With all the discussions about Millenials and their finances:
' CAN millennials really afford a deposit just by ditching the mochachinos and avocado toast? We asked one to keep a spending diary, but it wasn’t one who lives in London and works in the media so the entire thing was a waste of time.
Still, since we did it, here’s the spending diary of 26-year-old Tom Logan who lives in Preston and works as a mechanic and is therefore representative of absolutely nobody.
DAY 1 I have a couple of slices of toast and margarine then walk to work. Sorry, I’m already doing this wrong. I should have bought breakfast and got the tube and then bought a coffee. Sorry.
I packed sandwiches for lunch too, because there isn’t anywhere you can buy them near the garage. I know, I’m completely fucking this up.
I should have a gym membership or something, but I just keep fit by walking to work.
' DAY 1 Bus then tube to work £3.90 Coffee from new cafe £2.80 Lunch from work canteen £4.50 Downpayment on a gym membership £70 Tube home £2.70 Dinner out £15 Snack on the way home £2.20 Total £101.10
I have managed to avoid including the Taylor Swift ticket, but this is not an auspicious start, what with the list including the most expensive flat white within half a mile of the office and two out of three meals eaten out.
An old friend is staying with me and we want to try the Chinese restaurant that was booked up on his last visit. Then, on the way home, we stop at the local Turkish supermarket and the Wafe Up biscuits my flatmate and I like are four for £1.10 and, well, here we are.
I may live to regret the Gymbox membership, but I have learned that scrimping on a gym means I do not go. If I experience a flutter of alarm every time the direct debit goes through, I will make the effort to bring down the cost per visit. '
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
In my experience, asking people to live a hairshirt life for 5 years - cutting out daily coffee and any drinking out with friends - simply isn't realistic.
With all the discussions about Millenials and their finances:
' CAN millennials really afford a deposit just by ditching the mochachinos and avocado toast? We asked one to keep a spending diary, but it wasn’t one who lives in London and works in the media so the entire thing was a waste of time.
Still, since we did it, here’s the spending diary of 26-year-old Tom Logan who lives in Preston and works as a mechanic and is therefore representative of absolutely nobody.
DAY 1 I have a couple of slices of toast and margarine then walk to work. Sorry, I’m already doing this wrong. I should have bought breakfast and got the tube and then bought a coffee. Sorry.
I packed sandwiches for lunch too, because there isn’t anywhere you can buy them near the garage. I know, I’m completely fucking this up.
I should have a gym membership or something, but I just keep fit by walking to work.
' DAY 1 Bus then tube to work £3.90 Coffee from new cafe £2.80 Lunch from work canteen £4.50 Downpayment on a gym membership £70 Tube home £2.70 Dinner out £15 Snack on the way home £2.20 Total £101.10
I have managed to avoid including the Taylor Swift ticket, but this is not an auspicious start, what with the list including the most expensive flat white within half a mile of the office and two out of three meals eaten out.
An old friend is staying with me and we want to try the Chinese restaurant that was booked up on his last visit. Then, on the way home, we stop at the local Turkish supermarket and the Wafe Up biscuits my flatmate and I like are four for £1.10 and, well, here we are.
I may live to regret the Gymbox membership, but I have learned that scrimping on a gym means I do not go. If I experience a flutter of alarm every time the direct debit goes through, I will make the effort to bring down the cost per visit. '
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Yet, in many places, £150 k would you a perfectly decent large flat or small house.
With all the discussions about Millenials and their finances:
' CAN millennials really afford a deposit just by ditching the mochachinos and avocado toast? We asked one to keep a spending diary, but it wasn’t one who lives in London and works in the media so the entire thing was a waste of time.
Still, since we did it, here’s the spending diary of 26-year-old Tom Logan who lives in Preston and works as a mechanic and is therefore representative of absolutely nobody.
DAY 1 I have a couple of slices of toast and margarine then walk to work. Sorry, I’m already doing this wrong. I should have bought breakfast and got the tube and then bought a coffee. Sorry.
I packed sandwiches for lunch too, because there isn’t anywhere you can buy them near the garage. I know, I’m completely fucking this up.
I should have a gym membership or something, but I just keep fit by walking to work.
' DAY 1 Bus then tube to work £3.90 Coffee from new cafe £2.80 Lunch from work canteen £4.50 Downpayment on a gym membership £70 Tube home £2.70 Dinner out £15 Snack on the way home £2.20 Total £101.10
I have managed to avoid including the Taylor Swift ticket, but this is not an auspicious start, what with the list including the most expensive flat white within half a mile of the office and two out of three meals eaten out.
An old friend is staying with me and we want to try the Chinese restaurant that was booked up on his last visit. Then, on the way home, we stop at the local Turkish supermarket and the Wafe Up biscuits my flatmate and I like are four for £1.10 and, well, here we are.
I may live to regret the Gymbox membership, but I have learned that scrimping on a gym means I do not go. If I experience a flutter of alarm every time the direct debit goes through, I will make the effort to bring down the cost per visit. '
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
A relevant question is why does she have to be in London?
She's a Guardian journalist. So is Georges Monbiot. He doesn't live in London.
I suspect the Guardian would be a better paper without all the bleating about London property prices.
The philanthropist who established and endowed the University of Westminster funded it with the money that he (and his father) had made as Chairman of the East India Company
Not sure Indians would see the EIC plunder being spent in Westminster as a plus.
Interesting new book out on the subject recently, out on kindle this Friday.
