Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
I was out with a group urbane Italian friends last night... not one, I repeat not one knew the name of our PM. Not one.
We have been reduced to one of those inconsequential countries where no one knows or cares of our political leadership.
We are the country led by Auntie Mabel from Maidenhead hoping for someone, however odious dropping some crumbs because they feel sorry for us.
From 2008 when Brown showed the rest how to save the world banking system to 2017 when we are a diminished and fast diminishing country. And people have the fucking cheek to say Brexit is patriotic.
I wouldn't know the PM of Italy without googling it either. Not sure what that proves.
We have become Italy...with the sunshine.....bloody hell I hate the heat!
Building Regulations could require new homes to be designed to stay cool in heatwaves without air conditioning. It won't happen ... too many large housebuilders are too close to the current govt.
I love warm sunshine and hadn't been too hot in England since the summer of 1976 ... not until I was stuck on a train on 21st June 2017 (hottest June day since 1976) with broken air conditioning. 30 degC = fine. 40 degC = excessive.
OT. Just listened to an 'Any Questions'. Studio audiences and vox pops shouldn't be ignored. They're generally the most reliable measurement of the zeitgeist.
It was a Laura Kuenssberg vox pop in a Preston Bingo Hall and a 'Question Time' with Nigel Lawson that first alerted me to the likelihood that 'Leave' would win.
There was a palpable amount of anger about to day. This could well be a long hot summer.
As an aside, it ought not to be forgotten that the housing boom has created a very large number of people with big mortgages.
Getting prices down (say) 40% to help with those not on the property "ladder" will be fairly disastrous for those on 90% mortgages. It will also have a negative impact on labour mobility, by putting large numbers of people into negative equity.
I wonder though. If it did happen... Would the government intervene in some way to help those in that situation?
Under Cameron and Osborne the Conservatives forgot they should be the party of aspiration and instead became the party of stasis and privilege.
Ever increasing numbers of pensioners with ever increasing triple lock pensions living in houses with ever increasing prices and voting Conservative in ever increasing numbers.
Building that many homes will be hard and expensive. But Corbyn needs a tiny swing to be PM, which would be much much more expensive.
They need to go for broke and build build build, especially in London and the south, but in the big northern cities as well and everywhere else that needs it.
Social housing, private housing, homes for rent, homes for first timers, family homes but most of all good quality safe homes.
Several problems with that starting with Tory voting Nimbus, passing via shortage of building workers (apart from immigrants) but ending with house price deflation, negative equity and a renewed banking crisis.
There is no easy way out for the Tories.
Britain is a country which wants to buy cheap houses and inherit expensive houses.
And will blame the government if that isn't possible.
Got it in one, neither the Tories nor Labour can solve that one!
The only way to bring down high real terms house prices (and personal debt) without negative equity is to let inflation rip. A dose of printing money and payrises for all should do the trick. Corbyns can do this, though there may be a few side effects.
Indeed, it was inflation during the 1974 to 1979 Labour government which helped bring Thatcher to power
Inflation was not actually that high when Thatcher took office. At just under 10% it was quite a bit lower than when Heath departed in March 1974. Thatcher's victory had much more to do with the industrial strife of Jan/Feb 79 - the Winter of Discontent. Had Callaghan called the election for Auumn 1978 Thatcher might well have lost - and never become PM.
That's right. Until the Winter of Discontent, Callaghan's government had been having a good run. Unemployment was falling and GDP was growing at close to 1% a quarter following the mid 70s post Barber boom bust and the oil crises.
And then the Winter of Discontent happened.
Thats a tasty what if. Winning a 78 election and then getting the infusion of North Sea Oil cash before the next election .
I was out with a group urbane Italian friends last night... not one, I repeat not one knew the name of our PM. Not one.
We have been reduced to one of those inconsequential countries where no one knows or cares of our political leadership.
We are the country led by Auntie Mabel from Maidenhead hoping for someone, however odious dropping some crumbs because they feel sorry for us.
From 2008 when Brown showed the rest how to save the world banking system to 2017 when we are a diminished and fast diminishing country. And people have the fucking cheek to say Brexit is patriotic.
I wouldn't know the PM of Italy without googling it either. Not sure what that proves.
We have become Italy...with the sunshine.....bloody hell I hate the heat!
Building Regulations could require new homes to be designed to stay cool in heatwaves without air conditioning. It won't happen ... too many large housebuilders are too close to the current govt.
