the cat. He’s the prisoner of Jerry the mouse, who is perched on the pot’s rim.
With a bone tied between his ears, a grass skirt, and his fur blackened with soot, Jerry is waving a little spear and pretending to be a cannibal.
‘Peel dem potatoes!’ he roars, and Tom obeys miserably. ‘Chop dem carrots,’ bellows Jerry, and the cat adds them to the hot water he’s stewing in. Then he reaches for an onion. ‘Hold de onion!’ barks Jerry.
*No soot allowed: The next Tom And Jerry Blu-ray disc from cartoon giant Warner Bros - the Golden Collection Volume Two - will be missing two episodes originally scheduled for inclusion *
What’s wrong with that picture? Logically, just about everything — the mouse is talking, the cat is dicing vegetables and is terrified, despite his kitchen knife being much bigger than Jerry’s spear… and anyway, a cannibal mouse would eat mice, not cats. It’s perfect nonsense.
Even if you’re a Tom And Jerry fan, you might not have seen that cannibal scene. It’s from a 1951, seven-minute cartoon called His Mouse Friday, where the duo get shipwrecked on a desert island, like Robinson Crusoe. It is never shown on TV now, for fear of causing racial offence.
The problem isn’t so much Jerry’s deep-fried accent, or that when the real cannibals show up, they’re talking hep Fifties jive, like jazz stars Duke Ellington and Sammy Davis Jr. No, the problem is the soot.
Jerry rubs his face and body with soot from the cauldron to disguise himself. He blacks up...
Me too - when finger wagging goes backwards into history to change what was shown at the time - it really irks me.
I'm sure the Water Babies wouldn't be allowed in schools now either - but as a story its great.
"Written in 1862–63 as a serial for Macmillan's Magazine, it was first published in its entirety in 1863. It was written as part satire in support of Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species. The book was extremely popular in England, and was a mainstay of British children's literature for many decades, but eventually fell out of favour in part due to its prejudices (common at the time) against Irish, Jews and Americans." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water-Babies,_A_Fairy_Tale_for_a_Land_Baby
Unpopular Opinion Warning - I'd like to see these, just as I wouldn't censor the Canterbury Tales or Lady Chatterley
"Picture this gloriously silly scene from a Tom And Jerry cartoon. In a jungle clearing, trapped in a steaming cauldron, is Tom the cat. He’s the prisoner of Jerry the mouse, who is perched on the pot’s rim.
With a bone tied between his ears, a grass skirt, and his fur blackened with soot, Jerry is waving a little spear and pretending to be a cannibal.
‘Peel dem potatoes!’ he roars, and Tom obeys miserably. ‘Chop dem carrots,’ bellows Jerry, and the cat adds them to the hot water he’s stewing in. Then he reaches for an onion. ‘Hold de onion!’ barks Jerry.
*No soot allowed: The next Tom And Jerry Blu-ray disc from cartoon giant Warner Bros - the Golden Collection Volume Two - will be missing two episodes originally scheduled for inclusion *
What’s wrong with that picture? Logically, just about everything — the mouse is talking, the cat is dicing vegetables and is terrified, despite his kitchen knife being much bigger than Jerry’s spear… and anyway, a cannibal mouse would eat mice, not cats. It’s perfect nonsense.
Even if you’re a Tom And Jerry fan, you might not have seen that cannibal scene. It’s from a 1951, seven-minute cartoon called His Mouse Friday, where the duo get shipwrecked on a desert island, like Robinson Crusoe. It is never shown on TV now, for fear of causing racial offence.
I love Tom and Jerry, I got this as a gift a few weeks back
It may surprise many on PB to learn that prime central London property fell in value in June. Here is the evidence:
Home prices in seven of London’s eight most-expensive neighborhoods fell in June as the number of properties bought with cash dropped, Acadametrics Ltd. said.
Homes in the City of London financial district had the biggest decrease, falling 2.5 percent, the real estate researcher and LSL Property Services Plc (LSL) said in a report today. That was followed by the City of Westminster, which includes the affluent Mayfair area, where prices fell 2.4 percent from a month earlier.
Comments
There is no bubble outside London. There is a crisis averted.
Debatable whether there is a bubble in London, or whether there has been a sea-change in valuations due to foreign demand. I struggle to justify current valuations. But equally I sold in Chelsea at £800 psf 10 year ago because I thought it was toppy.