"Those Brits who speak confidently about how Britain’s “historical and cultural ties” to India will make it easy to strike a great new trade deal should read Mr Tharoor’s book. It would help them to see the world through the eyes of the … countries once colonised or defeated by Britain.’ — Gideon Rachman, Financial Times
That book has been out for a while.
Tharoor has made a whole political career out of blaming Britain for India's present day political ills.
So much so that even some Indian politicians are starting to call him out on it.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
A relevant question is why does she have to be in London?
She's a Guardian journalist. So is Georges Monbiot. He doesn't live in London.
I suspect the Guardian would be a better paper without all the bleating about London property prices.
"about London property prices" is redundant, although it's still a big ask
I think that the other consideration was the interesting piece a few weeks ago showing “real” turnout was much higher than normally thought once you had made the appropriate allowances for double registrations etc. If that was right “real” youth turnout is probably higher than we think.
The philanthropist who established and endowed the University of Westminster funded it with the money that he (and his father) had made as Chairman of the East India Company
Not sure Indians would see the EIC plunder being spent in Westminster as a plus.
Interesting new book out on the subject recently, out on kindle this Friday.
"Those Brits who speak confidently about how Britain’s “historical and cultural ties” to India will make it easy to strike a great new trade deal should read Mr Tharoor’s book. It would help them to see the world through the eyes of the … countries once colonised or defeated by Britain.’ — Gideon Rachman, Financial Times
You might appreciate that his Dad spent it on a large chunk of Leicestershire...which the lad then sold to set up a University...
(I know his great-great-great grandson, who still whines about it occasionally)
That just goes to prove the books thesis. English wealth is based on Colonial, particularly Indian, exploitation.
With all the discussions about Millenials and their finances:
' CAN millennials really afford a deposit just by ditching the mochachinos and avocado toast? We asked one to keep a spending diary, but it wasn’t one who lives in London and works in the media so the entire thing was a waste of time.
Still, since we did it, here’s the spending diary of 26-year-old Tom Logan who lives in Preston and works as a mechanic and is therefore representative of absolutely nobody.
DAY 1 I have a couple of slices of toast and margarine then walk to work. Sorry, I’m already doing this wrong. I should have bought breakfast and got the tube and then bought a coffee. Sorry.
I packed sandwiches for lunch too, because there isn’t anywhere you can buy them near the garage. I know, I’m completely fucking this up.
I should have a gym membership or something, but I just keep fit by walking to work.
' DAY 1 Bus then tube to work £3.90 Coffee from new cafe £2.80 Lunch from work canteen £4.50 Downpayment on a gym membership £70 Tube home £2.70 Dinner out £15 Snack on the way home £2.20 Total £101.10
[...]
Much better is her overall position, that she saves £100/month - actually greater (can you believe it) than most of the country.
Incidentally I agree with Martin: "Scanning my spending diary, he says it would be “very possible” for me to save from £400 to as much as £700 of my disposable income each month by cutting back on coffees, lunches out, rounds at the pub and holidays." (she said £1,000 above - must be the definition of "disposable".
I save approximately £900 of my disposable income of £1,300 each months but accept I'm the minority.
Well done.
It still means approximately the same sort of time saving as my parents, but I have the advantage of a higher salary and I'm prepared to make more sacrifices.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
The philanthropist who established and endowed the University of Westminster funded it with the money that he (and his father) had made as Chairman of the East India Company
Not sure Indians would see the EIC plunder being spent in Westminster as a plus.
Interesting new book out on the subject recently, out on kindle this Friday.
"Those Brits who speak confidently about how Britain’s “historical and cultural ties” to India will make it easy to strike a great new trade deal should read Mr Tharoor’s book. It would help them to see the world through the eyes of the … countries once colonised or defeated by Britain.’ — Gideon Rachman, Financial Times
You might appreciate that his Dad spent it on a large chunk of Leicestershire...which the lad then sold to set up a University...
(I know his great-great-great grandson, who still whines about it occasionally)
That just goes to prove the books thesis. English wealth is based on Colonial, particularly Indian, exploitation.
No, it doesn't. The guy in question was a real entrepreneur - a trader in tea and sugar, who modernised production in Demerara (and created the premium product we know today). His father was a lawyer in the Indian Bar.
The philanthropist who established and endowed the University of Westminster funded it with the money that he (and his father) had made as Chairman of the East India Company
Not sure Indians would see the EIC plunder being spent in Westminster as a plus.
Interesting new book out on the subject recently, out on kindle this Friday.
"Those Brits who speak confidently about how Britain’s “historical and cultural ties” to India will make it easy to strike a great new trade deal should read Mr Tharoor’s book. It would help them to see the world through the eyes of the … countries once colonised or defeated by Britain.’ — Gideon Rachman, Financial Times
You might appreciate that his Dad spent it on a large chunk of Leicestershire...which the lad then sold to set up a University...
(I know his great-great-great grandson, who still whines about it occasionally)
That just goes to prove the books thesis. English wealth is based on Colonial, particularly Indian, exploitation.
No, it doesn't. The guy in question was a real entrepreneur - a trader in tea and sugar, who modernised production in Demerara (and created the premium product we know today). His father was a lawyer in the Indian Bar.
Sugar production being completely divorced from colonial exploitation, of course.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
The philanthropist who established and endowed the University of Westminster funded it with the money that he (and his father) had made as Chairman of the East India Company
Not sure Indians would see the EIC plunder being spent in Westminster as a plus.
Interesting new book out on the subject recently, out on kindle this Friday.
