Of all the issues listed I think housing is the biggest domestic issue. Finding somewhere decent to live at a reasonable cost is becoming impossible in London and this is spreading elsewhere. It affects the future of our children and, for those with property already, our old age - if no-one can buy how much of a "pension" can that property be?
From purely anecdotal reports it is something which bothers my children and their friends and affects their decisions re careers etc. It is making them less than enamoured of the current economic/political settlement.
Britain needs to start building good quality homes and being more imaginative in the use it makes of existing space.
Off topic: a depressing sign of the times that another major terrorist attack gets barely a mention these days.
Finally re what Foxnsox said on the ladt thread: "If I were a regular Joe at such a rally, I would do a reverse ferret very quickly, just as I would if I were to be at anti-war rally if people started flying Hamas flags and making anti-semetic remarks." - absolutely right. By the company you keep you will be judged. But not all those who some seem to think are regular Joes or nice people, do do such reverse ferrets at such rallies. Some even choose to speak at them.
I am at a loss over your final paragraph. Who are we talking about? The original hypothesis was about genuine "regular Joes" presumably meaning innocent members of the 62% of the population who would like the statue kept, and had no other axe to grind. I agree that I personally would quietly remove my "keep the statue" badge and mingle with the crowd, but I would salso worry that that was moral cowardice on my part, and that the morally correct thing to do would be not to be put off by the presence of revolting neo-Nazis from saying my say. Are you saying that no one there at all was in fact a "regular Joe", or that being coincidentally on the same side of an argument as neo-Nazis is automatically equivalent to keeping company with them?
I won't comment about who was in Chsrlottesville as I don' know enough. But there have been marches in the UK where Hamas flags were flown and anti-Semitic slogans shouted and those who speak at such rallies and don't speak against such vile behaviour are exhibiting the same sort of moral obtuseness and cowardice and, perhaps something even worse, that Trump is over US Nazis.
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
You think they couldn't raise money anywhere else?
I am sure they know they would lose more donors by associating with Trump.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
No, it doesn't ThreeQuidder. You can find examples of stupidity and dubious decision-making wherever you look. Such examples do not define the tide of modern thinking, nor automatically deserve inclusion. The Free Speech Movement in Berkeley, California in the 60s demonstrates that free speech restrictions at universities are sadly nothing new.
You should take a look at the Richard Dawkins talk isam posted on the previous thread for a very interesting take on the the tide of modern thinking.
The main argument I made before the referendum took place was that a Leave result would take all the oxygen from political debate for years at the expense of the bigger issues you describe - and at the end of it all we shall be in basically the same position. Basically in the single market and custom union, paying our contributions but with no seat at the table making the rules.
What a total disaster. The best way to minimise the damage is for the Government to quickly agree to being in the single market and custom union and move on - or hold a second referendum. A minority won't like it - but they will be a minority and this is a democracy after all.
Housing is an enormous issue I agree, I wrote on here a few weeks back that the trigger to the crisis was Thatcher selling off council houses at huge discounts converting us all into property developers as opposed to homeowners.
And now the state sponsored property bubble is ironically pricing those who need it most out of the market. Housing benefit is a perfect example of inept govt, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
None of the above is remotely connected to Brexit.
Property development and BTL were a product of the Blair years. The two key triggers were:
1) Brown's tax increases on pensions shifting investment money into property 2) Increased immigration creating a demand for rented housing
Yes, but that was phase 2, RTB was the trigger. The irony is that Thatcher held herself up as a free marketeer but she massively distorted the market with 60% discounts.
Of course you're correct about immigration, property is about supply and demand, it really isn't rocket science. And in London where property prices are astronomical they continue to vote for more immigration, its bizarre.
Economic demand for real estate is not the same as physical demand for accommodation. House prices have risen much faster than rents, in London as well as the rest of the country.
Which figures. Rents are held down when house prices are rising because buying looks more attractive. If house prices fall, renting looks better so demand to rent increases; hence rents rise when house prices fall (or to be less prescriptive, perform relatively better - both could rise or fall but one could do so relatively more). Well, they did in the early 1990s anyway.
