Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
And I liked her taking the piss out of the guy who decked his house out like Nick Griffin's bunker.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
And I liked her taking the piss out of the guy who decked his house out like Nick Griffin's bunker.
Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
ET would be a gift for the Tories, a proper champagne socialist and hypocrite to boot.
Her father worked for the UN and NATO, nothing wrong with that but does contradict the 'her background is not' theory above.
Despite campaigning for a greater commitment to social housing, it didn't stop her adding an ex-local authority house to her property portfolio and letting it out.
Plus the Rochester tweet will come back to haunt her forever and rightly so, if she is leader then Labour can kiss goodbye to the WWC vote they just got back from Ukip.
The Tories may just at the moment be thinking that attacks on a LOTO's political past don't work too good. As for the flags thing, it has all the hallmarks of being a #thing on #twitter and utterly trivial in #reallife.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes I was thinking that. Maybe JRM is hoping to set off a landmark court case against child services on the rights of parents to name their children.
Ruth "turning down" Westminster in order to remain at Holyrood [which is what I expect to happen] will surely only make her more popular in Scotland.
There's a long way to go before 2021* but presumably Labour (and the LDs) would come under great pressure to rule out supporting a minority Conservative administration.
* That decision (extending the life of this Scottish Parliament to 5 years) now looks premature.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
ET would be a gift for the Tories, a proper champagne socialist and hypocrite to boot.
Her father worked for the UN and NATO, nothing wrong with that but does contradict the 'her background is not' theory above.
Despite campaigning for a greater commitment to social housing, it didn't stop her adding an ex-local authority house to her property portfolio and letting it out.
Plus the Rochester tweet will come back to haunt her forever and rightly so, if she is leader then Labour can kiss goodbye to the WWC vote they just got back from Ukip.
The Tories may just at the moment be thinking that attacks on a LOTO's political past don't work too good. As for the flags thing, it has all the hallmarks of being a #thing on #twitter and utterly trivial in #reallife.
How did the Tories personal attacks on Corbyn work out ? Has the video reached 10m hits yet ? Carlotta should know. She was updating us every few hours before the election.
The Primus, Secundus etc route was one taken by the rulers in the Codex Alera world. It's a fantasy by Jim Butcher, 5 or 6 parts, and really rather good. It has certain historical aspects but is almost entirely fantastical.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
My grandfather was called Quintus.
But as he was the sixth kid, it was just to screw with people...
Should have called him Septimus, and pointed meaningfully at the patio to quell any disputes about bedtime.
Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
ET would be a gift for the Tories, a proper champagne socialist and hypocrite to boot.
Her father worked for the UN and NATO, nothing wrong with that but does contradict the 'her background is not' theory above.
Despite campaigning for a greater commitment to social housing, it didn't stop her adding an ex-local authority house to her property portfolio and letting it out.
Plus the Rochester tweet will come back to haunt her forever and rightly so, if she is leader then Labour can kiss goodbye to the WWC vote they just got back from Ukip.
The Tories may just at the moment be thinking that attacks on a LOTO's political past don't work too good. As for the flags thing, it has all the hallmarks of being a #thing on #twitter and utterly trivial in #reallife.
How did the Tories personal attacks on Corbyn work out ? Has the video reached 10m hits yet ? Carlotta should know. She was updating us every few hours before the election.
That was rather my point. And it wasn't Carlotta, it was me.
The Primus, Secundus etc route was one taken by the rulers in the Codex Alera world. It's a fantasy by Jim Butcher, 5 or 6 parts, and really rather good. It has certain historical aspects but is almost entirely fantastical.
On public sector pay, why can't the government cut it by 1% for those earning £50,000 or more and raise it by 2% for those below it (and cut MP pay as well).
Yes the government would still get bad headlines becasuse doctors and headteachers earn that much but who cares, it is the right thing to do as many lower paid workers have been suffering deep real terms wage cuts.
There are ways to raise the pay cap for poorer public sector workers whilst still being fiscally responsible.
Does this table tell us much more than the make-up of the readership of Conservative Home? It always was dominated by the wilder-eyed Leavers.
Yes Con Homes 2005 Tory leadership poll not only predicted Cameron would beat Davis but got his margin of victory almost spot on too. So today's poll showing Davis 1st, Boris 2nd and Patel 3rd of Tory runners and riders is a good marker of the views of the Tory membership
Does this table tell us much more than the make-up of the readership of Conservative Home? It always was dominated by the wilder-eyed Leavers.
Yes Con Homes 2005 Tory leadership poll not only predicted Cameron would beat Davis but got his margin of victory almost spot on too. So today's poll showing Davis 1st, Boris 2nd and Patel 3rd of Tory runners and riders is a good marker of the views of the Tory membership
On public sector pay, why can't the government cut it by 1% for those earning £50,000 or more and raise it by 2% for those below it (and cut MP pay as well).
