Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Its 5/4 at Ladbrokes that there’ll be no deal on Brexit

13»

Comments

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Mortgage availability.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,729
    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    Barnsley want the foreigners booted out according to a vox pop on Ch4 News.

    This country can look very ugly at times.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722
    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Mortgages would dry up, and would only be available if you had a big deposit. And people sitting on negative equity wouldn't move.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,518
    rcs1000 said:

    I think it's highly unlikely that Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 at the time of the next US Presidential election, will even stand to be the Democratic nominee.

    Polls this far out are basically name recognition. Bernie and Warren will score particularly well in NH as they represent neighbouring States.
    Biden was VP.
    Therefore the 3 anyone will have heard of.
  • Sean_F said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Mortgages would dry up, and would only be available if you had a big deposit. And people sitting on negative equity wouldn't move.
    At first. After a while life would move on as we adapt to the new reality.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    edited October 2017
    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it's highly unlikely that Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 at the time of the next US Presidential election, will even stand to be the Democratic nominee.

    Polls this far out are basically name recognition. Bernie and Warren will score particularly well in NH as they represent neighbouring States.
    Biden was VP.
    Therefore the 3 anyone will have heard of.
    Hillary was ahead at this stage for the Democratic nomination for 2016 and Romney at this stage for the Republican nomination for 2012.

    The fact Sanders and Warren make up 2/3 of the top 3 confirms Democrats are looking for a left-liberal populist.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    edited October 2017
    AndyJS said:

    HHemmelig said:


    Well this was a successful attack line during the general election

    https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/920963885909336064

    Out of the 7 faces fully visible in that picture, I count 5 have beards (and Livingstone had a moustache). Very indicative of the circles Jez moved in, as beards were very unfashionable in the early 80s.
    Robert Jones was the only Tory MP with a beard at the time, and apparently Maggie told him to shave it off. He refused.
    Jerry Hayes as well, whom Thatcher also really disliked.
  • HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    edited October 2017
    deleted
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.

    I don't think Trump's ego will allow him to not run for re election and be seen as a quitter
  • HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    edited October 2017
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it's highly unlikely that Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 at the time of the next US Presidential election, will even stand to be the Democratic nominee.

    Polls this far out are basically name recognition. Bernie and Warren will score particularly well in NH as they represent neighbouring States.
    Biden was VP.
    Therefore the 3 anyone will have heard of.
    Hillary was ahead at this stage for the Democratic nomination for 2016 and Romney at this stage for the Republican nomination for 2012.

    The fact Sanders and Warren make up 2/3 of the top 3 confirms Democrats are looking for a left-liberal populist.
    George W Bush and Gore too were the early frontrunners for 2000.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,397
    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it's highly unlikely that Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 at the time of the next US Presidential election, will even stand to be the Democratic nominee.

    Polls this far out are basically name recognition. Bernie and Warren will score particularly well in NH as they represent neighbouring States.
    Biden was VP.
    Therefore the 3 anyone will have heard of.
    I believe age will tell against all of them. If younger I think Biden would be in with a chance. He can turn out a decent stump speech (something Bill Clinton, but not his wife, and Barack Obama were good at) and Biden appeals to the blue collar workers that went Trump last time.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    HYUFD said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.

    I don't think Trump's ego will allow him to not run for re election and be seen as a quitter
    I think it depends - he's not completely clueless, and while his self belief is very high, there may be a point where MikeL's prediction applies, as that ego won't let him lose and that might trump his unwillingness to back down.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    Roger said:

    Barnsley want the foreigners booted out according to a vox pop on Ch4 News.

    This country can look very ugly at times.

    All countries have their ugliness - go to any European nation and look at some dark corner of it, or even some very well lit parts of it, and you will find some ugliness. One shouldn't ignore ugliness when it emerges, but nor should one assume that its mere existence is representative.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    FF43 said:

    dixiedean said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I think it's highly unlikely that Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 at the time of the next US Presidential election, will even stand to be the Democratic nominee.