In London both have soared simultaneously.
Exactly. The soaring rents debate is about a local London problem. It demands a local London solution - if any action is appropriate.
No problem about the link fix help; you're welcome.
As for the article, it was quite interesting for background flavour but I'm not sure what point it was trying to make.
Those people volunteered for militias and private armies in a messy proxy war of sovereignty and national pride that was largely kick-started by the EU. They weren't in an official national army. They can't seriously be expecting medals and a pension?
If you volunteer to go off and fight in a mercenary war then you have to accept that it's not state supported in the formal way. They knew what they were getting in to - or should have done.
Epping Forest parliamentary constituency is solid blue but at local level the LDs hold 2/3 of the district seats in Epping Hemnall where I stood last night and the Greens have a councillor in Buckhurst Hill and Loughton is dominated by the Residents Association. In the last district election in Hemnall in 2016 the Tories got 34% last night we got 37% in the town council by election so I don't think it suggests much change nationally albeit the LDs campaigned hard on the local plan so expect local plans to figure heavily in next year's locals
I'm not too far from Epping and we have friends in the town so I have been there a good number of times. The High Street is deteriorating I think and like so many other areas the Police Station has gone (in East Ham it has been left vacant since it closed - there's another topic for discussion), the Sue Ryder charity shop went as I recall and while The George & Dragon is a nice gastropub, I much prefer the Zaikaa down the other end of the High Street - some of the best Indian food around.
Yes though Churches the butchers is still there and the Theydon Oak in Coopersale Street just outside Epping is excellent for Sunday lunch (and often frequented by Rod Stewart who lives nearby). I agree Zaikaa is produces some excellent Indian food and I often get takeaways from there
Have enjoyed Sunday lunch in the Theydon Oak with Mrs Stodge (though no sign of Mr Stewart on that occasion). I always wondered how much time they spent cleaning all the ornaments. Zaikaa does a marvellous Sunday evening buffet-style offering (all you can eat but not in the buffet style). The aforementioned Mrs Stodge has visited Nostro's (I believe it's called) with her friend - mixed reviews. My fear is Epping will become like every other High Street with the same chains and places to eat - I'm sure it's something of which the Town Council is well aware.
Don't mention Coopersale or you'll get Sunil on here waxing lyrical about the Epping-Ongar railway.
Epping is a delightful little (former) market town. It hasn't changed much in decades. I expect it will continue to thrive.
Am mildly surprised it is leftish, but I guess it depends where the boundaries are drawn.
"Rudd seems to have formed a highly significant alliance with Davidson, whom she met privately in Glasgow recently. The Scottish Tory leader would probably back Rudd to also succeed May in Downing Street. (My sources tell me Davidson will not be running Jacob Rees-Mogg’s leadership campaign)."
Re. House prices. The one thing any government serious about tackling the problem could do that would definitely help would be to introduce legislation requiring purchasers to prove a connection to the area in which they're buying property.
sort of like a ghetto, yes?
Yes - and while we're on the subject, legislation requiring Channel 4 to take 'Location, Location, Location' off the air would be very welcome too.
No problem about the link fix help; you're welcome.
As for the article, it was quite interesting for background flavour but I'm not sure what point it was trying to make.
Those people volunteered for militias and private armies in a messy proxy war of sovereignty and national pride that was largely kick-started by the EU. They weren't in an official national army. They can't seriously be expecting medals and a pension?
If you volunteer to go off and fight in a mercenary war then you have to accept that it's not state supported in the formal way. They knew what they were getting in to - or should have done.
Thanks. I don't think the article is making any particular point* - it's a human interest story. The participants clearly did expect medals and pensions.
* Except given the source, a generally anti-Putin editorial line.
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
You think they couldn't raise money anywhere else?
I am sure they know they would lose more donors by associating with Trump.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
You think they couldn't raise money anywhere else?