Yes the government would still get bad headlines becasuse doctors and headteachers earn that much but who cares, it is the right thing to do as many lower paid workers have been suffering deep real terms wage cuts.
There are ways to raise the pay cap for poorer public sector workers whilst still being fiscally responsible.
Mathematically that's a strange idea... Some people would end up overtaking others.
It also would cost almost as much as raising pay for everyone by 2%. Also the pay differential between public and private is probably greatest for high incomes...
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Gotta be JRM. No one on that list cuts it; Thornberry, Benn, Cooper look much more prime ministerial to me, and the tories are extraordinarily lucky that the lunatics have taken over the Labour asylum, and are due to consolidate their position at party conference.
Thornberry has only 1 black mark next to her name with that whole Rotherham affair. Otherwise, she has actually been quite impressive - she generally performs well on TV, she's clearly of the left but not a hard left marxist type. She's clearly a bit of a champagne socialist, but her background is not. To my knowledge no history of IRA remarks or similar.
If the Corbynistas do consolidate control, I think she would be in with a shot for next leader
She is very good on TV, and the chav flag tweet was really, really not the career-annihilating blunder it was portrayed as.
It was for Miliband. It showed him to be fake.
ET is very comfortable in her own shoes too.
And I liked her taking the piss out of the guy who decked his house out like Nick Griffin's bunker.
Which was a great help to the Leave campaign.
There are some people you just don't want on your side like Jeremy has shown. Things have moved on. Sun readers and their xenophobic flags are out. The young and the educated are taking over.
The Referendum was the nationalists high watermark. I doubt it'll be repeated
Does this table tell us much more than the make-up of the readership of Conservative Home? It always was dominated by the wilder-eyed Leavers.
Yes Con Homes 2005 Tory leadership poll not only predicted Cameron would beat Davis but got his margin of victory almost spot on too. So today's poll showing Davis 1st, Boris 2nd and Patel 3rd of Tory runners and riders is a good marker of the views of the Tory membership
In which case is Patel worth a bet?
I think she is pretty piss poor, but then I always thought that of May. I bet against May last time round because I expected her to flop.
With rare exceptions, my dislike of a Tory frontbencher is inversely related to their chance of winning, as such I have put afew quid on Priti.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
Good question, I don't know if they are considered.
However, in terms of repayments now vs 5 years ago, they won't be different. It is a percentage of your salary, not related to how much you owe. And most people are paying them off so slowly that £20k or £50k at 3% or 6% interest rate, they will still be making payments in late 20 / early 30s when most people come to buy a home.
The real difference is the percentage of people actually clearing that debt by the cut off date vs the government having to clear it for them.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
The repayment side is. Or it is for the Coventry building society (Which seems to be ner enough best buy on the mortgage charts)
I pointed this out years ago in one of my (many) posts here :>
The current voting system at Holyrood is not set up to deliver a majority, but as you may have noticed, the Scottish Conservatives under Ruth Davidson overtook the Scottish Labour party as the main Opposition at Holyrood. They also performed far better than the Scottish Labour party did in the last GE despite the Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn's campaigns. Blame the Scottish Conservative result on the Ruth Davidson! You don't achieve that kind of level of political success without garnering the tactical votes of Scottish Labour voters in much the same way that the SNP used to be able to collect Tory votes..
Yes but tactical voting will only go so far in Holyrood due to the proportional aspect. So you need the SNP to fall back directly, in order to make any other administration viable. Those SNP voters then have to directly transfer to the unionist parties. Considering the increase in SNP has largely been at the expense of Slab, and considering that Slab no longer looks dead in Scotland even if the Tories performed better, it is more likely that a larger share of SNP votes would return to a resurgent Labour party than move to the Conservatives (like how ex-kippers returned to Lab rather than going on to Con).
Scon have room to increase but are probably nearing their ceiling as long as the Labour party looks resurgent. the SNP seem to be flailing post-election, so there is a large well of potential SNP voters for them to have 'return home'.
I think a minority SNP administration in 2021 is most likely, but Kezia as FM is more likely than Ruth - SNP fallback will lead to Slab leapfrogging Scon.
Well here is the thing, I don't think there is a designated 'ceiling' for the Scottish Conservatives under Ruth Davidson while she outperforms the other Scottish party leaders in Scotland.
If Kezia Dugdale was the answer to both Scottish Labour's problems and also a vehicle for the anti SNP vote, it would have materilised in the Holyrood elections last year or during the local elections and the GE just a few weeks ago. It didn't, and all because neither Kezia Dugdale or her party are now the natural home of the pro Union/anti SNP vote central ground vote in Scotland.
