Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
It'll certainly do wonders for uniting the mood of my nation.
It may annoy diehard republican Nats like you but for the rest of us we will be very happy for them and many of us will join in the celebrations
Well, I'm a monarchist, and my reaction is What a nauseatingly vain and silly woman. But perhaps she aspires to be the princess of people's hearts.
You are a leftwinger, hardly a diehard monarchist
I am not but I agree with him
The Queen will be the last really respected monarch and apart from William and Kate the rest are wholly irrelevant and few will notice their passing
You voted for Blair twice and like it or not Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne
Do you honestly think Princess Beatrice getting married means anything at all to 90% of the nation, regardless of views on the institution of the monarchy?
Ninth in line is nowhere - she's more chance of winning the lottery than being Queen. Whether you're monarchist or republican or neither... she's an irrelevance.
"Bernie Sanders Endorses Joe Biden for President The Vermont senator added the weight of his left-wing support to Mr. Biden’s candidacy in a step toward Democratic unity against President Trump."
You can tell from this press conference that the doctors are firmly in control of policy.
So imagine the worst hit the economy could take from this, your absolute worst nightmare, and assume its going to be worse than that.
For two million job losses read four million, in other words.
Oh, it's going to be a grade A catastrophe, through a combination of public fear, changing habits, ongoing social distancing measures and a long and grinding lockdown.
Once discretionary retail gets up and running, a lot of customers won't come back because they'll move online or only go out to buy clothes, in particular, if they're essential and not the sort of basics they can pick up whilst at the supermarket. The shops will also, presumably, be made to put staff on the doors to arrange orderly queues or shoo customers away once they're full (which, for smaller units, may mean only having two people in there at any one time.)
Services like hairdressers will also come back, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were made to trade by appointment only and half the chairs were left empty to at least keep the customers 2m apart from each other. The staff will probably be told to wear masks.
God alone knows when the leisure and hospitality industries will be allowed to resume trading. Worst case scenario is that nobody gets to reopen until we have herd immunity or a vaccine, because social distancing, and the whole lot goes to the wall. That'll cause a depression on its own.
Fact is, I don't think it'll get quite that far because the imperative to avert mass unemployment and socio-economic collapse will eventually force the Government to let the virus out of jail. In fact, I've suspected for some time that this is what the Nightingale hospitals are primarily for - not so much dealing with the immediate crisis but warehousing the victims of the second wave. But I certainly wouldn't want to be employed by (or recently laid off from) a business like a cafe or a gym right now.
Businesses do fail, often through no fault of their own, when circumstances change. Normally the Right is quite resistant to the state bailing them out. Strangely, some sections of the Right now think not only that businesses should be bailed out, but that hundreds of thousands of lives should be sacrificed to do it. It seems an odd philosophy for conservatives to espouse.
It's a matter of changing mindset from 'I have to keep what I have' to 'what can I do now to benefit from the situation?' If most people in your line of work are running around going 'I'm doomed' then maybe you are better spending your time working out how you can get ahead of them. In my own field, there are going to be real difficulties about losing custom from East Asia. The answer is not 'how do I get that back?' it's 'what can I do instead and how can I get there first?'
Sorry, but despite the histrionic language used by some, the costs of the lockdown are going to be measured primarily in terms of wealth, not lives. And the prophets of economic doom hardly seem to have placed the lives of the poor high on their agenda previously.
YOu seem like the kind of person who is quite happy to see hundreds of thousands of working class people sicken and die during a horrible recesssion so long as the fabulously wealthy get a little poorer.
You seem like the kind of person you enjoys slicing babies thinly and eating them on toast.
LOL what an absurd comment
Indeed.
Any true conservative would only eat babies when roasted and served with potato salad.
As if toast comes into the equation.
Although lightly warmed blinis with sour cream and baby roe works a treat
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
I vote she's not a nobody. Also since her cousin flounced off to Canada, she could now be effectively as high as seventh.
Also, something weird has happened to Vanilla. Again.
Businesses do fail, often through no fault of their own, when circumstances change. Normally the Right is quite resistant to the state bailing them out. Strangely, some sections of the Right now think not only that businesses should be bailed out, but that hundreds of thousands of lives should be sacrificed to do it. It seems an odd philosophy for conservatives to espouse.
This has moved beyond a silly left-right dispute. If the Treasury runs out of money to prop up all the unemployed before this is all over (because the markets won't lend to it anymore, and it can't print its way out of trouble without ruining everybody through hyperinflation) then we have mass starvation and societal collapse.