    Polls this far out are basically name recognition. Bernie and Warren will score particularly well in NH as they represent neighbouring States.
    Biden was VP.
    Therefore the 3 anyone will have heard of.
    I believe age will tell against all of them. If younger I think Biden would be in with a chance. He can turn out a decent stump speech (something Bill Clinton, but not his wife, and Barack Obama were good at) and Biden appeals to the blue collar workers that went Trump last time.
    Biden would easily win the general election against Trump in all likelihood, his problem is he has to get through the Democratic primary first and Sanders and Warren are more likely to appeal to liberal voters there.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.

    I don't think Trump's ego will allow him to not run for re election and be seen as a quitter
    I think it depends - he's not completely clueless, and while his self belief is very high, there may be a point where MikeL's prediction applies, as that ego won't let him lose and that might trump his unwillingness to back down.
    If he refuses to run he would be tarred as a 'loser' and a 'quitter' anyway
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    AndyJS said:

    Big question of the moment. How is it possible for Gibralter to have more than one football team?

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.135666751

    19 apparently, across more than one division.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,811
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.

    I don't think Trump's ego will allow him to not run for re election and be seen as a quitter
    I think it depends - he's not completely clueless, and while his self belief is very high, there may be a point where MikeL's prediction applies, as that ego won't let him lose and that might trump his unwillingness to back down.
    If he refuses to run he would be tarred as a 'loser' and a 'quitter' anyway
    Yes he would - but I think it is more about whether he can sell it to himself, believe what he is saying even if the truth is patently the opposite. Stubbornly insisting he was so great he doesn't need another term or something sounds pretty darn implausible, but he might consider it if the alternative is losing to someone else.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,746
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    The one thing Trump will really, really, really not want to do is lose.

    I suspect he'll settle for one term, say he's done a brilliant job but unfortunately he won't be able to stand again on health / age grounds.

    I don't think Trump's ego will allow him to not run for re election and be seen as a quitter
    I think it depends - he's not completely clueless, and while his self belief is very high, there may be a point where MikeL's prediction applies, as that ego won't let him lose and that might trump his unwillingness to back down.
    If he refuses to run he would be tarred as a 'loser' and a 'quitter' anyway
    Particularly if he has been deposed under the 25th amendment.
  • steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 1,019
    The Sun's website carrying an article suggesting that the Dutch are getting nervous about the Brexit discussions because of their substantial trade with GB. Apparently they are also concerned about the hardline approach the Germans and French are taking.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,429
    edited October 2017
    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
  • Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students
  • Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,429

    The Sun's website carrying an article suggesting that the Dutch are getting nervous about the Brexit discussions because of their substantial trade with GB. Apparently they are also concerned about the hardline approach the Germans and French are taking.

    Didn't the Danes recently castigate the EU for being silly about the negotiations? ;)
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
    It shouldn't be considered as an asset. That is why we got into this mess. It is a place to live. Successive governments have enacted policies and tax breaks which have encouraged people to buy houses as an investment. That is the main reason we are in this mess today.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    edited October 2017
    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better in than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
  • Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,429
    edited October 2017
    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
    We shall see...
  • Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    The problem is the predicted system is nonsense and it doesn’t give any chance to those for it clicks in the second year of their courses. Having the actual exam marks you can compare real performance and then interview those who make the cut.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,722
    edited October 2017

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    A Levels were the toughest exams I've ever taken. I thought long and hard about taking the Cambridge entrance exam, but just didn't think I could manage to combine it with the A Level workload.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,866
    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
    We shall see...
    Who the hell knows?

    We're less than a year into a Trump Presidency. He might get sick. He might face re-election at the same time as a recession. There might be a "smoking gun". It might be that Obama-care repeal blows up his face.

    And it might be that he tacks to the centre following the mid-terms, that the US economy grows strongly across the four years, and the Democrats put up a no-hoper.