And with Scotland now lagging behind the UK in both economic and public sector performance, a perfect political storm is brewing that is going to propel the Scottish Conservatives into power at Holyrood. To put it into perspective, a terrible May GE campaign vs a socialist Corbyn manifesto utopia protest vote didn't shift more than six seats in a country that is really fed up with the SNP at Holryood or the constant chatter about another Indy Ref on the back of Brexit!
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
One thing that it does do is that by middled aged, when most people have kids. Under previous systems / rates, more people had cleared the loan and that extra tax rate had gone away meaning that they would have more income to pay for the kids / home improvements etc.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
The unpalatable answer is really less full time students, more flexible part time higher education and on the job learning...but parents won't accept that little Johnny isn't bright enough to one of the 25-30% that go full time (rather than the 50% now) and its elitist etc etc etc.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes I was thinking that. Maybe JRM is hoping to set off a landmark court case against child services on the rights of parents to name their children.
He should go the whole Mogg, and change his own name by deed poll to Derisus Apsurdus.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
One thing that it does do is that by middled aged, when most people have kids. Under previous systems / rates, more people had cleared the loan and that extra tax rate had gone away meaning that they would have more income to pay for the kids / home improvements etc.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
Indeed. The system isn't great, but it kind of works, in 95% of the situation, it's exactly the same as a graduate tax.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
One thing that it does do is that by middled aged, when most people have kids. Under previous systems / rates, more people had cleared the loan and that extra tax rate had gone away meaning that they would have more income to pay for the kids / home improvements etc.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
Indeed. The system isn't great, but it kind of works, in 95% of the situation, it's exactly the same as a graduate tax.
Well there are various changes I would make. One of the big issues that the change in the system didn't result in, was
a) a proper market i.e there is just no way that a degree from Oxford is worth the same as Oxford Brookes
b) different subjects cost a vastly different amount to put on e.g Chemistry at a top uni costs about £15k per student per year, media studies at a shit one £3k.
c) things like medicine has become eye wateringly expensive, despite them being very valuable to the nation.
If I was on plan 2, I'd clear my o/s balance tommorow - but as I'm plan 1 I'd in theory pay off my mortgage first. Plan 2 would have been long term alot more expensive for me.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes I was thinking that. Maybe JRM is hoping to set off a landmark court case against child services on the rights of parents to name their children.
He should go the whole Mogg, and change his own name by deed poll to Derisus Apsurdus.
For future offspring the names Caecilius, Cogidubnus and Lurcio remain available.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
Well there are various changes I would make. One of the big issues that the change in the system didn't result in, was
a) a proper market i.e there is just no way that a degree from Oxford is worth the same as Oxford Brookes
b) different subjects cost a vastly different amount to put on e.g Chemistry at a top uni costs about £15k per student per year, media studies at a shit one £3k.
c) things like medicine has become eye wateringly expensive, despite them being very valuable to the nation.
Part of that is greedy chancellors automatically pushing the fees to the maximum of course.
There's not much talent on either side. Its a dire problem. Its appalling that Michael Gove should come second in the ratings, and amazing that Tories should consider him an electoral asset. A 2019 election would mean that 70 year old Tory castoff David Davies would be facing 70 year hopeless and incompetent hard left ideologue Corbyn, moderated by 76 year old Vince Cable.
If I was on plan 2, I'd clear my o/s balance tommorow - but as I'm plan 1 I'd in theory pay off my mortgage first. Plan 2 would have been long term alot more expensive for me.
I think it all depends on your situation and likely life earning etc. I can't remember the exact maths, but if you are in a career where you aren't going to be making much more than £30-40k a year for the rest of your life I don't think it is ever worth attempting to pay it off.
Interested to hear one of the reasons the government feel they can get away with 6,1% interest in student loans is they don't credit score applicants. However they do garnish their salary so the argument is clearly moot.
Is it really that high? Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
It is. The rate is set every year at March RPI level + 3%. Student loans aren't really a loan, they are a capped graduate tax.
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
Surely the payments must be relevant for the affordability criteria that lenders are now obliged to apply? It must be a real issue with first time buyers in particular and I suspect is increasingly driving the reduction in home ownership.
It is, but the as the repayments are a percentage of income, not based on the overall balance of debt left (unlike a normal loan), then the amount of the loan inself is irrevelent, it just reduces your Net Pay, like Income Tax or National insurance does.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
Well there are various changes I would make. One of the big issues that the change in the system didn't result in, was
a) a proper market i.e there is just no way that a degree from Oxford is worth the same as Oxford Brookes
b) different subjects cost a vastly different amount to put on e.g Chemistry at a top uni costs about £15k per student per year, media studies at a shit one £3k.
c) things like medicine has become eye wateringly expensive, despite them being very valuable to the nation.
Part of that is greedy chancellors automatically pushing the fees to the maximum of course.
Greedy and this bizarre attitude of my university is no lesser than any others, when everybody can check the ranking, facilities, academics who will teach you.