"Those Brits who speak confidently about how Britain’s “historical and cultural ties” to India will make it easy to strike a great new trade deal should read Mr Tharoor’s book. It would help them to see the world through the eyes of the … countries once colonised or defeated by Britain.’ — Gideon Rachman, Financial Times
You might appreciate that his Dad spent it on a large chunk of Leicestershire...which the lad then sold to set up a University...
(I know his great-great-great grandson, who still whines about it occasionally)
That just goes to prove the books thesis. English wealth is based on Colonial, particularly Indian, exploitation.
No, it doesn't. The guy in question was a real entrepreneur - a trader in tea and sugar, who modernised production in Demerara (and created the premium product we know today). His father was a lawyer in the Indian Bar.
Sure, they exploited the system well taking advantage of the assymetric Colonial relationships and power dynamics.
I could find 1,000 economists to say that Labour’s plans would cost us zillions. Doesn’t mean if they were voted in they shouldn’t be allowed to govern.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast.
But, why can she do that ... err ... outside London.
I think that is the point I and another_richard are trying to make.
Most of my time at the moment is spent working with some collaborators in Manhattan.
I don't need to live in Manhattan.
If I did choose to live in Manhattan, I'd have a lot of fun, but I'd be renting.
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast.
But, why can she do that ... err ... outside London.
I think that is the point I and another_richard are trying to make.
Most of my time at the moment is spent working with some collaborators in Manhattan.
I don't need to live in Manhattan.
If I did choose to live in Manhattan, I'd have a lot of fun, but I'd be renting.
I suppose it is career prospects in journalism being best in the Smoke.
Entitlement possibly but not unusual in Millenials. Telling them to suck it up is not going to win them back from Corbynism.
Thankfully, we live in a democracy, not a businesscaseocracy
Exactly the same could have been said in 1940 about the difference in (believed) aircraft numbers for the Luftwaffe vs the RAF. Imagine that War Ministry briefing papers at that time had to be discussed in parliament as part of a debate on whether to fight on? The electorate have set a position, now the politicians have to deliver. If they don't then I really don't know where we end up.
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
I could find 1,000 economists to say that Labour’s plans would cost us zillions. Doesn’t mean if they were voted in they shouldn’t be allowed to govern.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast.
But, why can she do that ... err ... outside London.
I think that is the point I and another_richard are trying to make.
Most of my time at the moment is spent working with some collaborators in Manhattan.
I don't need to live in Manhattan.
If I did choose to live in Manhattan, I'd have a lot of fun, but I'd be renting.
I suppose it is career prospects in journalism being best in the Smoke.
Entitlement possiblyp but not unusual in Millenials. Telling them to suck it up is not going to win them back from Corbynism.
I am happy for them to vote Corby.
It is the middle class professionals with large ISAs that will suffer, dr fox.
There is no reason why the Guardian itself has to be in London. There is no reason why most of the journalists have to be in London.
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
Has there ever been a politician who’s been so shameless about it?
You can imagine him planning a ‘grid’ with tabloid pleasing stories. “Williamson saves cat stuck up tree”, “Williamson uncovers spy ring in Ministry of Defence”, “Williamson sends troops to Africa to protect elephants from poachers.”
You have to admire his creativity. He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
'Brave' for a junior minister to say that. Of course would actually have been brave for him to resign from the Government to say so.
Another sign of the government quietly falling apart, surely? On the leaked report, as Huffington Post observed, they appear to have a choice between releasing it now or waiting until a Commons vote forces them to release it. They could hastily add a paragraph on their dreamland scenario (ideally customised special deal).
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast.
But, why can she do that ... err ... outside London.
I think that is the point I and another_richard are trying to make.
Most of my time at the moment is spent working with some collaborators in Manhattan.
I don't need to live in Manhattan.
If I did choose to live in Manhattan, I'd have a lot of fun, but I'd be renting.
I suppose it is career prospects in journalism being best in the Smoke.
Entitlement possiblyp but not unusual in Millenials. Telling them to suck it up is not going to win them back from Corbynism.
I am happy for them to vote Corby.
It is the middle class professionals with large ISAs that will suffer, dr fox.
There is no reason why the Guardian itself has to be in London. There is no reason why most of the journalists have to be in London.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
O/T Italy - less than five weeks to go (betting post)
Only two small Betfair markets: next PM and biggest party in the Chamber of Deputies
Biggest party - current odds 5 star 1.3/1.42 Forza italia 12.5/44 Democratic Party 3.75/5 Other 3.8
This is a much more difficult market than it appears because the electoral law is new and will combine one third of MPs elected in single-member constituencies using FPTP, and two thirds elected by national PR (seats are divided between parties or coalitions reaching a 10% threshold).
Current polls clearly show the 5star movement as the single biggest party in terms of votes. But most models show that the centre-right coalition as a whole will get more votes, while the democrats are in third place.
However the market is about seats by party and most models show the centre-right coalition with a very clear lead over the 5 stars (270to300 seats for the centre-right/155 to 180 5 stars/ 130 to 160 centre-left), thanks to constituency-elected MPs.
Thus this market could be decided by the seat-distribution within the centre-right coalition. The coalition is composed of four parts, of which Forza Italia represents a bit less than half in terms of votes.
As it stands, the most probable result is still that 5 stars movement will have more MPs but the odds on offer appear excessively low (and too high for FI) . Laying the DP seems quite safe as they are almost certain to finish behind M5S.