I love warm sunshine and hadn't been too hot in England since the summer of 1976 ... not until I was stuck on a train on 21st June 2017 (hottest June day since 1976) with broken air conditioning. 30 degC = fine. 40 degC = excessive.
My house is 15 years old and has a real chimney. I sometimes have woodfires in the winter, but the problem is that as a modern double glazed house it gets too hot. Modern houses are simply too well insulated for fires.
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
"What is left" ? Only a tiny fraction is built upon.
Once you open the ugly box of nationalism as the referendum has done it can sprout in all sorts of unexpected directions
Ah yes, that well known referendum which resulted in the founding of An Gof in 1980 - named after the leader of the referendum-inspired Cornish Rebellion of 1497.
Once you open the ugly box of nationalism as the referendum has done it can sprout in all sorts of unexpected directions
Ah yes, that well known referendum which resulted in the founding of An Gof in 1980 - named after the leader of the referendum-inspired Cornish Rebellion of 1497.
Didn't Nick Clegg grant Cornwall nationhood during the coalition?
You'd think as an MP for a Yorkshire seat he would have had a different priority.
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
"What is left" ? Only a tiny fraction is built upon.
The trouble is that the effect of building spills out further than its own footprint. A field next to a motorway is different from a field not next to a motorway. And so on.
OT. Just listened to an 'Any Questions'. Studio audiences and vox pops shouldn't be ignored. They're generally the most reliable measurement of the zeitgeist.
It was a Laura Kuenssberg vox pop in a Preston Bingo Hall and a 'Question Time' with Nigel Lawson that first alerted me to the likelihood that 'Leave' would win.
There was a palpable amount of anger about to day. This could well be a long hot summer.
As an example of new house building: houses with chimneys sell for more than houses without chimneys. Hence the more expensive houses being built around our way have brick chimneys sticking out of the roof.
Except chimneys are also massive holes that let heat escape and cold air in, and cost money to properly build. Therefore they are faux-chimneys: they are built into the roof trusses at ground level and lifted up on the trusses. Hence you see brick chimneys on a roof that are physically unconnected to anything (although in some cases they run a flue from a gas boiler up to them). They are certainly not chimneys for fires.
Another one I've heard of (though not around here) is a 'proper' chimney being built, but leaving the interior flue unlined. Which can have rather deleterious effects on the house if they set a fire.
My house, 20 years old, has a fake chimney, and a ridge tile outlet for the flue next to it.
A couple of neighbours have replaced their gas fires with wood burners, which require an external steel column bolted onto the side of the house.
It's crazy. It's nonsensical. Yet housebuilders build them as people will pay more for houses with a chimney, even if they are useless and pointless.
I was out with a group urbane Italian friends last night... not one, I repeat not one knew the name of our PM. Not one.
We have been reduced to one of those inconsequential countries where no one knows or cares of our political leadership.
We are the country led by Auntie Mabel from Maidenhead hoping for someone, however odious dropping some crumbs because they feel sorry for us.
From 2008 when Brown showed the rest how to save the world banking system to 2017 when we are a diminished and fast diminishing country. And people have the fucking cheek to say Brexit is patriotic.
I wouldn't know the PM of Italy without googling it either. Not sure what that proves.
We have become Italy...with the sunshine.....bloody hell I hate the heat!
Building Regulations could require new homes to be designed to stay cool in heatwaves without air conditioning. It won't happen ... too many large housebuilders are too close to the current govt.
I love warm sunshine and hadn't been too hot in England since the summer of 1976 ... not until I was stuck on a train on 21st June 2017 (hottest June day since 1976) with broken air conditioning. 30 degC = fine. 40 degC = excessive.
My house is 15 years old and has a real chimney. I sometimes have woodfires in the winter, but the problem is that as a modern double glazed house it gets too hot. Modern houses are simply too well insulated for fires.
I'm not saying that all new houses have faux-chimneys, just that many do. I'd love a house in which I could have real fires safely.
If you want real heat: a few years back my parents extended and modernised an old cottage into a house. The modernised and insulated kitchen has an Aga in it, which they use for cooking. Whilst it's brilliant in winter, in summer it gets a little too toasty ...
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
"What is left" ? Only a tiny fraction is built upon.
Yup - all the green "built on " garbage includes anything that is "used". So a garden for a house in Marden - which can be an acre of grass (literally) - is hideous satanic mills or something.
I was out with a group urbane Italian friends last night... not one, I repeat not one knew the name of our PM. Not one.