If I was on plan 2, I'd clear my o/s balance tommorow - but as I'm plan 1 I'd in theory pay off my mortgage first. Plan 2 would have been long term alot more expensive for me.
I think it all depends on your situation and likely life earning etc. I can't remember the exact maths, but if you are in a career where you aren't going to be making much more than £30-40k a year for the rest of your life I don't think it is ever worth attempting to pay it off.
It will be higher than that these days, 60k or so.
May doing well on PMQs - economy, economy, economy!
She is, too. Perhaps the GE disaster has been a wake up call.
Jezza sounding shrill.
He doesn't listen to the answers at all. His questions always seem tin-eared to the dialogue...
So back to normal. He is at the end of the day as thick as shit.
The thing is the cult (and the wider public) don't care. May could bury him every week and it won't dent his poll ratings.
Indeed. It is really quite scary.
To be fair, Hague used to give Blair a kicking most weeks and it didn't do him any favours. The difference was that Blair wasn't a total incompetent moron outside of the chamber.
Greedy and this bizarre attitude of my university is no lesser than any others, when everybody can check the ranking, facilities, academics who will teach you.
Nothing bizarre about asking for as much money as the market will stand. Your point would be stronger if it ended "and decide that what is on offer is not worth £9000 p.a."
If I was on plan 2, I'd clear my o/s balance tommorow - but as I'm plan 1 I'd in theory pay off my mortgage first. Plan 2 would have been long term alot more expensive for me.
I think it all depends on your situation and likely life earning etc. I can't remember the exact maths, but if you are in a career where you aren't going to be making much more than £30-40k a year for the rest of your life I don't think it is ever worth attempting to pay it off.
It will be higher than that these days, 60k or so.
Probably right. I haven't really looked since I paid off mine in a lump sum (and obviously did those calculations, and still not sure if I made the correct decision given passing up some investment opportunities).
Mr. Meeks, Peston's unimpressive. As well as his brutal questioning of Corbyn ("will you keep your allotment?") there was also a very odd moment after one of the terrorist attacks. He came out with some nonsense that May (after she had made a statement that was pretty standard, straight bat stuff) was trying to have it both ways, taking a unifying stance *and* blaming Muslims [or words to that effect]. It was quite bizarre.
May doing well on PMQs - economy, economy, economy!
She is, too. Perhaps the GE disaster has been a wake up call.
Jezza sounding shrill.
He doesn't listen to the answers at all. His questions always seem tin-eared to the dialogue...
So back to normal. He is at the end of the day as thick as shit.
The thing is the cult (and the wider public) don't care. May could bury him every week and it won't dent his poll ratings.
Bit of a discrepancy between you and Robert Preston then ?
I didn't watch, I was commenting on somebody else observation. However, given how wrong Peston is on most things, I am glad I don't take his opinion on much.
Mr. Meeks, Peston's unimpressive. As well as his brutal questioning of Corbyn ("will you keep your allotment?") there was also a very odd moment after one of the terrorist attacks. He came out with some nonsense that May (after she had made a statement that was pretty standard, straight bat stuff) was trying to have it both ways, taking a unifying stance *and* blaming Muslims [or words to that effect]. It was quite bizarre.
Channeling Mrs Merton, "what first made you a son of Labour peer so hostile to a Tory PM...."
Mr. Meeks, Peston's unimpressive. As well as his brutal questioning of Corbyn ("will you keep your allotment?") there was also a very odd moment after one of the terrorist attacks. He came out with some nonsense that May (after she had made a statement that was pretty standard, straight bat stuff) was trying to have it both ways, taking a unifying stance *and* blaming Muslims [or words to that effect]. It was quite bizarre.
Channeling Mrs Merton, "what first made you a son of Labour peer so hostile to a Tory PM...."
I think Peston ejaculated prematurely over the transformation of Jezza, who sounded very authoritative with his first question but then went downhill.
Mr. Urquhart, really not impressed with broadcast media lately. Sky's in love with the euro-sausage, and ITV have not been responsible or sensible over Grenfell Tower.
Yesterday, the imbecile reporting for ITV suggested that the response to Grenfell called into question who should run the country (or words to that effect). It was not an edifying moment of journalism.
Mr. Urquhart, really not impressed with broadcast media lately. Sky's in love with the euro-sausage, and ITV have not been responsible or sensible over Grenfell Tower.
Yesterday, the imbecile reporting for ITV suggested that the response to Grenfell called into question who should run the country (or words to that effect). It was not an edifying moment of journalism.
Fat head this morning on Sky was similar. The government were wrong to announce the judge, the government were definitely at fault for the tower fire, etc etc etc for 10 mins.
If the government hadn't announced a head of the inquiry by now they would have been getting it in the neck.