    At this stage, the range of outcomes is staggeringly wide. Still, I'd take the 1.9 available on Betfair for him going in 2020 or later, which covers a lot of outcomes.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    edited October 2017
    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
    We shall see...
    If Corbyn wins here I would expect Sanders to win there, in something of a reverse Thatcher and Reagan and much as Trump followed Brexit but as you say we shall see...

    Reagan of course narrowly lost the GOP 1976 nomination to Ford who went on to lose the general election to Carter much as Sanders narrowly lost the 2016 Democratic nomination to Clinton who then went onto lose the general election to Trump.
  • Fekir off.

    Nabil Fekir has been substituted in the Everton v Lyon match.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,337
    edited October 2017

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    The problem is the predicted system is nonsense and it doesn’t give any chance to those for it clicks in the second year of their courses. Having the actual exam marks you can compare real performance and then interview those who make the cut.
    But wouldn't that cause even more stress, the applications and acceptance window would be less than a month for everyone.

    A Level Results come out in August and unis start in September.

    Effectively you'd be putting everyone in clearing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
    It shouldn't be considered as an asset. That is why we got into this mess. It is a place to live. Successive governments have enacted policies and tax breaks which have encouraged people to buy houses as an investment. That is the main reason we are in this mess today.
    It is a place to live but the whole point of home ownership is also to build up an asset for yourself and your family which was why Thatcher was so keen on it.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    The problem is the predicted system is nonsense and it doesn’t give any chance to those for it clicks in the second year of their courses. Having the actual exam marks you can compare real performance and then interview those who make the cut.
    But wouldn't that cause even more stress, the applications and acceptance window would be less than a month for everyone.

    A Level Results come out in August and unis start in September.

    Effectively you'd be putting everyone in clearing.
    It would require a rejig of school / uni year to have a proper window.

    We have discussed this on here in the past and Gove looked at it, but unis wouldn’t even entertain the idea.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    That image of the Radcliffe Camera is one the naffest photographs I have ever seen.

    I don't see what conclusions we can reach about the acceptance rate of black candidates without knowing the number of applicants.
  • Everton are going to get a heavy fine and a stadium ban for this.

    Note the father of the year who aims punches at the Lyon players, whilst holding a child.

    https://twitter.com/TimsBallPhobia/status/921111527893151744?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,214

    DavidL said:

    Completely O/T but one of my favourite sites, http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ now has the same for the French NG.

    What I have noticed is that the French demand is fairly consistently 20% more than ours. I appreciate France is a much bigger country and no doubt their wastage in transmission will exceed ours by a considerable margin but their economy is roughly the same size as is their population. What makes their energy consumption so much higher than ours?

    In the summer they will have a significant power demand for a/c. Maybe they have more electric domestic heating than in the UK too.
    I wondered if we use a lot more gas in houses and maybe even industry than they do.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Completely O/T but one of my favourite sites, http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ now has the same for the French NG.

    What I have noticed is that the French demand is fairly consistently 20% more than ours. I appreciate France is a much bigger country and no doubt their wastage in transmission will exceed ours by a considerable margin but their economy is roughly the same size as is their population. What makes their energy consumption so much higher than ours?

    In the summer they will have a significant power demand for a/c. Maybe they have more electric domestic heating than in the UK too.
    I wondered if we use a lot more gas in houses and maybe even industry than they do.
    https://en.selectra.info/energy-france/guides/electricity-cost

    "the average cost of electricity in France is 26.5% cheaper than the EU average" (because of lovely cheap clean nuclear)

    https://en.selectra.info/energy-france/guides/gas-cost

    "The average price of natural gas in France is €0.070 / kWh, which is slightly below the average for Europe (€0.073 / kWh)"

    market forces innit.
  • I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The problem is class not race.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    HHemmelig said:


    Well this was a successful attack line during the general election

    https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/920963885909336064

    Out of the 7 faces fully visible in that picture, I count 5 have beards (and Livingstone had a moustache). Very indicative of the circles Jez moved in, as beards were very unfashionable in the early 80s.
    Yes they were. Labour leaders in fashion again
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,429
    rcs1000 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
    We shall see...
    Who the hell knows?