It's all a bit ridiculous though.
For me Bubbles occur when huge amounts of speculative or leveraged money charges into a market in the hope of making a fast buck
Thing is, Foreigners aren't buying UK property for price appreciation, they are buying for safety. It's bolthole, rainy day money.
Again tim tries to claim that being worried about immigration = toxic.
WACISTS !! WACISTS !!
Indeed, and they have the spare money kicking around to back their valuations.
Many of the buyers are very wealthy Russians and Chinese who know exactly what it is like to live in a country where everything you own is by the grace of the government.
They are more than happy to invest in property here even if its worth a few per cent less in 10-year than it is now (unlikely).
Fact is, if the UK's history is anything to go by, it is always yours.
If we only knew it, probity and respect for property are amongst our greatest exports. We tamper with them at our peril.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/08/the-immigration-vans-surprisingly-popular-with-the-nation/
Like Brown - as soon as the voters get to know the real Ed they will give him their votes.
I can't recall Labourites being in psychological meltdown like this in ages.
Chin-up guys. Last year the Tories has a problem with erm pasties. You've got Chris Bryant's Diary aged 51 1/2.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
@YouGov
Support for 'go home' immigration vans up 8% since July. 55% now support the adverts - http://y-g.co/14tdO4T
The utility of the property as a primary home is not the primary benefit to the purchaser, just as a Chippendale dining chair is not bought primarily to sit on.
This will make London prime property much more volatile than the rest of the UK property market.
It may surprise many on PB to learn that prime central London property fell in value in June. Here is the evidence:
Home prices in seven of London’s eight most-expensive neighborhoods fell in June as the number of properties bought with cash dropped, Acadametrics Ltd. said.
Homes in the City of London financial district had the biggest decrease, falling 2.5 percent, the real estate researcher and LSL Property Services Plc (LSL) said in a report today. That was followed by the City of Westminster, which includes the affluent Mayfair area, where prices fell 2.4 percent from a month earlier.
More details in the original Bloomberg article: http://bloom.bg/135CZ3m
Just popped onto the Savills web-site over lunch and was amazed at the number of London properties going at £30m+, any PBers got that in their back pockets as spare change?
Also a lot of these properties had been renovated to the highest luxury specification, including basement swimming pools and staff flats etc. Most obviously aimed at the rich overseas investor, to whom losing the odd £5m will never matter, whereas in many parts of the country £10m will buy a very nice small estate.
Labour spokesperson August 2013
"(Tory MP) Chris Skidmore's argument about ... immigration was a disgrace, not based on evidenced facts, but on surmise, anecdote and prejudice."
Chris Bryant June 2013
Can anyone else spot the inconsistency here?
His support for Israel counters traditional British establishment, particularly FCO, support for the Palestine
1) differences in funds
2) differences in ground troops
3) differences in voters' interaction with technology
4) the next UK general election will be three years after the US election.
It's fairly clear that the Conservatives are going to have to fight the next election on emaciated troop numbers. To get the most out of them, they're going to have to get much better at finding their voters.
The technological possiblities need to be exploited much more effectively by the political parties. No doubt Mr Messina has much to say on that front.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10240340/Trade-unions-responsible-for-three-quarters-of-Labours-donations.html
"Labour also reduced its overdraft facilities by £2.5 million over the period and took out two new loans of £1.22 million each with the Co-operative Bank and Unity Trust Bank.
The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Trust your cats have not devoured your tea again before you got it inside. If you won that battle then something has changed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_the_State_of_Palestine
True but the London Property also cannot be stolen by a corrupt communist party official who fancies it during a clampdown. Unlike a chair or a painting. And unlike a swiss bank account it can be used as a home if things get hot, domestically. And it can soak up quite large amounts of capital over many years without officialdom sniffinf around it. And the market is liquid enough for it to disposed of reasonably quickly if necessary.
Thus London property is a uniquely attractive asset for these guys.
I guess, at least we can be grateful Gordon didn't think it up in 2007.
29 April 2010:
"House price inflation hits 10.5%, says the Nationwide"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10090047
2 August 2013:
"House prices rise 3.9% in a year, says Nationwide"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23539192
But why let the facts spoil a good story?
I'm quite wary about London's property market in the longer term. When the demand is driven by buyers for whom such a purchase is optional, they might collectively decide very quickly that they no longer wish to exercise that option. If so, then prices might crater surprisingly quickly.