Next Prime Minister - current odds Gentiloni (current democrat PM) 2.82/3.75 Tajani (current European parliament President -Forza italia) 3.25/3.3 Di Maio (5 Stars) 3.4/6.2 Renzi (Democrat party leader) 4.5/60 Salvini (Northern league) 5.5/20 Berlusconi (barred from running in the election) 7/13
As everybody expects a hung parliament, the question is which kind of coalition would be formed and what PM could be consensual enough. Di Maio's odds are much too low as no other party wants to support the 5 Stars movement and it should be very far from a majority. - Lay The League is considered fascist by most of the centre-left and 5 stars - Lay Salvini Berlusconi is not in the running - Lay Renzi's coalition should finish third - Lay
Two possible solutions: the centre-right's candidate (very probably Tajani) manages to get enough support form the european/centrist wing of the centre-left and forms a government, or negotiations go nowhere and a caretaker government is named before new elections. In this case, Gentiloni could be asked to stay on. I have backed Tajani as the odds seem ok.
I am happy for them to vote Corby. It is the middle class professionals with large ISAs that will suffer, dr fox. There is no reason why the Guardian itself has to be in London. There is no reason why most of the journalists have to be in London.
It seems to me that most of the Guardian journalists are in the USA, as are most of their stories these days.
I am happy for them to vote Corby. It is the middle class professionals with large ISAs that will suffer, dr fox. There is no reason why the Guardian itself has to be in London. There is no reason why most of the journalists have to be in London.
It seems to me that most of the Guardian journalists are in the USA, as are most of their stories these days.
No idea. I tipped Soton for the drop earlier this month. They seem to have run out of ideas and struggle to score, no great signings, with player and fan morale low. The bottom half is tight, but 6 is good value.
Soton also have some tough fixtures coming, it is a difficult run in.
german car-makers have “blood on their hands” due to rigging diesel exhaust tests which led to the deaths of thousands of Britons, the Government's former chief scientist has said.
Professor Sir David King said it was “simply astonishing” that Volkswagen, BMW and Daimler had performed rigged experiments on monkeys and that such duplicity had caused the deaths of large numbers of people in the UK.
O/T Italy - less than five weeks to go (betting post)
Only two small Betfair markets: next PM and biggest party in the Chamber of Deputies
Biggest party - current odds 5 star 1.3/1.42 Forza italia 12.5/44 Democratic Party 3.75/5 Other 3.8
This is a much more difficult market than it appears because the electoral law is new and will combine one third of MPs elected in single-member constituencies using FPTP, and two thirds elected by national PR (seats are divided between parties or coalitions reaching a 10% threshold).
Current polls clearly show the 5star movement as the single biggest party in terms of votes. But most models show that the centre-right coalition as a whole will get more votes, while the democrats are in third place.
However the market is about seats by party and most models show the centre-right coalition with a very clear lead over the 5 stars (270to300 seats for the centre-right/155 to 180 5 stars/ 130 to 160 centre-left), thanks to constituency-elected MPs.
Thus this market could be decided by the seat-distribution within the centre-right coalition. The coalition is composed of four parts, of which Forza Italia represents a bit less than half in terms of votes.
As it stands, the most probable result is still that 5 stars movement will have more MPs but the odds on offer appear excessively low (and too high for FI) . Laying the DP seems quite safe as they are almost certain to finish behind M5S.
Next Prime Minister - current odds Gentiloni (current democrat PM) 2.82/3.75 Tajani (current European parliament President -Forza italia) 3.25/3.3 Di Maio (5 Stars) 3.4/6.2 Renzi (Democrat party leader) 4.5/60 Salvini (Northern league) 5.5/20 Berlusconi (barred from running in the election) 7/13
As everybody expects a hung parliament, the question is which kind of coalition would be formed and what PM could be consensual enough. Di Maio's odds are much too low as no other party wants to support the 5 Stars movement and it should be very far from a majority. - Lay The League is considered fascist by most of the centre-left and 5 stars - Lay Salvini Berlusconi is not in the running - Lay Renzi's coalition should finish third - Lay
Two possible solutions: the centre-right's candidate (very probably Tajani) manages to get enough support form the european/centrist wing of the centre-left and forms a government, or negotiations go nowhere and a caretaker government is named before new elections. In this case, Gentiloni could be asked to stay on. I have backed Tajani as the odds seem ok.
Thanks, I have had a little dabble. Followed your Macron tip to great profit!
The CDU/CSU score in the INSA poll (33.5 +2 points in 2 weeks) is their best since this election with the pollster that usually gives them their lowest scores.
O/T Italy - less than five weeks to go (betting post)
Only two small Betfair markets: next PM and biggest party in the Chamber of Deputies
Biggest party - current odds 5 star 1.3/1.42 Forza italia 12.5/44 Democratic Party 3.75/5 Other 3.8
This is a much more diffiplace.
However the market is about seats by party and most models show the centre-right coalition with a very clear lead over the 5 stars (270to300 seats for the centre-right/155 to 180 5 stars/ 130 to 160 centre-left), thanks to constituency-elected MPs.
Thus this market could be decided by the seat-distribution within the centre-right coalition. The coalition is composed of four parts, of which Forza Italia represents a bit less than half in terms of votes.
As it stands, the most probable result is still that 5 stars movement will have more MPs but the odds on offer appear excessively low (and too high for FI) . Laying the DP seems quite safe as they are almost certain to finish behind M5S.