I am sure they know they would lose more donors by associating with Trump.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
You think they couldn't raise money anywhere else?
I am sure they know they would lose more donors by associating with Trump.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
Re. House prices. The one thing any government serious about tackling the problem could do that would definitely help would be to introduce legislation requiring purchasers to prove a connection to the area in which they're buying property.
sort of like a ghetto, yes?
Yes - and while we're on the subject, legislation requiring Channel 4 to take 'Location, Location, Location' off the air would be very welcome too.
When I bought my first home in London the estate agent asked, when I told him how much I had to spend: "what's keeping you to that number, sir?"
The Electoral Commission really needs to come out with proposals to do something about this local/national spend distinction. I'm not sure what, but the current system definitely isn't working.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, but their spending is flat - and more Brits are going abroad - and their spending (in £) is well up:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Going all SJW risks alienating some of your philanthropic base. By virtue signalling they are gambling with lifesaving levels of fund raising. That's all. It's not a political thing. Charities should stay out of politics.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
So virtue signalling is now more important than raising money to fight cancer.
Noted.
Still, I expect he's pleased to know he still has a supportier in you!
Bloody cancer charity do gooders.
They are still doing the fundraiser and are avoiding association with a crazy racist. Win win!
Indeed! What's not to like? Unless you're GeoffM of course!
I was making a serious and non-political point. I'm not sure if you missed it or deliberately chose to ignore it but I'll have one more go.
When a charity decides to go political, they face losing some donors and have to hope that they offset those by gaining others.
Consider the National Trust. They decided to rip up the written legacies of their benefactors over field sports rights on land left to them, for example. They lost some members over that (me, for example). Whether they gained any members on the flip-side is debatable. Similarly with me and the RSPCA on the same subject.
Geoff, your use of terms like 'virtue signalling' and 'SJW' marks you out as a reactionary raging against the tide of modern thinking.
The "tide of modern thinking" includes the concept that universities shouldn't allow free speech on their campus.
This is the latest nonsense in this vein which rather proves the organisers' point:
On topic, I don't agree. Brexit is basically the only thing that matters in British politics right now. The reason is that there's room for a wide variety of plausible outcomes. Depending how it's played it could end up with anything: A huge car crash, a long-term free-trading settlement, a long-term protectionist settlement, more-or-less the status quo only with less voting rights, or cancelling the whole thing. In theory these positions are reversable, but in practice once they become entrenched they'll be very hard to shift.
This is different to most of the other issues which may be important but either aren't much to do with Britain - like whether Trump and Kim Jong Un blow up the world - or are already in a stable political configuration that prevents much change, like whether Britain is going to fix its housing problems by repealing the planning laws. (It's not.)
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
I wonder if there's a degree of 'sleight of hand' - everyone 'resigning' on the dissolution? Surely Corbyn hasn't been that bad?
Just a quick head count on the wiki page puts a total number of changes at between 50 and 60 and that would conflate resignations, retirements and sackings.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
Thanks for that valuable contribution to the site.
A bit like a "Please do not throw stones at this sign" sign.
Here is an interesting story re London. Head of regeneration of Redcar steelworks site to be based in London "with occasional trips to the Tees Valley."
tbh , can see the case for need to liaise with Ministers, but don't they have e-mail and Skype? How about the need to liaise with local residents and businesses?
"if Facebook or Twitter bans a group, it can still take its message to any number of other social networks, or start its own. When domain registrars blacklist it, they effectively banish it from the public internet.
It’s a far blunter instrument, wielded by a company with no experience or expertise in passing editorial judgments, and little track record of public accountability for its actions."
I wonder if there's a degree of 'sleight of hand' - everyone 'resigning' on the dissolution? Surely Corbyn hasn't been that bad?
Just a quick head count on the wiki page puts a total number of changes at between 50 and 60 and that would conflate resignations, retirements and sackings.
So you would have to chuck in 'dissolution resignations' to get to 95......hardly Corbyn's doing! 50-60 is bad enough!
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
Thanks for that valuable contribution to the site.