The Chinese government’s move to discontinue its eco-subsidy program at the end of May had a broad impact on panel sales, but the biggest repercussion was in the 32-inch size. And because 32-inch is the most popular size in China, sales and pricing for this dimension plunged worldwide.
Meanwhile, production capacity for 32-inch panels still exceeds demand. The combination of weak demand and oversupply is expected to drive down the lowest price of 32-inch open cell panels to $90 in the first quarter of 2014, down from $96 during this year’s first quarter.
Samsung’s aggressive stance on 40-inch panels also has impacted prices for similar-sized LCDs. As a result, prices for 39- and 42-inch panels are expected to decline by 5.2 percent and 4.2 percent, respectively, in the third quarter.
South Korean makers in general reportedly are planning to produce 48- and 49-inch panels in 2014, and both 46- and 47-inch panels will then be phased out. Anticipation of such developments caused a $4 to $5 price deduction in June for the 46- and 47-inch panel categories.
For their part, Taiwanese manufacturers cut prices for 50-inch panels to maintain a reasonable gap with 46- and 47-inch panels. And like the South Koreans, the Taiwanese are planning to offer panels in new 48- and 49-inch sizes. This is likely to further drive down pricing for 50-inch LCD TV panels.
http://www.electroiq.com/articles/sst/2013/08/price-erosion-accelerates-for-lcd-tv-open-call-panels-in-q3.html?cmpid=EnlSSTDailyAugust132013
It is precisely a situation that has prices rising rapidly at one point in time and then falling rapidly shortly afterwards - triggering the taxpayer liability.
That involves them lying nonchalantly about but within 3ft for when I open the bag - I will then be mugged trying to make a sandwich.
HurstLlama recommended that I make cheese on toast and cut it into little squares first as a diversion strategy. I can see merit in his thinking.
"Deborah Mattinson, who was Mr Brown's personal polling adviser, said that Mr Miliband was failing to define his party's platform and was not speaking "in a language that people understand".
Labour is offering voters so little information about its plans that they are "almost not noticing it," she said.
Ms Mattinson's criticisms in a BBC interview are the latest sign of unease in the Labour Party about its performance under Mr Miliband. Signs of an economic recovery have coincided with polls suggesting the Conservative Party is starting to gain ground lost to Labour since 2010.
The number of people who believe the Tories are more capable of managing the economy has risen from 28 per cent in June to 40 per cent. Labour has seen a lower rise in public confidence – increasing from 19 per cent to 24 per cent, according to an ICM poll measuring "economic competence" for The Guardian.
Unease over Labour's performance was sharpened by the mishandling yesterday of an immigration speech by Chris Bryant, who stumbled over apparent criticisms of Tesco and Next for hiring foreign workers..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10239232/Labour-is-invisible-under-Miliband-says-Brown-aide-Deborah-Mattinson.html
Kay Burley @KayBurley
Catalonians side with Gibraltar in its border row with Spain claiming 'the rock' is being bullied...
Quite. Changes in the law might make this happen, such as if some f8ckwit politician decided to slap a very punitive mansion tax on anything over two million.
That is, in my view, by far the biggest risk to the London market.
This does not by any means make him a waste of time. Even within the much tighter limits of a UK campaign budget I have no doubt all of the parties spend far too much money on unfocussed, poorly thought through marketing. How many votes did the tories get for all their posters at the last election? Very few I suspect. Is putting unfocussed leaflets through peoples' doors really useful? Doubt it.
So I think he will help the tories to focus on spending smarter, getting a bigger return on their investments and working harder at finding the key information that is actually going to help persuade relevant voters (those in marginals) to get out and vote or to help the genuinely uncertain to make the right decision. Will this be enough to offset the superior Labour ground game? Not sure but it will help.
The worry for the tories might be if Labour can learn from their campaign and then add it to the better data base collected by more canvassing. But that will be 2020 and Cameron will have retired by then.
It is more centre of gravity than absence of difference.
A bit like saying "Not every Old Etonian votes Conservative", not everyone in the FCO supports the Palestinian cause. The statement is indisputably true, but the truth is not told.