We have been reduced to one of those inconsequential countries where no one knows or cares of our political leadership.
We are the country led by Auntie Mabel from Maidenhead hoping for someone, however odious dropping some crumbs because they feel sorry for us.
From 2008 when Brown showed the rest how to save the world banking system to 2017 when we are a diminished and fast diminishing country. And people have the fucking cheek to say Brexit is patriotic.
I wouldn't know the PM of Italy without googling it either. Not sure what that proves.
We have become Italy...with the sunshine.....bloody hell I hate the heat!
Building Regulations could require new homes to be designed to stay cool in heatwaves without air conditioning. It won't happen ... too many large housebuilders are too close to the current govt.
I love warm sunshine and hadn't been too hot in England since the summer of 1976 ... not until I was stuck on a train on 21st June 2017 (hottest June day since 1976) with broken air conditioning. 30 degC = fine. 40 degC = excessive.
My house is 15 years old and has a real chimney. I sometimes have woodfires in the winter, but the problem is that as a modern double glazed house it gets too hot. Modern houses are simply too well insulated for fires.
The smallest woodstove available has an output of about 4-5 kilowatts. A modern detached house of average size, even of volume developer quality, probably has a peak loss of 5-7 kW and it's only that high on the coldest days.
Housebuyers may believe that new houses have a chimney until they buy one and look for the fireplace. It's been a seller's market for most of the last 60 years, except a blip around 1990 and a brief blip in 2007. Simply creating a buyer's market would lead to some improvement in construction quality versus this typical example of current developer's rubbish:
OT. Just listened to an 'Any Questions'. Studio audiences and vox pops shouldn't be ignored. They're generally the most reliable measurement of the zeitgeist.
It was a Laura Kuenssberg vox pop in a Preston Bingo Hall and a 'Question Time' with Nigel Lawson that first alerted me to the likelihood that 'Leave' would win.
There was a palpable amount of anger about to day. This could well be a long hot summer.
What were they angry about?
Austerity. The fire and lack of empathy. Authority. Almost any authority. It was a revolutionary spirit that I haven't felt since I was at college.
PS. The BBC go to great efforts to havee a balanced audience
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
"What is left" ? Only a tiny fraction is built upon.
Yup - all the green "built on " garbage includes anything that is "used". So a garden for a house in Marden - which can be an acre of grass (literally) - is hideous satanic mills or something.
It is a distressing thing to see someone literally incoherent with rage. What are you trying to say?
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
Well, do you want net population grow or not. Hmmm. Lets build a chart for progressives -
ZPG = Zero Population Growth BOGB = Build on Green Belt
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
Well, do you want net population grow or not. Hmmm. Lets build a chart for progressives -
ZPG = Zero Population Growth BOGB = Build on Green Belt
You seem to be a bit thick in addition to being really, really, really angry. You see the bit where I say "Again the answer is obvious"? It would be apparent to anyone with an IQ in double figures, looking at the Mona Lisa analogy, that what I mean is that you have to build houses. I am, in other words, 100% in agreement with your own position.
Mr. Rentool, Clegg probably sees England as a collection of EU regions. That was a stupid move by him.
The point of EU regions is *not* to recognise real and distinct areas. That creates a sense of identity which is *bad* for the EU project.
Instead they are designed to break up the country into purely artificial areas to disrupt cohesiveness and create division - which makes it easier to rule.
That's why SandyRentool should also understand the lack of interest of that Yorkshire ex-MP in Yorkshire.
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
"What is left" ? Only a tiny fraction is built upon.
Yup - all the green "built on " garbage includes anything that is "used". So a garden for a house in Marden - which can be an acre of grass (literally) - is hideous satanic mills or something.
It is a distressing thing to see someone literally incoherent with rage. What are you trying to say?
That according to the comic definition of "used land", a garden that is a field left as a literal wilderness is classed as "developed" by the clowns who claim that the UK is covered in houses.
I'm not angry - just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who claim that immigration is wonderful but people (and their works) are evil.
Except that high inflation benefits the richer, in general. Hugo Stinnes and all that...
The only way to really bring house prices down is to increase the supply of houses or reduce demand.
If people start wittering about "brownfield", "land banking" etc. - they are lying liars who lie. To begin to deal with the housing shortage we need to build new towns. Each year. Whole towns.
The witterings about secret, simple fixes for housing are spoken because of anti-humanist religion - people and all their works are bad. Racist - for all races. This means that those who are most enthusiastic about the wonders of unlimited immigration are most opposed to building the facilities for the said migrants to live in.
