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?
More likely the opposite. Brexit tanks the economy, tax revenue drops, inflation rises as the pound devalues. May demostrates her usual incompetence while uncivil war breaks out in the Tory party in the blame game.
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.
Yes. A boost vs. expectations. As in we will continue on trend, rather than going below trend. I don't think that's positive enough that there would be a political benefit though?
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 ... Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
Unless you think that gender is to some degree or other a construct, a means by which we categorise in order to control. Gender fluidity is something I'm convinced about: everyone is somewhere on a spectrum and there are few absolutes.
Even if you don't subscribe to that theory then gender is certainly rather more complex than whether you have a vag or a willy ...
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.
There will be a bounce but it will be in some sectors and not others. Some areas of the economy will take off and some will take a hit.
The doom-mongers who are praying for disaster and are represented on here will cherry-pick examples of the downside (or in one case simply Scott'n'Paste the cherrypickings of others).
The evangelists on here will cherry-pick only the good examples and brush off the negative stuff (that's including me).
As always the truth will be somewhere in the middle. But the trend will be upwards.
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?
More likely the opposite. Brexit tanks the economy, tax revenue drops, inflation rises as the pound devalues. May demostrates her usual incompetence while uncivil war breaks out in the Tory party in the blame game.
Labour wins comfortable majority.
Then Corbyn and McDonnell crash the economy even further, inflation soars, many of the rich move abroad to escape the Labour tax hikes, we enter a double dip recession, the unions flex their muscles and Priti Patel becomes PM after winning the 2027 general election
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.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
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 ... Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
Unless you think that gender is to some degree or other a construct, a means by which we categorise in order to control. Gender fluidity is something I'm convinced about: everyone is somewhere on a spectrum and there are few absolutes.
Even if you don't subscribe to that theory then gender is certainly rather more complex than whether you have a vag or a willy ...
People shouldn't be allowed to vote if they can't even work out which set of public toilets they're physically plumbed in to use.
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.
There will be a bounce but it will be in some sectors and not others. Some areas of the economy will take off and some will take a hit.
The doom-mongers who are praying for disaster and are represented on here will cherry-pick examples of the downside (or in one case simply Scott'n'Paste the cherrypickings of others).
The evangelists on here will cherry-pick only the good examples and brush off the negative stuff (that's including me).
As always the truth will be somewhere in the middle. But the trend will be upwards.
I don't see how the trend can be upwards in the short term when it comes to trade. The economy could be doing well for other reasons of course, but Brexit is surely a drag in short term.
The EU has deals with loads of countries which will take us time to replicate. That's the trap Hammond has set for Fox.
In the long run its possible we could get more deals and deals more suited to our economy rather than the EU economy. But that can't happen by march 2019.
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 ... Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
Even if you don't subscribe to that theory then gender is certainly rather more complex than whether you have a vag or a willy ...
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 ... Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
Unless you think that gender is to some degree or other a construct, a means by which we categorise in order to control. Gender fluidity is something I'm convinced about: everyone is somewhere on a spectrum and there are few absolutes.
Even if you don't subscribe to that theory then gender is certainly rather more complex than whether you have a vag or a willy ...
People shouldn't be allowed to vote if they can't even work out which set of public toilets they're physically plumbed in to use.
It's rather more staggering that you should be allowed to vote given your Neanderthal brain and antediluvian views.
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.
Masculine and feminine names and articles are common in most languages, although no doubt it will become very PC to shun such conventions in the UK inside the next 15 years.
Yes. A boost vs. expectations. As in we will continue on trend, rather than going below trend. I don't think that's positive enough that there would be a political benefit though?
Yes, I think there would be a political benefit, because of the boost to business and consumer confidence.
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.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
I have considerable sympathy with your views. Increasing the interest rate on student loans was designed to make the book more marketable, nothing more. Under any normal circumstances it would be a breach of contract.
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.
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?