It always comes back to a balance: if the number of lives destroyed by the measures taken to combat coronavirus exceeds those destroyed by the virus itself, then at least some of the measures to suppress the virus must be removed. A hypothetical Labour administration would be faced with exactly the same horrible choices as the current one.
The Treasury is a VERY long way from the markets being unwilling to lend, with the interest rate currently close to 0. The trickier decision is how far to push interest rates up without accelerating bankruptcies - it's classic stagflation territory. I'd expect new "recovery bonds" to be issued at gradually higher interest rates until the market price is established.
Some production and services will simply be rolled over as used to happen after prolonged strike action or other disruption - if there's a shortage of new cars that people can afford, more new cars will be made to catch up; if a will needs to be prrocessed and the solicitor was unavailable, it will be processed later with no effect except mild inconvenience. Others will simply not happen - train journeys not taken, hairdressers not visited. Assessment of which businesses will manage best involves looking at which are in the "you can catch up" category.
on top of the lost-forever consumption (restaurants, travel etc.) a lot of the tangibles won't come back (fashion has lost a season), and a lot of consumption will be reassessed (cars, holidays). This huge hit to our consumption-based economy will mean we simply can't afford the welfare and health we now demand. With taxes very close to a post-war high already. something is going to give. and that won't be pretty. printing money really doesn't solve this either.
Yep. This is where we are at.
I imagine Sunak realises this and is defecating building materials at the moment, the sooner the rest of the country wises up to this fact the better.
he's a Goldman guy, he knows. Also UK is uniquely ill placed to handle this.
1) We tax property occupancy and transactions higher than anywhere else in the world. That is going to hurt. 2) We tax middle income earners on their income far lower than pretty much anywhere in Europe and rely on a very narrow base for income related taxes. Raising basic rate to 30% a la most Europe is going to hurt. 3) We are far more reliant on trade and invisible exports of services. And are so vulnerable to trade freezing up. The hit to the Golden Goose of London as the only alpha + city in Europe is going to hurt. 4) We have higher state support for social insurance (welfare), health (NHS) and housing (social housing) than most countries. Losing that is going to hurt
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
Interesting discussion. Given where we are, assuming that it's hard to see the lockdown ending until mid May at the earliest and a full opening of restaurants / cinemas until after that, what would you suggest from an economic perspective?
I really don't know. I see no good answers. I guess you could remove the 0% VAT rate and charge 20% for *everything* and couple it with removing *all* pension tax benefits. That gets your tax take up in a *moderately* equitable way. On spending, can't touch NHS obvs, ditch some of the dubious capital stuff like HS2, Hinckley? remove the transport subsidies? abolish overseas aid? do a Costa Rica and abolish the military? None of these are good. But not sure what else there is.
To extend Churchills famous quote below. The strong horse has just been shot and we're loading up the cart.
“Some regard private enterprise as if it were a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look upon it as a cow that they can milk. Only a handful see it for what it really is--the strong horse that pulls the whole cart.”
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
I vote she's not a nobody. Also since her cousin flounced off to Canada, she could now be effectively as high as seventh.
Also, something weird has happened to Vanilla. Again.
I hate to disillusion you, but her cousin's flounce had no bearing on the line of succession. He remains in sixth place. She is ninth.
Today's presser showed the government thinks it can get away with anything as long as it can parrot the phrase 'we followed the medical experts advice''
Massive recession????? we followed the medical experts advice
Millions unemployed??? we followed the medical experts advice
Soaring debt mountain???? we followed the medical experts advice
Recession related deaths???? we followed the medical experts advice
I trust people are aware that in Italy, France, Belgium, Spain and I suspect others there have been serious outbreaks and deaths in care homes. It is of course tragic and sad but I'm pretty sure most countries have treated their elderly in much the same way - no doubt with errors - but not I think with malice. Remember it is the nature of the beast we are dealing with that the elderly and infirm are those most at risk.
Indeed. But our government was unique - among the ones not run by complete loonies - in the delusion that it would be possible to let the virus run through about two thirds of the population while "cocooning" the vulnerable.
One might have expected even politicians as dim as Johnson and Hancock to question how that would be done for care homes.
Interesting to see you are now describing the Social Democratic government of Sweden as 'complete loonies'!
Idiot.
Can you really not understand the difference between a policy of achieving herd immunity on the one hand, and a policy of trying to prevent the virus spreading without a lockdown on the other?
No, because there is none, especially without mass testing which Sweden, unlike say South Korea, is not doing,
Indeed. I suspected you couldn't understand the difference.