So, any time people tell you that you can't build on the sacred land tell 'em they are racists who like burning poor brown people in tower blocks. For that is the effective result of their policies.
A bit harsh. The question is sometimes posed: if a house is on fire would you rescue from it the original Mona Lisa painting, or 30 orphans? Why this is viewed as paradoxical or difficult I have never understood - you rescue the orphans if you aren't a psychopath. We have the same dilemma: do you build houses, or do you destroy what is left of the English countryside? Again the answer is obvious, but we are inevitably destroying something beautiful and irreplaceable.
Well, do you want net population grow or not. Hmmm. Lets build a chart for progressives -
ZPG = Zero Population Growth BOGB = Build on Green Belt
You seem to be a bit thick in addition to being really, really, really angry. You see the bit where I say "Again the answer is obvious"? It would be apparent to anyone with an IQ in double figures, looking at the Mona Lisa analogy, that what I mean is that you have to build houses. I am, in other words, 100% in agreement with your own position.
PS "a bit thick" is an example of litotes.
I am using the language of the progressive to illustrate the stupidity of their position. In this form of thinking, a result biased against minority groups is racist, no matter the cause. Think institutional racism. If we apply this philosophical theory to housing, the current planning system results in groups which are heavily minority paying more and more for worse and worse housing.
So the current planning policy is racist. So many progressive are in favour of a racist housing policy.
Mr. Roger, must admit, saw that linked to on Twitter and it did make me wonder.
Maybe I should change my pen name to Thaddeus Beckham.
Mind you, I'd probably have better luck going to George RR Tolkien.
Mr. M, yeah, quite agree. It's rather sad.
Edited extra bit: why Ladbrokes has redesigned the F1 section so every race market has its own single market section, rather than putting all of them under a race section, is beyond me. It's stupid. And irksome. And somebody paid money to make it worse.
Corbyn remains the best thing to happen to the Tory party -but not in the way that was at first thought. A Corbyn government would be so disastrous, that the Tories would be using it in their PPBs long after Corbyn is gone. And I am a non Blairite Labour supporter. To campaign with poetry to crowds of chanting adulaters is one thing, but when the prose crashes and burns is another.
Indeed. There is a case to be made that it would be in the Tories' best interests for Corbyn to win the next general election, mess up the economy and then for them to be in contention at the subsequent election rather than for the Tories to narrowly win next time then a moderate like Umunna wins the following general election by a landslide and the Tories are then out of power for a decade or more. There is no doubt that it is in the country's best interests to keep Corbyn out though
Clearly no doubt in your mind... but many (>40% from the latest polls) clearly do not believe that blythe assumption. As many, if not more, believe that brexit will mess up the economy before Corbyn gets a chance.
42% still voted to keep Corbyn out, with Corbyn you get hard Brexit plus socialism on top
I'm beginning to suspect that the Tories cunning plan is to lose the next election in the hope that Corbyn gets the blame for the oncoming economic meltdown rather than Brexit.
Jennings making Ballance look like a 2020 specialist at the moment.
Harsh! 145 up at tea on Day 3 and you're looking for negatives?
If they bat to lunch tomorrow they should be 350 up and in a very strong position to push for a win. The lack of SA bowling options should hurt them even more in this innings. It's looking good but our top 3 is still a source of concern.
As an example of new house building: houses with chimneys sell for more than houses without chimneys. Hence the more expensive houses being built around our way have brick chimneys sticking out of the roof.
Except chimneys are also massive holes that let heat escape and cold air in, and cost money to properly build. Therefore they are faux-chimneys: they are built into the roof trusses at ground level and lifted up on the trusses. Hence you see brick chimneys on a roof that are physically unconnected to anything (although in some cases they run a flue from a gas boiler up to them). They are certainly not chimneys for fires.
Another one I've heard of (though not around here) is a 'proper' chimney being built, but leaving the interior flue unlined. Which can have rather deleterious effects on the house if they set a fire.
My house, 20 years old, has a fake chimney, and a ridge tile outlet for the flue next to it.
A couple of neighbours have replaced their gas fires with wood burners, which require an external steel column bolted onto the side of the house.
It's crazy. It's nonsensical. Yet housebuilders build them as people will pay more for houses with a chimney, even if they are useless and pointless.
Once you open the ugly box of nationalism as the referendum has done it can sprout in all sorts of unexpected directions
Alternatively once people notice that "community groups" get a reward for violence (or threat of).