More likely the opposite. Brexit tanks the economy, tax revenue drops, inflation rises as the pound devalues. May demostrates her usual incompetence while uncivil war breaks out in the Tory party in the blame game.
Labour wins comfortable majority.
Then Corbyn and McDonnell crash the economy even further, inflation soars, many of the rich move abroad to escape the Labour tax hikes, we enter a double dip recession, the unions flex their muscles and Priti Patel becomes PM after winning the 2027 general election
In my scenario Corbyn and Mc Donnell do surprisingly well, having inadvertently taken power at the bottom of the business cycle, and benefitting from the recovery. They take credit for their expansory plans and win a second election, while Tories continue to fight amonst themselves. No Tory currently in Parliament ever sits on the government benches again.
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
Yes. A boost vs. expectations. As in we will continue on trend, rather than going below trend. I don't think that's positive enough that there would be a political benefit though?
Yes, I think there would be a political benefit, because of the boost to business and consumer confidence.
Consumer confidence is okay I think... Has fallen since ref. but about average compared to historical levels. Similar story for business confidence I think.
But you're right that it could be positive effect....
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
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.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
I have considerable sympathy with your views. Increasing the interest rate on student loans was designed to make the book more marketable, nothing more. Under any normal circumstances it would be a breach of contract.
It is hard to know whether I should give some money to Fox jr to escape these chains of debt early, or whether the debt is going to be written off anyway. It would be a shame to do this then Jezza write off the existing debts.
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 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 or them.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
You cannot retire at 55 unless you have built up the funds to do so in the private sector and even in the public sector final salary pension schemes are rarer than they were. We may eventually get a retirement age of 75 but only if average life expectancy reaches 90. 65 only worked when life expectancy was 80
LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.
One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake
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.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
I have considerable sympathy with your views. Increasing the interest rate on student loans was designed to make the book more marketable, nothing more. Under any normal circumstances it would be a breach of contract.
It is hard to know whether I should give some money to Fox jr to escape these chains of debt early, or whether the debt is going to be written off anyway. It would be a shame to do this then Jezza write off the existing debts.
Doubt Jezza would do that in practice. Reducing interest rates on debt for those post 2012 is likely though I would guess.
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 ... Her mother clearly has a mental disorder and the child should be taken into care.
Unless you think that gender is to some degree or other a construct, a means by which we categorise in order to control.
Which is clearly, to use an appropriate phrase, total bollocks.
LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.
One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake
Hence Boris, ever the populist, backed ending the public sector pay cap this week
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?
More likely the opposite. Brexit tanks the economy, tax revenue drops, inflation rises as the pound devalues. May demostrates her usual incompetence while uncivil war breaks out in the Tory party in the blame game.
Labour wins comfortable majority.
Then Corbyn and McDonnell crash the economy even further, inflation soars, many of the rich move abroad to escape the Labour tax hikes, we enter a double dip recession, the unions flex their muscles and Priti Patel becomes PM after winning the 2027 general election
In my scenario Corbyn and Mc Donnell do surprisingly well, having inadvertently taken power at the bottom of the business cycle, and benefitting from the recovery. They take credit for their expansory plans and win a second election, while Tories continue to fight amonst themselves. No Tory currently in Parliament ever sits on the government benches again.
No chance, if we still have an economy left after Corbyn and McDonnell have got their hands on it the Tories will be highly likely to win the next general election, those 2 would guarantee a quicker Tory recovery than Lazarus. Even a Patel general election win is possible after the disaster that would be a Corbyn premiership
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
Glastonbury disagreed.
A twig with a red rosette would be cheered at Glastonbury!
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 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 or them.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
You cannot retire at 55 unless you have built up the funds to do so in the private sector and even in the public sector final salary pension schemes are rarer than they were. We may eventually get a retirement age of 75 but only if average life expectancy reaches 90. 65 only worked when life expectancy was 80
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 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 or them.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
You cannot retire at 55 unless you have built up the funds to do so in the private sector and even in the public sector final salary pension schemes are rarer than they were. We may eventually get a retirement age of 75 but only if average life expectancy reaches 90. 65 only worked when life expectancy was 80
BJO retired at 54
Well if he has saved enough pension good luck to him
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.