We don't know the exact causes of the fire, hence the inquiry. And even if it is suspected it was the cladding, it appears that buildings around the country have similar cladding dating back 15 years, and the cladding approved by the local council wasn't the stuff that was put on the building etc etc etc.
Mr. Urquhart, really not impressed with broadcast media lately. Sky's in love with the euro-sausage, and ITV have not been responsible or sensible over Grenfell Tower.
Yesterday, the imbecile reporting for ITV suggested that the response to Grenfell called into question who should run the country (or words to that effect). It was not an edifying moment of journalism.
Journalists in general tbh. I rate both Andrews but otherwise I'd much rather have an ex-politician talking me through things.
The current voting system at Holyrood is not set up to deliver a majority, but as you may have noticed, the Scottish Conservatives under Ruth Davidson overtook the Scottish Labour party as the main Opposition at Holyrood. They also performed far better than the Scottish Labour party did in the last GE despite the Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn's campaigns. Blame the Scottish Conservative result on the Ruth Davidson! You don't achieve that kind of level of political success without garnering the tactical votes of Scottish Labour voters in much the same way that the SNP used to be able to collect Tory votes..
Yes but tactical voting will only go so far in Holyrood due to the proportional aspect. So you need the SNP to fall back directly, in order to make any other administration viable. Those SNP voters then have to directly transfer to the unionist parties. Considering the increase in SNP has largely been at the expense of Slab, and considering that Slab no longer looks dead in Scotland even if the Tories performed better, it is more likely that a larger share of SNP votes would return to a resurgent Labour party than move to the Conservatives (like how ex-kippers returned to Lab rather than going on to Con).
Scon have room to increase but are probably nearing their ceiling as long as the Labour party looks resurgent. the SNP seem to be flailing post-election, so there is a large well of potential SNP voters for them to have 'return home'.
I think a minority SNP administration in 2021 is most likely, but Kezia as FM is more likely than Ruth - SNP fallback will lead to Slab leapfrogging Scon.
And with Scotland now lagging behind the UK in both economic and public sector performance, a perfect political storm is brewing that is going to propel the Scottish Conservatives into power at Holyrood. >
hmmm A Tory FM? I'll believe it when I see it. Problem is they are still third in the central belt at Holyrood, so if there was another Tory surge Labour would likely gain those seats through the middle.
I think a lot of the Tory recovery in Scotland was because they weren't threatening to block Brexit whereas the SNP were and Labour were too weak in those rural (relatively pro-brexit for Scotland) seats SCon took. but in England Corbyn/labour accepted Brexit so LEAVE voters felt safe to vote for Labour down south.
Does this table tell us much more than the make-up of the readership of Conservative Home? It always was dominated by the wilder-eyed Leavers.
Yes Con Homes 2005 Tory leadership poll not only predicted Cameron would beat Davis but got his margin of victory almost spot on too. So today's poll showing Davis 1st, Boris 2nd and Patel 3rd of Tory runners and riders is a good marker of the views of the Tory membership
In which case is Patel worth a bet?
Only if the Tories lose the next general election, in which case she may be the next but 1 Tory leader after Davis or Boris
On public sector pay, why can't the government cut it by 1% for those earning £50,000 or more and raise it by 2% for those below it (and cut MP pay as well).
Yes the government would still get bad headlines becasuse doctors and headteachers earn that much but who cares, it is the right thing to do as many lower paid workers have been suffering deep real terms wage cuts.
There are ways to raise the pay cap for poorer public sector workers whilst still being fiscally responsible.
A freeze for those over £100k would be difficult for anyone to attack.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes I was thinking that. Maybe JRM is hoping to set off a landmark court case against child services on the rights of parents to name their children.
He should go the whole Mogg, and change his own name by deed poll to Derisus Apsurdus.
I thought those WERE his first two names and Jacob was further down the list
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Mr. Meeks, Peston's unimpressive. As well as his brutal questioning of Corbyn ("will you keep your allotment?") there was also a very odd moment after one of the terrorist attacks. He came out with some nonsense that May (after she had made a statement that was pretty standard, straight bat stuff) was trying to have it both ways, taking a unifying stance *and* blaming Muslims [or words to that effect]. It was quite bizarre.
Peston is a europhile Labour stooge who wants to see the back of both the Tories and Brexit.
I'm on Majka for today's stage. Twice a KoM winner so should be involved in this mountain top finish, especially as he seems to be targetting a high GC finish this year rather than the KoM jersey. 33/1 for today.
Also backed Molleka at 100/1 for this years KoM. I think he's targetting this rather than GC and has lost 8 min so far this year so the big boys won't see him as a threat and may allow him to get away up the road, probably not today but the upcoming mountain stages. Of course he could just be feeling weak after doing the Giro but I'll take that chance.