Next Prime Minister - current odds Gentiloni (current democrat PM) 2.82/3.75 Tajani (current European parliament President -Forza italia) 3.25/3.3 Di Maio (5 Stars) 3.4/6.2 Renzi (Democrat party leader) 4.5/60 Salvini (Northern league) 5.5/20 Berlusconi (barred from running in the election) 7/13
As everybody expects a hung parliament, the question is which kind of coalition would be formed and what PM could be consensual enough. Di Maio's odds are much too low as no other party wants to support the 5 Stars movement and it should be very far from a majority. - Lay The League is considered fascist by most of the centre-left and 5 stars - Lay Salvini Berlusconi is not in the running - Lay Renzi's coalition should finish third - Lay
Two possible solutions: the centre-right's candidate (very probably Tajani) manages to get enough support form the european/centrist wing of the centre-left and forms a government, or negotiations go nowhere and a caretaker government is named before new elections. In this case, Gentiloni could be asked to stay on. I have backed Tajani as the odds seem ok.
If the centre right coalition do indeed win most seats they have agreed that whichever party wins most votes can pick the next Premier, so if Forza Italia win most votes that is Tajani and if the Northern League win most seats that is Salvini. Though given 5 Stars will likely be the biggest single party in terms of votes and seats overall, Di Maio will also lay a claim to the Premiership
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Centre right 36.8 (16.5 FI 12.8 Northern League others 7.5)
Others
Another word on the horribly complicated electoral law. As I said PR seats are divided between coalitions or single parties getting more than 10% of the national vote. However it's a bit more complicated. Combined coalition scores taken into account for PR only include member parties getting more than 1% of the votes (small coalition parties under 1% are thus "wasted votes" for coalitions).
And then coalitions can only divide PR seats between their member parties getting 3% or more of the votes. Parties between 1 and 3% then count for the PR score of their coalition but will not get seats (unless they have constituency MPs)...
As it stands it seems that none of the centre left parties except the PD will clear 3%. The PD will then get all the centre-left PR seats.
On the right, Forza Italia and Northern League of course clear the bar. It seems that the most-right wing element of the coalition (Fratelli d'Italia) will also easily wualify for PR seats. The question remains open for the centrist element of the coalition "Noi con Italia". The last EMG poll has it at 2.8, so very close to get seats.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Good to see Corbynism remaining utterly marginal in my part of the world.
What shocks me most is Redbridge. That used to be true blue Tory - Winston Churchill was a local MP when he died. They held the council for almost the entire time from 1965 to 2014 and last June they only won one ward. Doesn't look good for IDS next time looking at the wards in his seat.
Where Redbridge has now gone I see Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering going too in a decade - the demographic changes are literally killing the Tories chances long term in the capital.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Good to see Corbynism remaining utterly marginal in my part of the world.
What shocks me most is Redbridge. That used to be true blue Tory - Winston Churchill was a local MP when he died. They held the council for almost the entire time from 1965 to 2014 and last June they only won one ward. Doesn't look good for IDS next time looking at the wards in his seat.
Where Redbridge has now gone I see Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering going too in a decade - the demographic changes are literally killing the Tories chances long term in the capital.
I don’t know about Hillingdon, but I don’t think you’re right about Bromley and Havering. Their demographics are changing, but not in a way that is especially favourable for Labour.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Yes.
That is the answer the conservatives offer. Those without wealthy parents can be tenants in their buy-to-lets.
Also Everton available at 40's. 5 points above bottom 3, Leicester and Arsenal next up. Course we are FAR too good to go down, but that has been heard before. Not playing well and riddled with injuries in positions we don't have cover. Teams below us picking up points/playing well. Worth a cheeky few quid? I've had a tenner), but DYOR obvs. Course £400 will be no consolation...
Good to see Corbynism remaining utterly marginal in my part of the world.
What shocks me most is Redbridge. That used to be true blue Tory - Winston Churchill was a local MP when he died. They held the council for almost the entire time from 1965 to 2014 and last June they only won one ward. Doesn't look good for IDS next time looking at the wards in his seat.
Where Redbridge has now gone I see Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering going too in a decade - the demographic changes are literally killing the Tories chances long term in the capital.
Churchill was MP for Epping from 1924 until 1945, then Woodford from 1945 until 1964 (Woodford included the Epping Forest areas of Loughton, Buckhurst Hill and Chigwell from 1950 until 1955).
Redbridge is heading Labour with IDS the last Tory MP left from there, Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering are all still pretty solid blue on that map in the outer fringes and all but 1 of the MPs in each of Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering elected last June were also Tory.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Well 52% of first time buyers now get on the housing ladder with parental support and with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form. That does not prevent the need for more affordable housing and shared ownership schemes which are being built for those without high incomes or parents with many assets but is the reality
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
She said 'she was not a quitter and there’s a long term job to be done. And that job is about getting the best Brexit deal, about ensuring that we take back control of our money, our laws, our borders, that we can sign trade deals around the rest of the world. But it’s also about our domestic agenda.' That suggests she plans on staying for most of the Parliament but not necessarily she wants to fight the next general election.
Though with the Tories still pretty close to Labour in the polls and no alternative much more popular than she is it is still not impossible she could fight the next election.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Well 52% of first time buyers now get on the housing ladder with parental support and with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form. That does not prevent the need for more affordable housing and shared ownership schemes which are being built for those without high incomes or parents with many assets but is the reality
There's also the thought that mummy and daddy will be starting to think about care costs. If not for them, thn for granny and grandpa
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Not sure where you're getting your maths from.