    We're less than a year into a Trump Presidency. He might get sick. He might face re-election at the same time as a recession. There might be a "smoking gun". It might be that Obama-care repeal blows up his face.

    And it might be that he tacks to the centre following the mid-terms, that the US economy grows strongly across the four years, and the Democrats put up a no-hoper.

    At this stage, the range of outcomes is staggeringly wide. Still, I'd take the 1.9 available on Betfair for him going in 2020 or later, which covers a lot of outcomes.
    Yeah. I'm not saying he WILL 100% win POTUS again in 2020 as there are so many different outcomes who the hell knows.

    I'm just saying that the assumption he WILL be a one term Presidency (I see it particularly from Democrat supporting friends from US in other places) seems pretty complacent.

    Trump could well win again in 2020. Stranger things have happened - The value bet is probably for him for get four more years as it seems so unlikely at the moment...
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    AndyJS said:

    Big question of the moment. How is it possible for Gibralter to have more than one football team?

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.135666751

    One for the Gibraltar Liberation Front and another for The Liberation Front of Gibraltar?
  • AndyJS said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The problem is class not race.
    Yup, privately educated people are demonised and insulted on a regular basis by society.
  • I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military official.

    He has monstered the democratic senator though.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Not how I read it.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    GIN1138 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    GIN1138 said:

    MikeL said:

    Will Trump stand for a 2nd term?

    I think he will... And my guess is that he'll win a second term as well (as the Democrats will manage to come up with another dud candidate)

    *DISCLAIMER: I was the first person on here to tip Trump for the Presidency - Everyone laughed at me but they aren't laughing now :D * )
    Trump failed to win the popular vote and won Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1%, rustbelt states a populist like Sanders will go down better than an elitist like Hillary did. If Sanders wins those 3 (pre 2016 they had voted for every Democratic candidate since 1988) and holds the Hillary states he wins the Presidency.
    We shall see...
    Who the hell knows?

    We're less than a year into a Trump Presidency. He might get sick. He might face re-election at the same time as a recession. There might be a "smoking gun". It might be that Obama-care repeal blows up his face.

    And it might be that he tacks to the centre following the mid-terms, that the US economy grows strongly across the four years, and the Democrats put up a no-hoper.

    At this stage, the range of outcomes is staggeringly wide. Still, I'd take the 1.9 available on Betfair for him going in 2020 or later, which covers a lot of outcomes.
    Yeah. I'm not saying he WILL 100% win POTUS again in 2020 as there are so many different outcomes who the hell knows.

    I'm just saying that the assumption he WILL be a one term Presidency (I see it particularly from Democrat supporting friends from US in other places) seems pretty complacent.

    Trump could well win again in 2020. Stranger things have happened - The value bet is probably for him for get four more years as it seems so unlikely at the moment...
    Trump could win, the Tories could win, who knows. Though at the moment the former is even further behind than the latter.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?

    It was the opposite of throwing Trump under a bus. It was a robust and emotional defence of what Trump was intending to do, and an attack on Congresswoman Wilson for violating the sanctity of the bereavement call for political gain.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017
    MTimT said:

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
    According to fake news cnn he advised trump not to but trump insisted and so he advised him what to say.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    AndyJS said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The problem is class not race.
    The single most enormous bias is geographical.

    55 per cent of all UK Oxbridge applications typically come from London & the South East & East.

    Just typical South-East England entitlement.

    There is huge geographical discrimination against Scotland, Wales, N Ireland, the North & the Midlands.

    Why aren't MPs in Wales & N Ireland & Scotland & the North & Yorkshire & Lancashire & the Midlands kicking up a huge fuss ?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,633

    AndyJS said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The problem is class not race.
    Yup, privately educated people are demonised and insulted on a regular basis by society.
    Never noticed it myself
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    MTimT said:

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
    According to fake news cnn he advised trump not to but trump insisted and so he advised him what to say.
    From that other fake news site, the NYT:

    "John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, delivered an emotional, personal defense of President Trump’s call this week to the widow of a slain soldier, describing the trauma of learning about his son’s death in Afghanistan and calling the criticism of Mr. Trump’s call unfair.