A bit like a "Please do not throw stones at this sign" sign.
I wonder if there's a degree of 'sleight of hand' - everyone 'resigning' on the dissolution? Surely Corbyn hasn't been that bad?
Just a quick head count on the wiki page puts a total number of changes at between 50 and 60 and that would conflate resignations, retirements and sackings.
So you would have to chuck in 'dissolution resignations' to get to 95......hardly Corbyn's doing! 50-60 is bad enough!
yeah, that would make some sense - that said, those unwilling to stand again for election under him should probably be counted in some way.
Most curious is why the deletion? It hardly seems in the 'Nazi May' category of crassness.
Probably once a Tory MP retweeted it, a panicked CCHQ researcher spent two hours trying and failing to stand the number up.
The gov.uk list of ministers by department has 102 entries, so Corbyn's not even lost a full slate of shadows! (Yes, some ministers have more than one job, and a number sit in the Lords rather than the Commons) https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
Thanks for that valuable contribution to the site.
A bit like a "Please do not throw stones at this sign" sign.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
Do we know SeanT has left? Maybe just busy on that third draft of the latest money-spinning thriller.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
Do we know SeanT has left? Maybe just busy on that third draft of the latest money-spinning thriller.
He came in, made incorrect claims about a car crash and then pronounced he had enough and flounced.
The Electoral Commission really needs to come out with proposals to do something about this local/national spend distinction. I'm not sure what, but the current system definitely isn't working.
Yes, all parties got maximum fines for the 2015 election, the police investigated a number of cases and there's one prosecution still outstanding for breach of local spending limits. It's clear the current system of rules and punishments doesn't work, it would be a good use of the Commission's time to draft a new set of rules with the intention of getting a cross party consensus in the next couple of years.
Parliament is going to be pretty quiet for the next year or so, as most of the government's efforts are going towards the Brexit negotiations - it's not a bad time to think of a list of things where there is general agreement for changes that could either be brought forward, or that independent working groups could start discussing. Planning and social care are the two obvious ones, but there will be plenty more.
Housing is an enormous issue I agree, I wrote on here a few weeks back that the trigger to the crisis was Thatcher selling off council houses at huge discounts converting us..cut...None of the above is remotely connected to Brexit.
Property development and BTL were a product of the Blair years. The two key triggers were: 1) Brown's tax increases on pensions shifting investment money into property 2) Increased immigration creating a demand for rented housing
Yes, but that was phase 2, RTB was the trigger. The irony is that Thatcher held herself up as a free marketeer but she massively distorted the market with 60% discounts.
Of course you're correct about immigration, property is about supply and demand, it really isn't rocket science. And in London where property prices are astronomical they continue to vote for more immigration, its bizarre.
Economic demand for real estate is not the same as physical demand for accommodation. House prices have risen much faster than rents, in London as well as the rest of the country.
Which figures. Rents are held down when house prices are rising because buying looks more attractive. If house prices fall, renting looks better so demand to rent increases; hence rents rise when house prices fall (or to be less prescriptive, perform relatively better - both could rise or fall but one could do so relatively more). Well, they did in the early 1990s anyway.
In London both have soared simultaneously.
Exactly. The soaring rents debate is about a local London problem. It demands a local London solution - if any action is appropriate. Please leave the rest of us out it.
The London rents have plateued in past few months, but the expansion of licencing requirements (designating them as HMOs with a licence required) to all landlords renting to 3+ tenants is reducing rental stock and increasing prices in the councils that have introduced it. Newham being the most "enthusiastic" in enforcing it to all and watching rents rise by 50% in 5 years to 2016, third highest % rise in London. More councils such as Hammersmith are now launching the same whilst the Government DCLG under Javid has turned a blind eye to the massive problems it is creating. There are even mortgage difficulties for landlords where an HMO designation is communicated by the council to the mortgage company who then use it as an excuse to end a BTL mortgage (on low rates) even though the property had 3 or more bedrooms!
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
Do we know SeanT has left? Maybe just busy on that third draft of the latest money-spinning thriller.