When the Sikh community got that play stopped by escalating "protests", I wondered what strange fruit that would create. Low and behold, within months the EDL appeared.
Jennings making Ballance look like a 2020 specialist at the moment.
Harsh! 145 up at tea on Day 3 and you're looking for negatives?
If they bat to lunch tomorrow they should be 350 up and in a very strong position to push for a win. The lack of SA bowling options should hurt them even more in this innings. It's looking good but our top 3 is still a source of concern.
For those who like that sort of thing - Cook is ten short of 11111 Test runs
Is that true? How can ITV justify flat-out racial discrimination? I would have thought that would be illegal.
No wonder trust in the media is falling. When they painted the first place in the election as a loss and the second place as a great achievement, I thought that was bad enough.
Is that true? How can ITV justify flat-out racial discrimination? I would have thought that would be illegal.
No wonder trust in the media is falling. When they painted the first place in the election as a loss and the second place as a great achievement, I thought that was bad enough.
Why only uk nationals? No Irish or other EU citizens allowed?
Corbyn remains the best thing to happen to the Tory party -but not in the way that was at first thought. A Corbyn government would be so disastrous, that the Tories would be using it in their PPBs long after Corbyn is gone. And I am a non Blairite Labour supporter. To campaign with poetry to crowds of chanting adulaters is one thing, but when the prose crashes and burns is another.
Indeed. There is a case to be made that it would be in the Tories' best interests for Corbyn to win the next general election, mess up the economy and then for them to be in contention at the subsequent election rather than for the Tories to narrowly win next time then a moderate like Umunna wins the following general election by a landslide and the Tories are then out of power for a decade or more. There is no doubt that it is in the country's best interests to keep Corbyn out though
Clearly no doubt in your mind... but many (>40% from the latest polls) clearly do not believe that blythe assumption. As many, if not more, believe that brexit will mess up the economy before Corbyn gets a chance.
42% still voted to keep Corbyn out, with Corbyn you get hard Brexit plus socialism on top
I'm beginning to suspect that the Tories cunning plan is to lose the next election in the hope that Corbyn gets the blame for the oncoming economic meltdown rather than Brexit.
Of course if there was a general election in 2019 and he won he would get the blame for the fallout from both
I would just like to say these sick people do not speak for us. The majority of us Cornishmen forgive the English for the centuries of oppression. We're mostly a decent bunch.
Mr. John, it's the magic equality formula that leads to the Equalities Committee of Parliament having Women And tacked onto the front. Because some groups are more equal than others.
[Yes, I agree sexism against women still happens and is probably still more prevalent than that against men. That does not excuse massively skewed reporting and funding of men's problems around suicide, and sexual/domestic violence].
I have just been on 888bet.com to put a bet on Jacob Rees-Mogg as next Tory leader at 25-1 and the max bet allowed was £3.68p.
But I am on a roll with leader bets, as I backed Macron when he was 20-1, Corbyn (the first time he stood for leader) at 25-1 and Trump for President when he as 3-1. So if you ant to help yourself, you know what to do!
Meanwhile my tiny bet has moved the odds to 16-1. Bizarre
Mr. John, it's the magic equality formula that leads to the Equalities Committee of Parliament having Women And tacked onto the front. Because some groups are more equal than others.
[Yes, I agree sexism against women still happens and is probably still more prevalent than that against men. That does not excuse massively skewed reporting and funding of men's problems around suicide, and sexual/domestic violence].
The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. Ayn Rand
I have just been on 888bet.com to put a bet on Jacob Rees-Mogg as next Tory leader at 25-1 and the max bet allowed was £3.68p.
But I am on a roll with leader bets, as I backed Macron when he was 20-1, Corbyn (the first time he stood for leader) at 25-1 and Trump for President when he as 3-1. So if you ant to help yourself, you know what to do!
Meanwhile my tiny bet has moved the odds to 16-1. Bizarre
I think bookies assume that certain punters know more than they do about 'specialist' subjects like politics. I've been told by others on here that they mark certain customers' accounts and limit their bets, especially if that customer tends to win. Bookies only like customers who lose.
I tried to place one GE bet, £20 at odds of 5 I think and my stake was limited to £8. Most other bets went through OK.
Mr. John, it's the magic equality formula that leads to the Equalities Committee of Parliament having Women And tacked onto the front. Because some groups are more equal than others.
[Yes, I agree sexism against women still happens and is probably still more prevalent than that against men. That does not excuse massively skewed reporting and funding of men's problems around suicide, and sexual/domestic violence].