    "Mr. Kelly said that he was stunned to see the criticism, which came from a Democratic congresswoman, Representative Frederica S. Wilson of Florida, after Mr. Trump delivered a similar message to the widow of one of the soldiers killed in Niger."
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited October 2017
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
    It shouldn't be considered as an asset. That is why we got into this mess. It is a place to live. Successive governments have enacted policies and tax breaks which have encouraged people to buy houses as an investment. That is the main reason we are in this mess today.
    It is a place to live but the whole point of home ownership is also to build up an asset for yourself and your family which was why Thatcher was so keen on it.
    If the point of homeownership is to build up an asset, then presumably you'd be yelling at young people not to buy a house right now. Returning to 3.5x average earnings would ruin most of them.

    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    And then you save perhaps half of your rent cost every month into a proper pension, investing in productive companies, employing and training real people.

    You can buy if you want, but for many people it doesn't make that much sense.
  • Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The problem is class not race.
    Yup, privately educated people are demonised and insulted on a regular basis by society.
    Never noticed it myself
    You'd notice it more if you were a Tory.
  • MTimT said:

    MTimT said:

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
    According to fake news cnn he advised trump not to but trump insisted and so he advised him what to say.
    From that other fake news site, the NYT:

    "John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, delivered an emotional, personal defense of President Trump’s call this week to the widow of a slain soldier, describing the trauma of learning about his son’s death in Afghanistan and calling the criticism of Mr. Trump’s call unfair.

    "Mr. Kelly said that he was stunned to see the criticism, which came from a Democratic congresswoman, Representative Frederica S. Wilson of Florida, after Mr. Trump delivered a similar message to the widow of one of the soldiers killed in Niger."
    Thanks.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    kle4 said:

    Roger said:

    Barnsley want the foreigners booted out according to a vox pop on Ch4 News.

    This country can look very ugly at times.

    All countries have their ugliness - go to any European nation and look at some dark corner of it, or even some very well lit parts of it, and you will find some ugliness. One shouldn't ignore ugliness when it emerges, but nor should one assume that its mere existence is representative.
    They do but here we know that it's not a tiny minority in dark corners but 52%. Doesn't it make you shiver.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Pong said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
    It shouldn't be considered as an asset. That is why we got into this mess. It is a place to live. Successive governments have enacted policies and tax breaks which have encouraged people to buy houses as an investment. That is the main reason we are in this mess today.
    It is a place to live but the whole point of home ownership is also to build up an asset for yourself and your family which was why Thatcher was so keen on it.
    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    And then you save perhaps half of your rent cost every month into a proper pension, investing in productive companies, employing and training real people.

    You can buy if you want, but for many people it doesn't make that much sense.
    Who pays for maintenance and capital projects of shared space and amenities, such as a new roof?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,230
    Sean_F said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    A Levels were the toughest exams I've ever taken. I thought long and hard about taking the Cambridge entrance exam, but just didn't think I could manage to combine it with the A Level workload.
    Agreed.

    University was a doddle next to A-levels.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,546
    edited October 2017
    MTimT said:

    MTimT said:

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
    According to fake news cnn he advised trump not to but trump insisted and so he advised him what to say.
    From that other fake news site, the NYT:

    "John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, delivered an emotional, personal defense of President Trump’s call this week to the widow of a slain soldier, describing the trauma of learning about his son’s death in Afghanistan and calling the criticism of Mr. Trump’s call unfair.

    "Mr. Kelly said that he was stunned to see the criticism, which came from a Democratic congresswoman, Representative Frederica S. Wilson of Florida, after Mr. Trump delivered a similar message to the widow of one of the soldiers killed in Niger."
    This is how cnn have written it up...


    Kelly's place at the podium came days after Trump pulled his chief of staff into the political storm by saying in an interview with Fox News: "You could ask General Kelly, did he get a call from Obama?"