I fancy Latour for the young riders jersey. havent backed him yet. hope to get a better price tomorrow. 7/1 was available this morning but the bookies I have cash with were best 5/1.
I'm on Majka for today's stage. Twice a KoM winner so should be involved in this mountain top finish, especially as he seems to be targetting a high GC finish this year rather than the KoM jersey. 33/1 for today.
Also backed Molleka at 100/1 for this years KoM. I think he's targetting this rather than GC and has lost 8 min so far this year so the big boys won't see him as a threat and may allow him to get away up the road, probably not today but the upcoming mountain stages. Of course he could just be feeling weak after doing the Giro but I'll take that chance.
I fancy Latour for the young riders jersey. havent backed him yet. hope to get a better price tomorrow. 7/1 was available this morning but the bookies I have cash with were best 5/1.
I'm hoping Froome wins as I have a bet I placed years ago, 5 TdFs at 20-1. He needs to win this one really to keep it live I think, as he'll start getting 'old' in the next few years. If he does win this one, the bet is in fantastic shape of course.
Well there are various changes I would make. One of the big issues that the change in the system didn't result in, was
a) a proper market i.e there is just no way that a degree from Oxford is worth the same as Oxford Brookes
b) different subjects cost a vastly different amount to put on e.g Chemistry at a top uni costs about £15k per student per year, media studies at a shit one £3k.
c) things like medicine has become eye wateringly expensive, despite them being very valuable to the nation.
On point (a) I think TSE has a header planned but it must be worth nearly as much.
On point (b) media studies does quite well in employability surveys, even if they are all working as waiters. Amusingly, a hundred years ago the same arguments were made against English degrees -- reading novels was a leisure activity for women, not a serious field of study.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
The USA adulterous dating site Ashley Madison which got hacked a few years ago, whose name sounds to me like a firm of estate agents, was so called because those are two of the most common girls' first names.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Lesley, Leslie Frances, Francis Vivian, Vivian Frankie etc
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
I'm on Majka for today's stage. Twice a KoM winner so should be involved in this mountain top finish, especially as he seems to be targetting a high GC finish this year rather than the KoM jersey. 33/1 for today.
Also backed Molleka at 100/1 for this years KoM. I think he's targetting this rather than GC and has lost 8 min so far this year so the big boys won't see him as a threat and may allow him to get away up the road, probably not today but the upcoming mountain stages. Of course he could just be feeling weak after doing the Giro but I'll take that chance.
I fancy Latour for the young riders jersey. havent backed him yet. hope to get a better price tomorrow. 7/1 was available this morning but the bookies I have cash with were best 5/1.
I'm hoping Froome wins as I have a bet I placed years ago, 5 TdFs at 20-1. He needs to win this one really to keep it live I think, as he'll start getting 'old' in the next few years. If he does win this one, the bet is in fantastic shape of course.
I think he's started this year v well. your bet doesnt conflict with any of mine so good luck! he could definitely win today but I didn't like the price.
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Americans seem also to repurpose surnames as first names so you see Taylor and Jackson, for instance. I expect there will be a few Trumps starting school soon.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Almost unbelievable that in 2017 someone can post something so hideously gender binary as this.
'Boys' 'Girls' names - you'll be telling me that they have to wear only blue and pink respectively next. Ridiculous rubbish.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Lesley, Leslie Frances, Francis Vivian, Vivian Frankie etc
And there are no doubt further ones
Neighbours had a several-month storyline which ended with a baby girl and boy both being named Shannon.
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Lesley, Leslie Frances, Francis Vivian, Vivian Frankie etc
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
Better than evens on Tories getting most seats would be the bet I'd go for. Doubt May will be leader though in 2022.
As an aside - I doubt the economy will bounce from Brexit. The short term risk is downside. A transitional deal would avoid that but it won't cause a bounce.
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
I find most of that very plausible, but I won't bet on it because it coincides with what I want to happen. I think the Corbgasm was real and intense, but transient, and that he will stitch things up to ensure that his successor shares his politics (but not his charisma). But I don't think there is any chance of May outperforming expectations to a big enough extent to have her going into another GE as PM.
The BBC drama doc on the last Tory leadership did Boris no favours.
Boris does Boris no favours. As the only Conservative to be elected Mayor of London, twice, he is a proven vote-winner. After this year's election result, he should, as such, be a shoe-in.
But he is lazy and arrogant and it shows whenever he is interviewed and relies on jokes and bluster to cover up ignorance of his brief. Cameron was sometimes as bad, like the bright student who floats effortlessly by on last-minute revision, but with Boris it is every single time. And buy clothes that fit -- spend some of the book royalties in Savile Row -- if Jeremy Corbyn can do it, so can Boris.
Boris has the highest ceiling of any of the likely contenders. But he also probably has the lowest floor.