He came in, made incorrect claims about a car crash and then pronounced he had enough and flounced.
He left because he started abusing another poster to which OGH objected.
It is the holidays. People have had a surfeit of politics and the same arguments over Brexit are dismal.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
Do we know SeanT has left? Maybe just busy on that third draft of the latest money-spinning thriller.
I must have joined after his good stuff - most of what I saw seemed to be borderline racist, or misogynist claptrap tbh. It put me off buying any of his books anyway!
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Out of interest, what does one have to do to get banned (not that I want to)? Are there some site rules I should have read or will common decency keep me safe?
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Out of interest, what does one have to do to get banned (not that I want to)? Are there some site rules I should have read or will common decency keep me safe?
I believe denying the Holocaust is a definite no, no. Rightly so.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
There is still some good stuff even though it is August and everyone is on holiday. Speaking as a punter who is not an activist, does not use twitter and who could not point to Charlottesville on a map, I shall miss SeanT's insights into fine wines and exotic resorts: how the other half lives after leaving Downing Street so does not have to pretend to fly to Cornwall on Easyjet.
Do we know SeanT has left? Maybe just busy on that third draft of the latest money-spinning thriller.
I must have joined after his good stuff - most of what I saw seemed to be borderline racist, or misogynist claptrap tbh. It put me off buying any of his books anyway!
Sounds about right - he just used to do it with rather more éclat.
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Out of interest, what does one have to do to get banned (not that I want to)? Are there some site rules I should have read or will common decency keep me safe?
Common decency will distinguish you from most of us here, so I'm not sure.
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Out of interest, what does one have to do to get banned (not that I want to)? Are there some site rules I should have read or will common decency keep me safe?
Don't go suggesting that RadioHead is anything other than the greatest band in the world...
On topic, I don't agree. Brexit is basically the only thing that matters in British politics right now. The reason is that there's room for a wide variety of plausible outcomes. Depending how it's played it could end up with anything: A huge car crash, a long-term free-trading settlement, a long-term protectionist settlement, more-or-less the status quo only with less voting rights, or cancelling the whole thing. In theory these positions are reversable, but in practice once they become entrenched they'll be very hard to shift.
This is different to most of the other issues which may be important but either aren't much to do with Britain - like whether Trump and Kim Jong Un blow up the world - or are already in a stable political configuration that prevents much change, like whether Britain is going to fix its housing problems by repealing the planning laws. (It's not.)
I agree. I accept that I am bit obsessed by Brexit, but I think it is an interesting topic for non-partisan reasons. The outcomes are uncertain, but they are nor really betting outcomes like a zero-sum referendum is. Brexit outcomes will be long drawn out and very messy.
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Out of interest, what does one have to do to get banned (not that I want to)? Are there some site rules I should have read or will common decency keep me safe?
Merciless twitting of bald LibDems would do it, I reckon. You can say Vince Cable is a stupid old fool, because that's an uncontroversial consensus view, but I'd be surprised if you can say he's a stupid old bald LibDem fool without consequences. Fighting words, those, and you'd be if not banned at least offered out to settle it in the car park.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
I blame it on Brexit....
I think you're probably right, coupled with the fact that UK politics has become a whole lot less interesting of late and is desperately short of real talent on all sides of the political spectrum. It's a shame that Topping refuses to accept this fact and instead fires off against the messenger, i.e. yours truly, when it's an inescapable truth that traffic on this site very sharply of late whereby it is at least 70% down on its average level over recent years and has clearly lost a considerable degree of the previous humour, wit and intellectual incisiveness of its posters, not least, as Morris points out, as a result of some of its finest being over zealously banned, never to return.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, but their spending is flat - and more Brits are going abroad - and their spending (in £) is well up:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, and their spending is well up (in Euros) - and more Brits are going abroad - but their spending is flat:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent €2.4 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 17% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent €5.1 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a nil increase when compared with June 2016.
I have converted your post to Euros. It gives a different perspective.