Just been to Barclays Mortgage Calculator and for 2 people on £35k income, with a £35k deposit it would be possible to buy a £350k property.
No need for mum and dad. Just need two people to look after their money.
with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form.
Leaving aside the fact that this is selecting for people who want their parents to die, you're neglecting the following. Of those 60% who are owner-occupiers:-
* Some (most?) will have more than one child, diluting the inheritance * Some will die with nobody to leave their house to * Some will suffer illness or misfortune that will see their positive equity diluted * Some will live so long that their children will be past childbearing/rearing age when they inherit, so it's useless.
(You also have to take into account that it's last-survivor: the house only descends to the children when both parents die, and the probability of at least one parent lasting past 80 is quite high)
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on ud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Well 52% of first time buyers now get on the housing ladder with parental support and with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form. That does not prevent the need for more affordable housing and shared ownership schemes which are being built for those without high incomes or parents with many assets but is the reality
There's also the thought that mummy and daddy will be starting to think about care costs. If not for them, thn for granny and grandpa
Only if they need residential care now the dementia tax proposal has been scrapped and in any case any transfer would normally be made when their children are in their late 20s or 30s ie well before the parents are likely to get dementia.
Though as I also pointed out recently China has the highest number of under 40 home owners in the world as parents help their children buy a house on marriage and in return those children care for them as much as they can when they are elderly, it works both ways
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Depends if Mummy and Daddy are willing to help out or not
Yes - because everyone's mummy and daddy has a spare £100k to give to each of their offspring to buy a property. Is that our answer now - inheritance is the way to buy a home and if you come from a poor background tough?
Not sure where you're getting your maths from.
Just been to Barclays Mortgage Calculator and for 2 people on £35k income, with a £35k deposit it would be possible to buy a £350k property.
No need for mum and dad. Just need two people to look after their money.
No need for Mum and Dad outside London and the South maybe certainly
with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form.
Leaving aside the fact that this is selecting for people who want their parents to die, you're neglecting the following. Of those 60% who are owner-occupiers:-
* Some (most?) will have more than one child, diluting the inheritance * Some will die with nobody to leave their house to * Some will suffer illness or misfortune that will see their positive equity diluted * Some will live so long that their children will be past childbearing/rearing age when they inherit, so it's useless.
(You also have to take into account that it's last-survivor: the house only descends to the children when both parents die, and the probability of at least one parent lasting past 80 is quite high)
Even now around 30 to 40% will always be renting.
No as most transfers to help with deposits etc will be well before death and final inheritance becomes an issue (although the Telegraph did have an article at the weekend on 60+ year olds who had always rented getting on the property ladder for the very first time thanks to an inheritance, albeit mainly buying apartments in retirement complexes)
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
That Maggie-style going "on and on" requires you to have won an election or two first, Theresa.....
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
That Maggie-style going "on and on" requires you to have won an election or two first, Theresa.....
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
That Maggie-style going "on and on" requires you to have won an election or two first, Theresa.....
All that article says is May says the next general election is not until 2022, she is focusing on the job in hand and who leads the party is up to the Tory party and its leadership rules, nowhere at all does she insist she is fighting the next general election at all costs
with 60% of the adult population still owner occupiers a majority will still have mummy and daddy able to help in some share or form.
Leaving aside the fact that this is selecting for people who want their parents to die, you're neglecting the following. Of those 60% who are owner-occupiers:-
* Some (most?) will have more than one child, diluting the inheritance * Some will die with nobody to leave their house to * Some will suffer illness or misfortune that will see their positive equity diluted * Some will live so long that their children will be past childbearing/rearing age when they inherit, so it's useless.
(You also have to take into account that it's last-survivor: the house only descends to the children when both parents die, and the probability of at least one parent lasting past 80 is quite high)
Even now around 30 to 40% will always be renting.
No as most transfers to help with deposits etc will be well before death and final inheritance becomes an issue (although the Telegraph did have an article at the weekend on 60+ year olds who had always rented getting on the property ladder for the very first time thanks to an inheritance, albeit mainly buying apartments in retirement complexes)
Of course, up until the early 80's...... thirty or so years ago......renting social...... council..... housing was common. It's only since the end of that decade really that to get a house one more or less HAD to buy. Sometimes waiting lists were quite long, of course
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
I don't if my parents were typical, but they certainly weren't spending the sort of money she was spending, at her age, in the 1960's.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
I don't if my parents were typical, but they certainly weren't spending the sort of money she was spending, at her age, in the 1960's.
My parents were getting up at the crack of dawn to buy the leftover vegetables from the market cheaply.
She can only borrow £140k on her £35k salary so would need a deposit of £210k to buy that £350k one bed flat.
Assuming she spends £3 a day on coffee or £1100 a year she should have no bother saving up enough for her deposit in about 200 years if she stopped buying coffees each day.
Still cutting avocado toast out might reduce the wait to 150 years.
Just shows how silly these articles are in the context of London prices - and £350k would barely get you a studio in most of zone 2 these days not a one bed.
Life involves making choices.
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
She might as well enjoy life then, meet her friends, go for dinner at nice places, eat avocado toast. Cos she will never afford to buy a flat on her own in London - until she gets her inheritance of course.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
Then, most boomers didn't spend money the way that she does.
Totally agree - she probably spends more on haircuts in a year than they spent on buying their four bed house! Of course no one ever had nights out in the 1960s and 1970s did they or get their hair cut or eat out - they just sat indoors watching Dads army and Dixon of dock green with the lights off.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
I don't if my parents were typical, but they certainly weren't spending the sort of money she was spending, at her age, in the 1960's.