You clearly do not understand that if you do not have a lockdown by definition the virus will spread more widely and you will be pursuing a herd immunity policy, even if by default.
If you pursue mass testing and tracing you might be able to avoid a lockdown and pursuing herd immunity but Sweden is not mass testing
You really are unbelievably thick, aren't you?
Obviously Sweden is trying to avoid a majority of its population getting the virus. Advocates of the Swedish strategy are even claiming they will succeed.
You may not agree - I don't agree myself - but to say that "by definition" not having a lockdown means the virus will spread until herd immunity stops it, and to imply that that is what the Swedish government is trying to do, is just plain stupid. Obviously the idea of the Swedish strategy is that social distancing will succeed without the need for a lockdown.
Yet Sweden already has a death rate higher than all its neighbours, Denmark, Finland and Norway. Either you support a lockdown or you don't, if you don't fine but you cannot criticise the government then on any grounds but the lockdown is too heavy
You implied Sweden's policy was herd imunity. It isn't.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
The Labour drama might be interesting for some in the media but frankly no one else gives a fig . Right wing commentators in particular are trying to make a big deal of this and are obviously frustrated that the virus has taken over the majority of the news.
It'll certainly do wonders for uniting the mood of my nation.
It may annoy diehard republican Nats like you but for the rest of us we will be very happy for them and many of us will join in the celebrations
Well, I'm a monarchist, and my reaction is What a nauseatingly vain and silly woman. But perhaps she aspires to be the princess of people's hearts.
You are a leftwinger, hardly a diehard monarchist
I am not but I agree with him
The Queen will be the last really respected monarch and apart from William and Kate the rest are wholly irrelevant and few will notice their passing
You voted for Blair twice and like it or not Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne
Do you honestly think Princess Beatrice getting married means anything at all to 90% of the nation, regardless of views on the institution of the monarchy?
Ninth in line is nowhere - she's more chance of winning the lottery than being Queen. Whether you're monarchist or republican or neither... she's an irrelevance.
Without being unkind, that is the jist of it. Big name royals are able to affect the mood of the nation with major events, lesser known or more minor royals just aren't able to do so however positively intentioned it might be. It'd make the news, sure, but even monarchists like myself mostly won't get excited by it.
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
If you are in the top 10 in line for the throne by definition you are not a nobody, the line of succession is not dependent on polls
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
I vote she's not a nobody. Also since her cousin flounced off to Canada, she could now be effectively as high as seventh.
Also, something weird has happened to Vanilla. Again.
I hate to disillusion you, but her cousin's flounce had no bearing on the line of succession. He remains in sixth place. She is ninth.
I did say "effectively". I assume if the situation arose, he'd un-resign from his family and return to take the throne, but I don't think it's guaranteed.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I think your Amazon voucher cache is safe this time.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
What we need is state-sponsored new towns or at least refurbishment and development up north and by the seaside. New jobs and get some money flowing. Looking for more ways to build flats in London is a fools errand.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
The simplest and easiest way to reboot the UK economy after this is all over would be to liberalize the planing and tax system associated with development, especially development of housing.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
I suppose we could throw in 1714 - because prior to 1701 Electress Sophia had been quite well down the list of possible heirs - but 1701 rendered that more or less moot.
You can tell from this press conference that the doctors are firmly in control of policy.
So imagine the worst hit the economy could take from this, your absolute worst nightmare, and assume its going to be worse than that.
For two million job losses read four million, in other words.
Oh, it's going to be a grade A catastrophe, through a combination of public fear, changing habits, ongoing social distancing measures and a long and grinding lockdown.
Once discretionary retail gets up and running, a lot of customers won't come back because they'll move online or only go out to buy clothes, in particular, if they're essential and not the sort of basics they can pick up whilst at the supermarket. The shops will also, presumably, be made to put staff on the doors to arrange orderly queues or shoo customers away once they're full (which, for smaller units, may mean only having two people in there at any one time.)
Services like hairdressers will also come back, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were made to trade by appointment only and half the chairs were left empty to at least keep the customers 2m apart from each other. The staff will probably be told to wear masks.
God alone knows when the leisure and hospitality industries will be allowed to resume trading. Worst case scenario is that nobody gets to reopen until we have herd immunity or a vaccine, because social distancing, and the whole lot goes to the wall. That'll cause a depression on its own.