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
I find most of that very plausible, but I won't bet on it because it coincides with what I want to happen. I think the Corbgasm was real and intense, but transient, and that he will stitch things up to ensure that his successor shares his politics (but not his charisma). But I don't think there is any chance of May outperforming expectations to a big enough extent to have her going into another GE as PM.
I think that's very true. I tried to avoid saying she would lead them to victory. I could see her steering through Brexit and perhaps taking the Tories up to 2021 then standing aside for a bright young thing to come from the ranks and lead them to victory.
If the Conservatives don't get their act together, including on social media and amongst yoofs, then they deserve to lose. But that was by no means the only catastrophe of the 2017 campaign.
I'm reminded of that line in Blackadder:
'I want to see how a war is fought ... so badly.' 'Well you've certainly come to the right place Bob. A war hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, high chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside.'
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Almost unbelievable that in 2017 someone can post something so hideously gender binary as this.
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
I find most of that very plausible, but I won't bet on it because it coincides with what I want to happen. I think the Corbgasm was real and intense, but transient, and that he will stitch things up to ensure that his successor shares his politics (but not his charisma). But I don't think there is any chance of May outperforming expectations to a big enough extent to have her going into another GE as PM.
Corbyn isn't charismatic particularly, he is just good at ranting
Unaccountably he has given his only daughter the single Christian name of Mary. Perhaps he thinks fillies are too weak to bear the burden of lots of stupid names.
Are the other boys named in sequence? Primus, Secundus, etc.....?
It seems like a rotten thing to do to the children. They have to bear the ridicule of unusual names, not the parent who named them.
Yes -- though I wonder if it is changing slightly as we adopt the American custom of just making names up, as well as immigrants no longer feeling compelled to anglicise their names. It is tough now -- he'd be criticised as well for calling the boy Wayne.
The other american custom I find a bit odd is that of giving boys girl's names and vice versa. I once came across a boy called Claire and a girl called Robin. Two more famous examples were Marion Morrison (John Wayne) and Michael Learned (Mrs Walton in "The Waltons").
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
Almost unbelievable that in 2017 someone can post something so hideously gender binary as this.
'Boys' 'Girls' names - you'll be telling me that they have to wear only blue and pink respectively next. Ridiculous rubbish.
There's some Canuk-based stupidity occurring right now where a mother wants her baby girl to be listed on the birth certificate as Gender Unknown until she's "old enough to make the decision on her own".
The poor baby is called Searyl Atli Doty which is bad enough. Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
As an aside - I doubt the economy will bounce from Brexit. The short term risk is downside. A transitional deal would avoid that but it won't cause a bounce.
That's wrong IMO. There will be a very substantial boost* (compared with current falling expectations) if a Brexit deal which avoids a cliff-edge can be done. Of course, you are right that the converse is also true - there is very substantial downside risk, which is only partially priced-in at the moment.
* Albeit offset by a substantial rise in sterling.
Comments
Maybe JRM is hoping to set off a landmark court case against child services on the rights of parents to name their children.
There's a long way to go before 2021* but presumably Labour (and the LDs) would come under great pressure to rule out supporting a minority Conservative administration.
* That decision (extending the life of this Scottish Parliament to 5 years) now looks premature.
I reviewed the first part here:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/review-furies-of-calderon-codex-alera-1.html
Reminds me, when time/money permits, to try a Witcher book.
Yes the government would still get bad headlines becasuse doctors and headteachers earn that much but who cares, it is the right thing to do as many lower paid workers have been suffering deep real terms wage cuts.
There are ways to raise the pay cap for poorer public sector workers whilst still being fiscally responsible.
It also would cost almost as much as raising pay for everyone by 2%.
Also the pay differential between public and private is probably greatest for high incomes...
Wow... If you were confident you'd pay off the loan in the time period - probably worth refinancing commercially?
The reason you wouldn't "refinance" is student loans aren't considered when it comes to other lending / credit rating and of course if you lose your job you stop making repayments (and the amount you repay each month is a % of your income not as a % of the debt).
The Referendum was the nationalists high watermark. I doubt it'll be repeated
With rare exceptions, my dislike of a Tory frontbencher is inversely related to their chance of winning, as such I have put afew quid on Priti.
However, in terms of repayments now vs 5 years ago, they won't be different. It is a percentage of your salary, not related to how much you owe. And most people are paying them off so slowly that £20k or £50k at 3% or 6% interest rate, they will still be making payments in late 20 / early 30s when most people come to buy a home.
The real difference is the percentage of people actually clearing that debt by the cut off date vs the government having to clear it for them.
I pointed this out years ago in one of my (many) posts here :>
If Kezia Dugdale was the answer to both Scottish Labour's problems and also a vehicle for the anti SNP vote, it would have materilised in the Holyrood elections last year or during the local elections and the GE just a few weeks ago. It didn't, and all because neither Kezia Dugdale or her party are now the natural home of the pro Union/anti SNP vote central ground vote in Scotland.