And all discretionary spending, along with an entitled attitude of the right to live in the leafiest parts of central London despite only an average salary. If she was willing to live in Zone 6 and commute her numbers would look very different and imminently achieveable.
It’s all got a bit Four Yorkshiremen this morning. First, the journalist didn’t claim to be living particularly responsibly. Secondly, her parents’ generation didn’t scrimp and save to a mortgage. Her parents’ generation were fractionally older than me and I remember no hair shirts in the middle classes in the mid 80s. Indeed, it was famously an era of conspicuous consumption.
I look at the younger generation of solicitors and have to admit that they have it far harder than I did at that age. I used to go out most nights for a drink, work tolerable hours, enjoy myself and still saved money to enable me to buy a house in zone 2 in my late 20s.
My impression was it was much easier still for previous generations, when lunchtime drinking was routine, when the City pubs closed at 9pm because everyone had long finished their three hours of drinking and when young lawyers could buy houses in Notting Hill and do them up. They didn’t have Uber or Pret, but I can remember the greasy spoons and everyone got taxis.
It’s all got a bit Four Yorkshiremen this morning. First, the journalist didn’t claim to be living particularly responsibly. Secondly, her parents’ generation didn’t scrimp and save to a mortgage. Her parents’ generation were fractionally older than me and I remember no hair shirts in the middle classes in the mid 80s. Indeed, it was famously an era of conspicuous consumption.
I look at the younger generation of solicitors and have to admit that they have it far harder than I did at that age. I used to go out most nights for a drink, work tolerable hours, enjoy myself and still saved money to enable me to buy a house in zone 2 in my late 20s.
My impression was it was much easier still for previous generations, when lunchtime drinking was routine, when the City pubs closed at 9pm because everyone had long finished their three hours of drinking and when young lawyers could buy houses in Notting Hill and do them up. They didn’t have Uber or Pret, but I can remember the greasy spoons and everyone got taxis.
Not sure about the taxis! But agree with the rest. It was far easier to get on back in the day. We bought our first place - a two bedroom flat with garden in zone 2 in 1991 - for £60,000, with a combined salary of around £30,000 a year. Today, with the same jobs at the same level, we’d be on around £50,000 a year. The flat would cost £500,000+.
Comments
She's a Guardian journalist. So is Georges Monbiot. He doesn't live in London.
I suspect the Guardian would be a better paper without all the bleating about London property prices.
Wonder if we might rejoin EFTA at some point, but can't see it happeneing in the next few years.
Tharoor has made a whole political career out of blaming Britain for India's present day political ills.
So much so that even some Indian politicians are starting to call him out on it.
Thankfully, we live in a democracy, not a businesscaseocracy
He'll being doing this because he sniffs a chance of influencing Tory MPs down that road.
double registrations etc. If that was right “real” youth turnout is probably higher than we think.
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/958239853891735552
Living in London is such a choice as is pissing money away.
Now she's entitled to do so and if that's what she wants that's what she should do.
But very few people have the means to have everything and she certainly hasn't.
Interesting times in America.
Still nice to see some (but not all) boomers yet again fail to get it - her 10 per cent deposit on her one bed is probably double what they paid for their four bed detached house. Yes just cut out the coffees and haircuts - and she will have no problems buying her cosy shoebox for £350k!
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/958464582003167238
I could find 1,000 economists to say that Labour’s plans would cost us zillions. Doesn’t mean if they were voted in they shouldn’t be allowed to govern.
I think that is the point I and another_richard are trying to make.
Most of my time at the moment is spent working with some collaborators in Manhattan.
I don't need to live in Manhattan.
If I did choose to live in Manhattan, I'd have a lot of fun, but I'd be renting.
He’s managed to drum up an impressive number of headlines that will go down beautifully with Tory party members. TM must be wondering why he doesn’t share his ideas...
Entitlement possibly but not unusual in Millenials. Telling them to suck it up is not going to win them back from Corbynism.
It's spin, and tripey spin at that.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.131996513
It is the middle class professionals with large ISAs that will suffer, dr fox.
There is no reason why the Guardian itself has to be in London. There is no reason why most of the journalists have to be in London.
https://twitter.com/TheCricketPaper/status/958409362804019200
Only two small Betfair markets: next PM and biggest party in the Chamber of Deputies
Biggest party - current odds
5 star 1.3/1.42
Forza italia 12.5/44
Democratic Party 3.75/5
Other 3.8
This is a much more difficult market than it appears because the electoral law is new and will combine one third of MPs elected in single-member constituencies using FPTP, and two thirds elected by national PR (seats are divided between parties or coalitions reaching a 10% threshold).
Current polls clearly show the 5star movement as the single biggest party in terms of votes. But most models show that the centre-right coalition as a whole will get more votes, while the democrats are in third place.
However the market is about seats by party and most models show the centre-right coalition with a very clear lead over the 5 stars (270to300 seats for the centre-right/155 to 180 5 stars/ 130 to 160 centre-left), thanks to constituency-elected MPs.
Thus this market could be decided by the seat-distribution within the centre-right coalition.
The coalition is composed of four parts, of which Forza Italia represents a bit less than half in terms of votes.
As it stands, the most probable result is still that 5 stars movement will have more MPs but the odds on offer appear excessively low (and too high for FI) .
Laying the DP seems quite safe as they are almost certain to finish behind M5S.