UK total income (GDP) has dropped by 15% (£300 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
UK total wealth has also dropped by 15% (£1,350 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
You don't feel it until you travel abroad, buy imported stuff or try to use UK assets to buy assets abroad.
This diminution of our wealth as a result of the referendum is enormous and puts the £10b EU contribution into perspective.
"A year after they plumped for Brexit and two months after they voted to take away the government’s majority, nearly three-quarters of Britons think their country is on the wrong track. "
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
I look at Plato's twitter feed most days. Once you have got past the mass of pictures of cats, dogs and assorted other animals the rest can be pretty scary. I suspect that the lifting of a ban could be short lived. Having said that I have been enlightened on the thought processes from this end of the spectrum.
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
I blame it on Brexit....
I think you're probably right, coupled with the fact that UK politics has become a whole lot less interesting of late and is desperately short of real talent on all sides of the political spectrum. It's a shame that Topping refuses to accept this fact and instead fires off against the messenger, i.e. yours truly, when it's an inescapable truth that traffic on this site very sharply of late whereby it is at least 70% down on its average level over recent years and has clearly lost a considerable degree of the previous humour, wit and intellectual incisiveness of its posters, not least, as Morris points out, as a result of some of its finest being over zealously banned, never to return.
I hope the situation is that people are taking time out to catch their breath. Politically things are fraught and depressing what with Carolina statues and Nork nukes and brexit details, but as of June's fiasco there is not much on the electoral horizon, after a sustained burst of AVref Indyref EUref GE x2 Lab leader x2 and POTUS; German elections and Catalan indy don't really do it for me, to the extent that I might take a few months off (Cries of "No, no!) and come back when there's more to do than explain the expert/soothsayer distinction for the 999th time
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Was Tim actually ever banned?
No
That was my understanding - that he was a mysogynistic bully who should have been banned many times but was always protected by the mods who tended to ban his victims instead.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, but their spending is flat - and more Brits are going abroad - and their spending (in £) is well up:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, and their spending is well up (in Euros) - and more Brits are going abroad - but their spending is flat:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent €2.4 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 17% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent €5.1 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a nil increase when compared with June 2016.
I have converted your post to Euros. It gives a different perspective.
UK total income (GDP) has dropped by 15% (£300 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
UK total wealth has also dropped by 15% (£1,350 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
You don't feel it until you travel abroad, buy imported stuff or try to use UK assets to buy assets abroad.
This diminution of our wealth as a result of the referendum is enormous and puts the £10b EU contribution into perspective.
This kind of movement in exchange rates is commonplace as can be seen from any long-term FX chart. The movement in sterling against the euro since Q2 2015 is comparable to those against the euro (or DM) between Q1 2008 and Q4 2008, Q3 1995 and Q2 2000 and between Q4 1985 and Q2 1995. There have been similarly wide swings against the dollar and other currencies. I do not think such things portend any kind of either nirvana or disaster.
Mr. Putney, these things do move in cycles. After the last few years of multiple elections and a referendum, a quieter period is to be expected.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Tim and Plato from opposite ends of the spectrum?
Was Tim actually ever banned?
No
That was my understanding - that he was a mysogynistic bully who should have been banned many times but was always protected by the mods who tended to ban his victims instead.
He was also incredibly astute, a genius-level tipster, and very, very funny. And he was banned more than once, but not when he left the site.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, but their spending is flat - and more Brits are going abroad - and their spending (in £) is well up:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, and their spending is well up (in Euros) - and more Brits are going abroad - but their spending is flat:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent €2.4 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 17% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent €5.1 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a nil increase when compared with June 2016.
I have converted your post to Euros. It gives a different perspective.
A misleading one. I earn and spend in pounds, like most British people.
I probably, in fact, spend more in Euros than most British people as I spend two weeks a year in the Eurozone with my in-laws...
No one has heard of word processing and using the famous British Foreign office? What a problem to ask thousands of diplomats to deal with? Now if it was locust plagues....