In 2017 it's still pretty normal to be "gender binary" albeit with an appreciation and acceptance that it isn't always.
You are right though that Beverley's prejudice against unisex names is quaint. There have always been unisex names and most people don't have a problem with it. I was teaching a class yesterday with a male Morgan and a female Morgan in it. Other common unisex names are Alex, Ashley, Bailey, Billy, Corey, Drew, Frankie, Jamie, Mackenzie, Rowan, Robin, Sam and Taylor.
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.
Just came from a really really downbeat economic briefing...
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.
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
Glastonbury disagreed.
But Glastonbury consists largely of middle class young people in Che Guevera teeshirt phase. There is also something very very sinister about the sight and sound of large numbers of young people participating in mindless chanting whether it be "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" or "Sieg Heil".
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.
Just came from a really really downbeat economic briefing...
Do your clients know you're the bank who said YES YES YES?
(If I'd voted Leave I wouldn't even get a tampax ad!)
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 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 or them.
I can confirm that it is a factor in the affordability check. Treated in a similar way to childcare costs. Student loan by reducing take home pay does impact on affordability clearly but once again it feels like the system is stacked up against the young.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
You cannot retire at 55 unless you have built up the funds to do so in the private sector and even in the public sector final salary pension schemes are rarer than they were. We may eventually get a retirement age of 75 but only if average life expectancy reaches 90. 65 only worked when life expectancy was 80
BJO retired at 54
Well if he has saved enough pension good luck to him
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.
I had a great grandfather called Fenton and a great uncle called Dennison. My first head teacher was called Dyson Beaumont. It seems it was a Yorkshire tradition to use the maternal line surnames as first names.
Comments
Labour wins comfortable majority.
I don't think that's positive enough that there would be a political benefit though?
Even if you don't subscribe to that theory then gender is certainly rather more complex than whether you have a vag or a willy ...
The doom-mongers who are praying for disaster and are represented on here will cherry-pick examples of the downside (or in one case simply Scott'n'Paste the cherrypickings of others).
The evangelists on here will cherry-pick only the good examples and brush off the negative stuff (that's including me).
As always the truth will be somewhere in the middle. But the trend will be upwards.
The government have acted appallingly with the 9K student loan reform in general. They introduced it with a set of rules on interest, then reneged within a couple of years. In a few years time I predict they will tweak it again in some novel way to hammer the young once more. If they want to call it a loan, they can't just rewrite the rules of the game once they have been set. Otherwise it looks like a bit of a racket.
I'm a youngish Tory-voter but I'm getting sick of the intergenerational inequity in the system. We will be lucky to retire at 75+, will have barely there pensions/ NHS and yet we will be paying the taxes to fund early retirees at 55.
The economy could be doing well for other reasons of course, but Brexit is surely a drag in short term.
The EU has deals with loads of countries which will take us time to replicate. That's the trap Hammond has set for Fox.
In the long run its possible we could get more deals and deals more suited to our economy rather than the EU economy. But that can't happen by march 2019.
But you're right that it could be positive effect....
NEW THREAD
One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake
Reducing interest rates on debt for those post 2012 is likely though I would guess.
99%+ of people are born male or born female.
You are right though that Beverley's prejudice against unisex names is quaint. There have always been unisex names and most people don't have a problem with it. I was teaching a class yesterday with a male Morgan and a female Morgan in it. Other common unisex names are Alex, Ashley, Bailey, Billy, Corey, Drew, Frankie, Jamie, Mackenzie, Rowan, Robin, Sam and Taylor.
http://koridoty.com/?page_id=44
(If I'd voted Leave I wouldn't even get a tampax ad!)