However, if prices are rising in all parts of the UK as real incomes are stagnating or declining, then that is clearly not great news. It not only makes it harder to get on the housing ladder, it also encourages benefit-leechiong buy to lets and credit card based household spending. And at some stage interest rates will go up - perhaps pretty steeply if the rises are delayed for a while. For any number of years many posters on here correctly pointed out how the price of property distorted the functioning of the UK economy during the 90s and 00s. Surely a government governing in the national interst and not for narrow party advantage really should not actively be doing anything to help sustain such a state of affairs.
The basques will be next...!!!!
And look out for Scotland to ally itself with Spain...
"The party is listed as having outstanding loans of £12.79 million at the end of June"
Lab GAIN Senior ??
Mark seems to have given up on the LDs - since Huhne fell victim to a "vicious smear" he spends most of his time on here defending Labour ...
'Op North.
1) the relative solidity of the Labour "Brown 2010+" vote
2) the brand toxicity, and therefore strength of tactical anti-Tory feeling, amongst key groups of voters, most notably 2010 Lib Dems.
3) the rise of UKIP.
This bloke's number crunching could help with 3, but not the other two. Unlike the Democrats, the Tories don't really have a GOTV problem amongst their supporters.
I'm not convinced he'll make much difference, though clearly it can't hurt the Tories to give him a whirl.
(or at least the first lien secured GBP tranche...)
I'm sure you can back up your allegation with a link, or self-moderate.
After all, we wouldn't want OGH to have to contribute to the the Tory warchest by way of apology...
Labour under Brown outperformed significantly in Scotland vs England (IIRC they actually gained a seat in Scotland). Cameron did very well in England and pretty well in Wales all things considered.
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
i.e. is a significant part of the Brown2010 flaky?
Two hungry thieves sparked a five-hour police siege after breaking into a café to eat some quiche.
The pair barricaded themselves inside Cafe@Marshalls in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, and armed themselves with knives when police surrounded the premises.
Café owner Angela Marshall said she received a call at 1am from police informing her 15 patrol cars had been deployed as a result of a break-in.
‘Apparently they were hungry and wanted some quiche,’ she told the Journal. ‘There was a little bit of money in the till, but I think they just wanted food and then it got out of hand.’
Five hours later the men gave themselves up and were arrested on suspicion of aggravated burglary.
‘At 12.35am on Monday, officers on patrol disturbed two intruders inside a cafe at Derwent Water Terrace in Berwick,’ a spokesperson said. ‘The two men who were armed with knives refused to come out of the premises and threatened police.
‘After speaking with officers the two men, aged 21 and 20, were arrested on suspicion of aggravated burglary. No-one was injured during the incident.’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/regions/html/regions.stm
The very latest figures show an increase in 4 out of 10 regions, but mostly in London as you would expect:
http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/49529/HPIReport20130723.pdf
Of course, those are the recorded prices at completion, which will lag some of the other indices. Nonetheless, it's still as far as you can get from a 'bubble' as it's possible to imagine, outside London.
I'm just challenging the assumption of the 35% floor that so many people are keen on.
I think both the 29% (Brown floor) and the 6% (LibDem shift) could be flaky under pressure of an election
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labours-tax-dodge-on-sale-of-hq-saved-163210000-stamp-duty-427849.html
How much of the Scottish support was because he was 'our goblin' (TGOHF, I think)?
I don't know, and I guess no-one does (apart from those privy to some in-depth quant-qual internal party polling perhaps)
Personally, I suspect not much. Any more than some upper class southerners voted for Cameron because he was "their goblin".
If you want to know why a significant number in Labour remain sceptical of Ed Miliband's plan to reform trade union funding, you just need to look at the latest political donation figures. In quarter two, affiliated unions were responsible for 77 per cent (£2.4m) of all donations to the party, with Labour receiving just £354,692 in individual donations, £2,506,590 less than the Tories and £32,537 less than the Lib Dems (although it's worth remembering that the Electoral Commission only publishes donations over £7,500, so smaller sums are excluded). Unite was the largest donor (£772,195), followed by the GMB (£485,830), UNISON (£458,080), USDAW (£411,137) and the CWU (£143,121).
It's figures like these that prompt union general secretaries, such as the GMB's Paul Kenny and the CWU's Billy Hayes, to ask just how Labour intends to make up the huge shortfall that will inevitably result from the introduction of an opt-in system for donations from union members. At present, if around 10 per cent of the current 2.7 million levy-payers choose to affiliate themselves to the party (the estimate used by Labour officials), the party will see funding fall from £8m to less than £1m. It's likely that Labour will increase the £3 affiliation fee but unless it also widens its donor base it will go into the election at a significant disadvantage.