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, but their spending is flat - and more Brits are going abroad - and their spending (in £) is well up:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
Interesting - and mixed effects - of Sterling's fall - more foreigners are coming, and their spending is well up (in Euros) - and more Brits are going abroad - but their spending is flat:
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent €2.4 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 17% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent €5.1 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a nil increase when compared with June 2016.
I have converted your post to Euros. It gives a different perspective.
UK total income (GDP) has dropped by 15% (£300 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
UK total wealth has also dropped by 15% (£1,350 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
You don't feel it until you travel abroad, buy imported stuff or try to use UK assets to buy assets abroad.
This diminution of our wealth as a result of the referendum is enormous and puts the £10b EU contribution into perspective.
How many people pay for all their goods and services in euros?
Let's look at it another way. One hundred years ago, you could get five dollars to the pound, compared to 1.29 now. Would you say the UK is poorer than 100 years ago, or richer?
Comments
https://youtube.com/watch?v=yELHemcQn10
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ukraine-gore-no-glory-for-war-veterans/28681378.html
You should take a look at the Richard Dawkins talk isam posted on the previous thread for a very interesting take on the the tide of modern thinking.
The main argument I made before the referendum took place was that a Leave result would take all the oxygen from political debate for years at the expense of the bigger issues you describe - and at the end of it all we shall be in basically the same position. Basically in the single market and custom union, paying our contributions but with no seat at the table making the rules.
What a total disaster. The best way to minimise the damage is for the Government to quickly agree to being in the single market and custom union and move on - or hold a second referendum. A minority won't like it - but they will be a minority and this is a democracy after all.
Please leave the rest of us out it.
As for the article, it was quite interesting for background flavour but I'm not sure what point it was trying to make.
Those people volunteered for militias and private armies in a messy proxy war of sovereignty and national pride that was largely kick-started by the EU. They weren't in an official national army. They can't seriously be expecting medals and a pension?
If you volunteer to go off and fight in a mercenary war then you have to accept that it's not state supported in the formal way. They knew what they were getting in to - or should have done.
Am mildly surprised it is leftish, but I guess it depends where the boundaries are drawn.
"Rudd seems to have formed a highly significant alliance with Davidson, whom she met privately in Glasgow recently. The Scottish Tory leader would probably back Rudd to also succeed May in Downing Street. (My sources tell me Davidson will not be running Jacob Rees-Mogg’s leadership campaign)."
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-theresa-may-immigration-leaving-her-isolated-a7896636.html
* Except given the source, a generally anti-Putin editorial line.
https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/comment/2017/07/16/blueprint-for-a-housing-shortage/
(It's pay-walled, but you can read a couple of articles for free).
August is looking boring and quiet again.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15480552.Second_LibDem_MP_in_row_over___39_vanishing__39__election_expenses/
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent £2.2 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 2% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent £4.6 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a 15% increase when compared with June 2016.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/leisureandtourism/bulletins/overseastravelandtourism/provisionalresultsforjune2017
https://www.politwoops.co.uk/p/conservative/GregHands/898284242358095873
Or his wife has finally wrestled the bloody mobile off him and chucked it in the sea.
This is the original source:
https://twitter.com/RedHotSquirrel/status/898433244344889345
I wonder if there's a degree of 'sleight of hand' - everyone 'resigning' on the dissolution? Surely Corbyn hasn't been that bad?
Liberal Democrat HOLD Southcourt, Aylesbury Vale District Council.
LDEM: 37.3% (+8.4)
CON: 31.5% (+9.6)
LAB: 22.1% (-0.5)
GRN: 4.7% (-0.9)
UKIP: 4.4% (-16.5)
Conservative HOLD Riverside, Aylesbury Vale District Council.
CON: 34.7% (+3.7)
LDEM: 32.9% (+17.4)
LAB: 24.2% (+6.5)
UKIP: 5.5% (-30.3)
GRN: 2.6% (+2.6)
Conservative HOLD St Mary's, Forest Heath District Council.