    The answer to that question was no, Kelly said Thursday, though he stressed "that was not a criticism."

    In fact, Kelly said he advised Trump not to phone the families of fallen soldiers because "if you're not in the family, if you've never worn the uniform, if you're not in combat, you can't even begin to imagine how to make that call."

    When Trump insisted on making the calls, Kelly offered advice.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/19/politics/john-kelly-donald-trump-niger-family-calls/index.html

    Their spin is unsurprisingly negative on trump starting half way down. If you only read that and see the talking heads they are making it sound like he has contradicted trump.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,611
    Pong said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:



    Sean_F said:


    A crash in house prices wouldn't help young buyers, unless they had plenty of cash (which most people in their 20's don't).

    What? Thing being cheaper wouldn't help people wanting to buy it? That's a view I suppose.

    The national average used to be a house cost 3.5 times average salary 20 years ago, now it's 7.5 times.

    In London it's gone from 4 times salary to 12 times!
    Banks currently lend 4 to 4.5 times salary, if house prices fell they would cut that back drastically plus some existing homeowners would face negative equity.
    By your own numbers people are still in a far worse position than they were 20 or more years ago. If the cost has gone up from 3.5 times average salary to 7.5 times but the amount the banks will lend has only gone up from 3.5 times to 4.5 times then it is obvious people are far worse off.

    We have created an environment where people buy houses as an investment instead of being somewhere to live. We need to change that environment back to what it was - people buying houses as homes not as bank accounts.
    Northern Rock was lending up to 7 times salary but we all know what happened to them.

    I agree a balance needs to be restored but that would be better achieved by building more affordable housing than praying for a house price crash which would trap millions in negative equity. Plus for most people their house is their main asset.
    It shouldn't be considered as an asset. That is why we got into this .
    It is a place to live but the whole point of home ownership is also to build up an asset for yourself and your family which was why Thatcher was so keen on it.
    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    And then you save perhaps half of your rent cost every month into a proper pension, investing in productive companies, employing and training real people.

    You can buy if you want, but for many people it doesn't make that much sense.
    Even in Germany 52% of the population are homeowners.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate

    There is also nothing to stop you saving into a pension AND owning your own property.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,823
    edited October 2017
    Pong said:

    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    An interesting comparison:
    image
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Pong said:


    If the point of homeownership is to build up an asset, then presumably you'd be yelling at young people not to buy a house right now. Returning to 3.5x average earnings would ruin most of them.

    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    And then you save perhaps half of your rent cost every month into a proper pension, investing in productive companies, employing and training real people.

    You can buy if you want, but for many people it doesn't make that much sense.

    All true of central London come 2022. That's the power of Brexit.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,230
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    AnneJGP said:

    brendan16 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    (snip)

    60% of the country are homeowners most of whose children and grandchildren will inherit that housing wealth thanks to Osborne's inheritance tax cut.

    Anyway Javid is already pushing a mass programme of building more affordable housing, even going beyond council's local plans to do so.
    You're not wrong that a few youngsters (esp only children) who have looked up the value of their parents house on zoopla and calculated their inheritance and go to bed every night hoping their parents don't wake up in the morning will vote tory.

    a few.
    It does not have to be that cynical but many parents and grandparents who are homeowners, especially in London, the South East and East, have built up a large nest egg particularly with rising house prices which they want to pass on to their children and grandchildren. It is called looking after your family.
    Rent privately for 40 years and then inherit - or own in your 20s and 30s post a Corbyn induced crash? I expect most would rather the latter option.
    Something was said the other day about a policy to nationalise housing (don't know whether it was a spoof).

    I'd be open to something really radical to tackle the housing 'problem', although there are so many factors involved I can't see it happening.

    Say the state takes ownership of my housing. If it does, then the state will have to pick up the tab for my care in later life. Bit of a gamble whether the state comes out of it for gain or for loss.