And with Scotland now lagging behind the UK in both economic and public sector performance, a perfect political storm is brewing that is going to propel the Scottish Conservatives into power at Holyrood. To put it into perspective, a terrible May GE campaign vs a socialist Corbyn manifesto utopia protest vote didn't shift more than six seats in a country that is really fed up with the SNP at Holryood or the constant chatter about another Indy Ref on the back of Brexit!
Moonlight
Good times
Brexit.
Now, in your 20s that debt builds up fairly significantly as you are hardly denting it given the interest rate / graduate salary. Then, by the time you earn decent money you will still be paying it off, meaning that the majority of people will be hit by that extra 7% tax rate for most of their working lives. But then under a graduate tax scheme or jezza's free for all, people will be paying extra tax one way or another.
The unpalatable answer is really less full time students, more flexible part time higher education and on the job learning...but parents won't accept that little Johnny isn't bright enough to one of the 25-30% that go full time (rather than the 50% now) and its elitist etc etc etc.
a) a proper market i.e there is just no way that a degree from Oxford is worth the same as Oxford Brookes
b) different subjects cost a vastly different amount to put on e.g Chemistry at a top uni costs about £15k per student per year, media studies at a shit one £3k.
c) things like medicine has become eye wateringly expensive, despite them being very valuable to the nation.
Plan 2 would have been long term alot more expensive for me.
Jezza sounding shrill.
The thing is the cult (and the wider public) don't care. May could bury him every week and it won't dent his poll ratings.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/882559827993559041
Yesterday, the imbecile reporting for ITV suggested that the response to Grenfell called into question who should run the country (or words to that effect). It was not an edifying moment of journalism.
If the government hadn't announced a head of the inquiry by now they would have been getting it in the neck.
We don't know the exact causes of the fire, hence the inquiry. And even if it is suspected it was the cladding, it appears that buildings around the country have similar cladding dating back 15 years, and the cladding approved by the local council wasn't the stuff that was put on the building etc etc etc.
I rate both Andrews but otherwise I'd much rather have an ex-politician talking me through things.
NB quote tweet is from James Forsyth:
@JGForsyth
Has Theresa May ever defended the Tories' economic record as vigorously as this? Might get her a positive mention in the Standard editorial.
Perhaps her escape from the clutches of Beardie n Fifi is responsible.
Well anyone who isn't working for the BBC.
Someone on here pointed out to me, many years ago, that 100 years ago Beverley was sometimes a boys name. Yikes!
I'm on Majka for today's stage. Twice a KoM winner so should be involved in this mountain top finish, especially as he seems to be targetting a high GC finish this year rather than the KoM jersey. 33/1 for today.
Also backed Molleka at 100/1 for this years KoM. I think he's targetting this rather than GC and has lost 8 min so far this year so the big boys won't see him as a threat and may allow him to get away up the road, probably not today but the upcoming mountain stages. Of course he could just be feeling weak after doing the Giro but I'll take that chance.
I fancy Latour for the young riders jersey. havent backed him yet. hope to get a better price tomorrow. 7/1 was available this morning but the bookies I have cash with were best 5/1.
He needs to win this one really to keep it live I think, as he'll start getting 'old' in the next few years.
If he does win this one, the bet is in fantastic shape of course.
On point (b) media studies does quite well in employability surveys, even if they are all working as waiters. Amusingly, a hundred years ago the same arguments were made against English degrees -- reading novels was a leisure activity for women, not a serious field of study.
Frances, Francis
Vivian, Vivian
Frankie etc
And there are no doubt further ones
A rough tough rugby player too Miss C!
https://order-order.com/2017/07/05/mays-defiant-defence-austerity/
Here's a scenario:
The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.
Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?
'Boys' 'Girls' names - you'll be telling me that they have to wear only blue and pink respectively next. Ridiculous rubbish.
Jan
Doubt May will be leader though in 2022.
As an aside - I doubt the economy will bounce from Brexit. The short term risk is downside.
A transitional deal would avoid that but it won't cause a bounce.
If the Conservatives don't get their act together, including on social media and amongst yoofs, then they deserve to lose. But that was by no means the only catastrophe of the 2017 campaign.
I'm reminded of that line in Blackadder:
'I want to see how a war is fought ... so badly.'
'Well you've certainly come to the right place Bob. A war hasn't been fought this badly since Olaf the Hairy, high chief of all the Vikings, accidentally ordered 80,000 battle helmets with the horns on the inside.'
The poor baby is called Searyl Atli Doty which is bad enough. Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
http://theresurgent.com/canadian-mother-wants-babys-gender-to-be-unknown/
* Albeit offset by a substantial rise in sterling.