CON: 50.1% (+10.7)
LAB: 40.9% (+8.8)
GRN: 8.9% (+8.9)
*UKIP: (-28.4)
Didn't stand
Labour HOLD Park (Peterborough) result:
LAB: 49.6% (-0.7)
CON: 39.8% (+4.5)
UKIP: 5.1% (-2.9)
LDEM: 3.2% (+0.9)
GRN: 2.4% (-1.8)
https://twitter.com/BenGoldsmith/status/898435471696510977
This is different to most of the other issues which may be important but either aren't much to do with Britain - like whether Trump and Kim Jong Un blow up the world - or are already in a stable political configuration that prevents much change, like whether Britain is going to fix its housing problems by repealing the planning laws. (It's not.)
It really does look as if SeanT has left PB.com and probably for good this time. It's really much easier as I have found myself with so many of the better posters having also left since the GE. Shame really, PB was always entertaining, but I suspect that it's had its day.
Corbyn still more popular than May but his ratings fall
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/08/17/jeremy-corbyn-remains-more-popular-theresa-may/
testA bit like a "Please do not throw stones at this sign" sign.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-40972859?SThisFB
tbh , can see the case for need to liaise with Ministers, but don't they have e-mail and Skype? How about the need to liaise with local residents and businesses?
Doubtless the salary includes London weighting.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/08/the_one_big_problem_with_godaddy_dropping_the_daily_stormer.html
The key distinction:
"if Facebook or Twitter bans a group, it can still take its message to any number of other social networks, or start its own. When domain registrars blacklist it, they effectively banish it from the public internet.
It’s a far blunter instrument, wielded by a company with no experience or expertise in passing editorial judgments, and little track record of public accountability for its actions."
(Yes, some ministers have more than one job, and a number sit in the Lords rather than the Commons)
https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers
a) leave also; or
b) up your game.
That said, it'd be good if some older posters who were banned could perhaps have that exile lifted...
Parliament is going to be pretty quiet for the next year or so, as most of the government's efforts are going towards the Brexit negotiations - it's not a bad time to think of a list of things where there is general agreement for changes that could either be brought forward, or that independent working groups could start discussing. Planning and social care are the two obvious ones, but there will be plenty more.
It is the holidays. People have had a surfeit of politics and the same arguments over Brexit are dismal.
One a lighter note, the new face of test cricket:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2017/aug/17/trollied-trunch-edgbaston-fans-day-night-test
…by 8pm, Mr Blobby was leading Dick Tracy, the Mario Brothers, four Teletubbies, Gandalf, Noddy Holder and the Jamaican bobsleigh team in a conga line around the grandstand…
I hadn't realised that it was an Australian who invented the tea break...
Overseas residents made 3.5 million visits to the UK in June 2017; this has increased by 7% when compared with June 2016.
Overseas residents spent €2.4 billion on their visits to the UK in June 2017; this is an increase of 17% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents made 7.2 million visits abroad in June 2017; this has increased by 4% when compared with June 2016.
UK residents spent €5.1 billion on their visits abroad in June 2017, a nil increase when compared with June 2016.
I have converted your post to Euros. It gives a different perspective.
UK total income (GDP) has dropped by 15% (£300 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
UK total wealth has also dropped by 15% (£1,350 billion) since the referendum, relative to the rest of the world.
You don't feel it until you travel abroad, buy imported stuff or try to use UK assets to buy assets abroad.
This diminution of our wealth as a result of the referendum is enormous and puts the £10b EU contribution into perspective.
https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21726728-health-terrorism-and-poverty-replace-migration-publics-main-worries-britons-mellow?fsrc=rss|btn
I probably, in fact, spend more in Euros than most British people as I spend two weeks a year in the Eurozone with my in-laws...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/08/17/90-year-old-bust-abe-lincoln-destroyed-chicago-neighborhood/
Let's look at it another way. One hundred years ago, you could get five dollars to the pound, compared to 1.29 now. Would you say the UK is poorer than 100 years ago, or richer?