    Good evening, everyone.
    Bang goes most peoples' main asset overnight were housing to be nationalised.

    Of course the state currently picks up the tab for care anyway if you have assets under £23k (excluding your house in the case of personal care), maybe soon rising to £100k
    I imagine that such a policy could only be imposed by using extreme violence.
    Labour would be dead meat in days if they tried it. You don't touch people's houses. You just don't go there.

    The British might not be free-market right wingers, but they sure as hell aren't communists either.

    Much of Corbyn's support comes from young people frustrated they can't afford their own home.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    MTimT said:

    MTimT said:

    I see general Kelly has thrown trump under the bus.

    What's he done?
    Said obama not calling him wasn’t a problem and that he told trump that he shouldn’t be calling because the only people service families want to hear from is military officials.
    From what I have read, he did not say Trump should not call, but related his own personal experience that, when he got the news of his own son's death, the only calls that really mattered were those from his son's friends.
    According to fake news cnn he advised trump not to but trump insisted and so he advised him what to say.
    From that other fake news site, the NYT:

    "John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, delivered an emotional, personal defense of President Trump’s call this week to the widow of a slain soldier, describing the trauma of learning about his son’s death in Afghanistan and calling the criticism of Mr. Trump’s call unfair.

    "Mr. Kelly said that he was stunned to see the criticism, which came from a Democratic congresswoman, Representative Frederica S. Wilson of Florida, after Mr. Trump delivered a similar message to the widow of one of the soldiers killed in Niger."
    This is how cnn have written it up...


    Kelly's place at the podium came days after Trump pulled his chief of staff into the political storm by saying in an interview with Fox News: "You could ask General Kelly, did he get a call from Obama?"

    The answer to that question was no, Kelly said Thursday, though he stressed "that was not a criticism."

    In fact, Kelly said he advised Trump not to phone the families of fallen soldiers because "if you're not in the family, if you've never worn the uniform, if you're not in combat, you can't even begin to imagine how to make that call."

    When Trump insisted on making the calls, Kelly offered advice.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/19/politics/john-kelly-donald-trump-niger-family-calls/index.html

    Their spin is unsurprisingly negative on trump starting half way down. If you only read that and see the talking heads they are making it sound like he has contradicted trump.
    We are, at least I am, so anaesthetised to Trump that if you told us that he sodomised an elephant in the Oval Office and then invited a grieving war widow to s*ck his d*ck the reaction would be Yeah, whatever.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    edited October 2017

    Sean_F said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    A Levels were the toughest exams I've ever taken. I thought long and hard about taking the Cambridge entrance exam, but just didn't think I could manage to combine it with the A Level workload.
    Agreed.

    University was a doddle next to A-levels.
    I don't know, the cricket was a much higher standard. My bowling average was much worse at Uni.
  • Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    AnneJGP said:

    brendan16 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    (snip)

    60% of the country are homeowners most of whose children and grandchildren will inherit that housing wealth thanks to Osborne's inheritance tax cut.

    Anyway Javid is already pushing a mass programme of building more affordable housing, even going beyond council's local plans to do so.
    You're not wrong that a few youngsters (esp only children) who have looked up the value of their parents house on zoopla and calculated their inheritance and go to bed every night hoping their parents don't wake up in the morning will vote tory.

    a few.
    It does not have to be that cynical but many parents and grandparents who are homeowners, especially in London, the South East and East, have built up a large nest egg particularly with rising house prices which they want to pass on to their children and grandchildren. It is called looking after your family.
    Rent privately for 40 years and then inherit - or own in your 20s and 30s post a Corbyn induced crash? I expect most would rather the latter option.
    Something was said the other day about a policy to nationalise housing (don't know whether it was a spoof).

    I'd be open to something really radical to tackle the housing 'problem', although there are so many factors involved I can't see it happening.

    Say the state takes ownership of my housing. If it does, then the state will have to pick up the tab for my care in later life. Bit of a gamble whether the state comes out of it for gain or for loss.