The Scottish parliament had a debate on pay discrimination the other day. One of the Conservatives praised the push and asked if anything was also being done about men who were being discriminated against. The response was something along the lines of men doing well as a group, so therefore we shouldn't care about any individual man suffering, and by asking the question he was being anti-woman.
@Beverley_C China has written the UK off? Hm, that isn't really consistent with their presidents recent remarks
When top officials start calling us a "Declining Empire" that is not a good sign. The only real thing we can offer them is our services and finanicial sector because the EU is rubbish at it, but all the other stuff will be going to the EU.
Comments
I love warm sunshine and hadn't been too hot in England since the summer of 1976 ... not until I was stuck on a train on 21st June 2017 (hottest June day since 1976) with broken air conditioning. 30 degC = fine. 40 degC = excessive.
Zoopla put the value of UK housing stock at £8.17tn - no government could ever hope to bail out more than a small fraction of that.
*sighs* Considered Bottas for pole at 6, didn't back it.
Humbug.
I never thought he'd actually get it, but had a decent shot of second (each way that would've yielded a modest profit). Oh well.
Time to start write up qualifying and peruse the markets. Anyone seen an up to date weather forecast?
You'd think as an MP for a Yorkshire seat he would have had a different priority.
If you want real heat: a few years back my parents extended and modernised an old cottage into a house. The modernised and insulated kitchen has an Aga in it, which they use for cooking. Whilst it's brilliant in winter, in summer it gets a little too toasty ...
https://twitter.com/HowlandRobin/status/883678412380016644
Housebuyers may believe that new houses have a chimney until they buy one and look for the fireplace. It's been a seller's market for most of the last 60 years, except a blip around 1990 and a brief blip in 2007. Simply creating a buyer's market would lead to some improvement in construction quality versus this typical example of current developer's rubbish:
twitter.com/myhousesucks.
PS. The BBC go to great efforts to havee a balanced audience
ZPG = Zero Population Growth
BOGB = Build on Green Belt
1) ZPG (YES), BOGB (NO) = Racist
2) ZPG (YES), BOGB (YES) = Racist
3) ZPG (NO), BOGB (NO) = Racist
4) ZPG (NO), BOGB (YES) = Not Racist
Everyone clear now?
PS "a bit thick" is an example of litotes.
Instead they are designed to break up the country into purely artificial areas to disrupt cohesiveness and create division - which makes it easier to rule.
That's why SandyRentool should also understand the lack of interest of that Yorkshire ex-MP in Yorkshire.
I'm not angry - just pointing out the hypocrisy of those who claim that immigration is wonderful but people (and their works) are evil.
"Brooklyn Beckham got the book deal on merit: Pull the other one"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/08/nepotism-self-entitlement-brooklyn-beckham-photographs-book-deal-hadley-freeman
So the current planning policy is racist. So many progressive are in favour of a racist housing policy.
Ain't words and stuff fun?
Maybe I should change my pen name to Thaddeus Beckham.
Mind you, I'd probably have better luck going to George RR Tolkien.
Mr. M, yeah, quite agree. It's rather sad.
Edited extra bit: why Ladbrokes has redesigned the F1 section so every race market has its own single market section, rather than putting all of them under a race section, is beyond me. It's stupid. And irksome. And somebody paid money to make it worse.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/jul/08/homebuyers-who-owns-freehold-housebuilders-sold
Vote labour to put an end to this sh*te.
When the Sikh community got that play stopped by escalating "protests", I wondered what strange fruit that would create. Low and behold, within months the EDL appeared.
PS Sorry to be rude, but I've decided to experiment with rudeness.
No wonder trust in the media is falling. When they painted the first place in the election as a loss and the second place as a great achievement, I thought that was bad enough.
[Yes, I agree sexism against women still happens and is probably still more prevalent than that against men. That does not excuse massively skewed reporting and funding of men's problems around suicide, and sexual/domestic violence].
But I am on a roll with leader bets, as I backed Macron when he was 20-1, Corbyn (the first time he stood for leader) at 25-1 and Trump for President when he as 3-1. So if you ant to help yourself, you know what to do!
Meanwhile my tiny bet has moved the odds to 16-1. Bizarre
Ayn Rand The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.
Ayn Rand
I tried to place one GE bet, £20 at odds of 5 I think and my stake was limited to £8. Most other bets went through OK.
Edited extra bit, new thread.