Next Prime Minister - current odds
Gentiloni (current democrat PM) 2.82/3.75
Tajani (current European parliament President -Forza italia) 3.25/3.3
Di Maio (5 Stars) 3.4/6.2
Renzi (Democrat party leader) 4.5/60
Salvini (Northern league) 5.5/20
Berlusconi (barred from running in the election) 7/13
As everybody expects a hung parliament, the question is which kind of coalition would be formed and what PM could be consensual enough.
Di Maio's odds are much too low as no other party wants to support the 5 Stars movement and it should be very far from a majority. - Lay
The League is considered fascist by most of the centre-left and 5 stars - Lay Salvini
Berlusconi is not in the running - Lay
Renzi's coalition should finish third - Lay
Two possible solutions: the centre-right's candidate (very probably Tajani) manages to get enough support form the european/centrist wing of the centre-left and forms a government, or negotiations go nowhere and a caretaker government is named before new elections. In this case, Gentiloni could be asked to stay on. I have backed Tajani as the odds seem ok.
Soton also have some tough fixtures coming, it is a difficult run in.
New polls:
Forsa: 18%
INSA: 17.5%
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/30/german-car-makers-have-blood-hands-diesel-scandal/
german car-makers have “blood on their hands” due to rigging diesel exhaust tests which led to the deaths of thousands of Britons, the Government's former chief scientist has said.
Professor Sir David King said it was “simply astonishing” that Volkswagen, BMW and Daimler had performed rigged experiments on monkeys and that such duplicity had caused the deaths of large numbers of people in the UK.
Such a sense of entitlement - aspiring to be the proud over of a one bed flat but knowing it is an impossible dream as she only earns about the average salary in our capital city,
Current average of last polls from 10 pollsters:
5 Stars movement 27.8
Centre left 27.4 (PD 23.6, all others 3.8)
Centre right 36.8 (16.5 FI 12.8 Northern League others 7.5)
Others
Another word on the horribly complicated electoral law. As I said PR seats are divided between coalitions or single parties getting more than 10% of the national vote.
However it's a bit more complicated. Combined coalition scores taken into account for PR only include member parties getting more than 1% of the votes (small coalition parties under 1% are thus "wasted votes" for coalitions).
And then coalitions can only divide PR seats between their member parties getting 3% or more of the votes. Parties between 1 and 3% then count for the PR score of their coalition but will not get seats (unless they have constituency MPs)...
As it stands it seems that none of the centre left parties except the PD will clear 3%. The PD will then get all the centre-left PR seats.
On the right, Forza Italia and Northern League of course clear the bar. It seems that the most-right wing element of the coalition (Fratelli d'Italia) will also easily wualify for PR seats. The question remains open for the centrist element of the coalition "Noi con Italia". The last EMG poll has it at 2.8, so very close to get seats.
Where Redbridge has now gone I see Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering going too in a decade - the demographic changes are literally killing the Tories chances long term in the capital.
That is the answer the conservatives offer. Those without wealthy parents can be tenants in their buy-to-lets.
Forever.
Course we are FAR too good to go down, but that has been heard before.
Not playing well and riddled with injuries in positions we don't have cover.
Teams below us picking up points/playing well.
Worth a cheeky few quid? I've had a tenner), but DYOR obvs.
Course £400 will be no consolation...
Redbridge is heading Labour with IDS the last Tory MP left from there, Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering are all still pretty solid blue on that map in the outer fringes and all but 1 of the MPs in each of Bromley, Hillingdon and Havering elected last June were also Tory.
Once upon a time, it would have been brave to ignore evidence rather than seek it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/theresa-may-in-china-warns-tory-plotters-im-not-a-quitter-long-term-job_uk_5a710913e4b0ae29f08befbc
A defiant Theresa May has warned rebellious Tory MPs that she is “not a quitter” and signalled she will fight the next general election as party leader.
Though with the Tories still pretty close to Labour in the polls and no alternative much more popular than she is it is still not impossible she could fight the next election.
Just been to Barclays Mortgage Calculator and for 2 people on £35k income, with a £35k deposit it would be possible to buy a £350k property.
No need for mum and dad. Just need two people to look after their money.
Leaving aside the fact that this is selecting for people who want their parents to die, you're neglecting the following. Of those 60% who are owner-occupiers:-
* Some (most?) will have more than one child, diluting the inheritance
* Some will die with nobody to leave their house to
* Some will suffer illness or misfortune that will see their positive equity diluted
* Some will live so long that their children will be past childbearing/rearing age when they inherit, so it's useless.
(You also have to take into account that it's last-survivor: the house only descends to the children when both parents die, and the probability of at least one parent lasting past 80 is quite high)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUJjnuSLSXc
No as most transfers to help with deposits etc will be well before death and final inheritance becomes an issue (although the Telegraph did have an article at the weekend on 60+ year olds who had always rented getting on the property ladder for the very first time thanks to an inheritance, albeit mainly buying apartments in retirement complexes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXzZvooWH2Q
I look at the younger generation of solicitors and have to admit that they have it far harder than I did at that age. I used to go out most nights for a drink, work tolerable hours, enjoy myself and still saved money to enable me to buy a house in zone 2 in my late 20s.
My impression was it was much easier still for previous generations, when lunchtime drinking was routine, when the City pubs closed at 9pm because everyone had long finished their three hours of drinking and when young lawyers could buy houses in Notting Hill and do them up. They didn’t have Uber or Pret, but I can remember the greasy spoons and everyone got taxis.
NEW THREAD