    Good evening, everyone.
    Bang goes most peoples' main asset overnight were housing to be nationalised.

    Of course the state currently picks up the tab for care anyway if you have assets under £23k (excluding your house in the case of personal care), maybe soon rising to £100k
    I imagine that such a policy could only be imposed by using extreme violence.
    Labour would be dead meat in days if they tried it. You don't touch people's houses. You just don't go there.

    The British might not be free-market right wingers, but they sure as hell aren't communists either.

    Much of Corbyn's support comes from young people frustrated they can't afford their own home.
    I seemed to vaguely remember the tories got in a spot of trouble during the GE over this.....
  • NEW THREAD

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,633

    Sean_F said:

    Nearly one in three Oxford colleges failed to admit a single black British A-level student in 2015, with the university accused of “social apartheid” over its admissions policies by the former education minister David Lammy.

    The data shows that 10 out of 32 Oxford colleges did not award a place to a black British pupil with A-levels in 2015, the first time the university has released such figures since 2010. Oriel College only offered one place to a black British A-level student in six years.

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/oxford-accused-of-social-apartheid-as-colleges-admit-no-black-students

    The single best change that could be made...applications / offers after a-level results are known.
    Nah, I loved the incentive of what my required grades were at A Level, it really did focus the mind.
    A Levels were the toughest exams I've ever taken. I thought long and hard about taking the Cambridge entrance exam, but just didn't think I could manage to combine it with the A Level workload.
    Agreed.

    University was a doddle next to A-levels.
    I found chemistry A level tough, maths at A level was simple enough, with Physics being about the same as further maths AS.
    I struggled with some of the second and third year modules when I read maths. Should probably have done economics, the students complained about the stats modules they shared with the maths students ( Stats modules were pretty damn easy compared to the proper maths) as their hardest modules.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    AnneJGP said:

    brendan16 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pong said:

    (snip)

    ...
    ...

    a few.
    It does not have to be that cynical but many parents and grandparents who are homeowners, especially in London, the South East and East, have built up a large nest egg particularly with rising house prices which they want to pass on to their children and grandchildren. It is called looking after your family.
    Rent privately for 40 years and then inherit - or own in your 20s and 30s post a Corbyn induced crash? I expect most would rather the latter option.
    Something was said the other day about a policy to nationalise housing (don't know whether it was a spoof).

    I'd be open to something really radical to tackle the housing 'problem', although there are so many factors involved I can't see it happening.

    Say the state takes ownership of my housing. If it does, then the state will have to pick up the tab for my care in later life. Bit of a gamble whether the state comes out of it for gain or for loss.

    Good evening, everyone.
    Bang goes most peoples' main asset overnight were housing to be nationalised.

    Of course the state currently picks up the tab for care anyway if you have assets under £23k (excluding your house in the case of personal care), maybe soon rising to £100k
    I imagine that such a policy could only be imposed by using extreme violence.
    Labour would be dead meat in days if they tried it. You don't touch people's houses. You just don't go there.

    The British might not be free-market right wingers, but they sure as hell aren't communists either.

    Much of Corbyn's support comes from young people frustrated they can't afford their own home.
    People say the Tory party has no future; I say it has huge opportunities. Young people want into the system. They don't want a council house and a steady job on the bins, they want all that comes from an aspirational society: a good job in the private sector, the latest iphone, foreign holidays, a house of their own.

    Yes we need to change things to achieve this, but the values are closer to Conservative values than people make out. Corbyn's vision needs to be shown up for what it is: 1970s managed decline, where everyone knows their place and no-one can get on.
  • Pong said:

    In central Berlin, you can rent a spacious room in a shared flat for €350/month, bills included, or a reasonable family house in the commutable 'burbs for €500/mo. Long, secure tenancies.
    Tenant obligations to look after the property, with decent leeway to renovate/personalise.

    An interesting comparison:
    image
    Not really that surprising given Berlin's unique history. But as you say it is an interesting comparison of the capitals and their influence/benefit to the economies.
This discussion has been closed.