Scotland GE 2010 Labour were up 2.5% at 42%
Brown had some sort of effect on the Scottish voter ...
Can Ed repeat ?
Scottish Nationalists will take heart from this result to believe that Scotland is a land apart, and will vote for independence in 2014. Setting that aside for now, it does raise the possibility that having outperformed in 2010, Labour in Scotland could underperform in 2015. In 2010 the Labour PM and Chancellor both represented Scottish constituencies, while in 2015 it looks likely that the Leader of the Opposition and shadow Chancellor will both represent English constituencies.
These are the sorts of things that can create surprises for the unwary, and possibly profits for the political punter. However, the 2014 independence referendum exists as a major potential confounding factor.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/why-milibands-dismal-approval-ratings-should-worry-labour
"The answer is that personal ratings are frequently a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intentions. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance (sometimes by as much as 24 points), but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister."
Though the Labour "core" does now seem to be mid-30s, it's not something that they should take for granted, and Miliband does need to continue convincing those supporters (and the masses of other anti-Tory tacticals at the margins) that he's a better alternative.
He's not doing to too badly in that respect so far, with some good ideas, bold positions and increasing confidence as a performer, but, now well zen-rested over the summer, it's time for the long run-in, Ed!
Crap and getting crapper - if you aren't worried by this then chillax like a Buddha.
This follows a gaffe yesterday when he said "no one is the suppository of all wisdom" when criticising Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's campaign style.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-13/tony-abbott-highlights-fellow-candidates-sex-appeal/4884346
On the other hand it might be mid-term protesty, and current supporters won't actually vote Labour when push comes to shove if they think "Ed is crap" (this is the Tory hope, and an article of faith amongst PBTories)
Turns out he was Mr 28% in England.
Labour PB posters have form in ignoring the crapness of their leaders - they are ostrichesque about it.
"Picture this gloriously silly scene from a Tom And Jerry cartoon. In a jungle clearing, trapped in a steaming cauldron, is Tom the cat. He’s the prisoner of Jerry the mouse, who is perched on the pot’s rim.
With a bone tied between his ears, a grass skirt, and his fur blackened with soot, Jerry is waving a little spear and pretending to be a cannibal.
‘Peel dem potatoes!’ he roars, and Tom obeys miserably. ‘Chop dem carrots,’ bellows Jerry, and the cat adds them to the hot water he’s stewing in. Then he reaches for an onion. ‘Hold de onion!’ barks Jerry.
*No soot allowed: The next Tom And Jerry Blu-ray disc from cartoon giant Warner Bros - the Golden Collection Volume Two - will be missing two episodes originally scheduled for inclusion
*
What’s wrong with that picture? Logically, just about everything — the mouse is talking, the cat is dicing vegetables and is terrified, despite his kitchen knife being much bigger than Jerry’s spear… and anyway, a cannibal mouse would eat mice, not cats. It’s perfect nonsense.
Even if you’re a Tom And Jerry fan, you might not have seen that cannibal scene. It’s from a 1951, seven-minute cartoon called His Mouse Friday, where the duo get shipwrecked on a desert island, like Robinson Crusoe. It is never shown on TV now, for fear of causing racial offence.
The problem isn’t so much Jerry’s deep-fried accent, or that when the real cannibals show up, they’re talking hep Fifties jive, like jazz stars Duke Ellington and Sammy Davis Jr. No, the problem is the soot.
Jerry rubs his face and body with soot from the cauldron to disguise himself. He blacks up...
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2390792/How-sense-humour-censor-Tom-Jerry-racist-By-Mail-TV-critic-CHRISTOPHER-STEVENS.html#ixzz2bryoDu9b
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tom-And-Jerry-Complete-Collectors/dp/B000I0QSOO
I'm sure the Water Babies wouldn't be allowed in schools now either - but as a story its great.
"Written in 1862–63 as a serial for Macmillan's Magazine, it was first published in its entirety in 1863. It was written as part satire in support of Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species. The book was extremely popular in England, and was a mainstay of British children's literature for many decades, but eventually fell out of favour in part due to its prejudices (common at the time) against Irish, Jews and Americans." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water-Babies,_A_Fairy_Tale_for_a_Land_Baby
Probably based on more houses sold than Chippendale dining chairs auctioned.