Fact is, I don't think it'll get quite that far because the imperative to avert mass unemployment and socio-economic collapse will eventually force the Government to let the virus out of jail. In fact, I've suspected for some time that this is what the Nightingale hospitals are primarily for - not so much dealing with the immediate crisis but warehousing the victims of the second wave. But I certainly wouldn't want to be employed by (or recently laid off from) a business like a cafe or a gym right now.
Yeah, this is some great depression level stuff. I have access to some limited economic data through my job and it's hard to see how this doesn't result in a near fatal blow to the high street. There won't be any reason to leave our homes soon - there won't be anywhere left open to go.
The tax base is clearly going to take a kicking, it's not a question of us all paying more tax, it's going to be a fact that there simply aren't enough people left working to pay enough tax to keep public services going. Austerity will seem mild compared to the cuts that will need to be made.
The alternative is we print a load of funny money. Which I think is where we are headed.
Yes, I don’t see Boris making more cuts. They will print money to avoid economic disaster.
Indeed. The future is really going to pay for this one.
Or we will discover the debt and deficit hawks have been talking nonsense for the past decade and a half. Our current situation is unprecedented (I think) in that it is not a normal market failure of supply or demand that can be fixed by government stepping in. This is where we have "voluntarily" shut down large sections of the economy. Maybe when lockdown ends, it will return to normal. Maybe it won't. Who knows? The Treasury must be prepared to act but it is hard to know in advance what will be needed and where.
You print money but keep it as a specific liability (monetisation of debt). You then have a specific surcharge (a Corona solidarity charge) that can only be applied to paying down this liability. And once it’s gone it’s gone.
The risk with money printing is that the emergencies get a little less... real... every time. Eventually you're printing it to avoid the most minor of recessions.
I think this ends - perhaps twenty years from now - with governments debasing the currency.
It was inevitable from the day the Bank of England was founded, as was predicted by a wide man
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Fair play, if there was one man to accomplish this mission...
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Betfair have just added "Any Other" to their winning party market for the American election.
Would be amusing if a credible non listed candidate now entered...
That's funny. I like that. I've stuck £2 on it.
Bill Gates?
Grasping at Bill Gates as a potential name sort of shows why it isn't going to happen. Some huge problems:
1. Biden may be an imperfect candidate, but he isn't awful and polls suggest he has a reasonable chance. If you're Gates or someone like him, who I am sure isn't a Trump fan, why on earth would you split the anti-Trump vote?
2. Biden has just won the nomination, and in the end fairly comfortably. When Sanders dropped out, Biden had a big polling lead, endorsements from the major drop-outs, and had got a good turnout at the main electoral tests after an early wobble. Basically, he's got a fair amount of goodwill, so what's your argument to step in?
3. If Biden develops a huge problem - he gets ill or massive bad news drops - there are plenty of credible listed candidates including candidates who ran and dropped out (but have plenty of political credit in the bank) and Cuomo. Ditto, Trump has Pence in the wings if he has a problem.
4. One of the few people with the ego and money to do it, Bloomberg, just crashed and burned. Why put yourself through it with that immediate example of how hard it is?
The Labour drama might be interesting for some in the media but frankly no one else gives a fig . Right wing commentators in particular are trying to make a big deal of this and are obviously frustrated that the virus has taken over the majority of the news.
I think no one gives a fig is todays funniest comment
Tell that to Diane Abbott and the other mps signing their letter
I gave you a specific example. I suspect you're not really interested, so I won't waste my time anymore. Buy a whole box of nuisance masks. Why not wear a bird-mask like they did in the middle ages. It kept the black death away.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Fair play, if there was one man to accomplish this mission...
Unfortunately, this time no £20 Amazon vouchers were offered. I think he learned his lesson earlier.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Betfair have just added "Any Other" to their winning party market for the American election.
Would be amusing if a credible non listed candidate now entered...
That's funny. I like that. I've stuck £2 on it.
Bill Gates?
Grasping at Bill Gates as a potential name sort of shows why it isn't going to happen. Some huge problems:
1. Biden may be an imperfect candidate, but he isn't awful and polls suggest he has a reasonable chance. If you're Gates or someone like him, who I am sure isn't a Trump fan, why on earth would you split the anti-Trump vote?
2. Biden has just won the nomination, and in the end fairly comfortably. When Sanders dropped out, Biden had a big polling lead, endorsements from the major drop-outs, and had got a good turnout at the main electoral tests after an early wobble. Basically, he's got a fair amount of goodwill, so what's your argument to step in?
3. If Biden develops a huge problem - he gets ill or massive bad news drops - there are plenty of credible listed candidates including candidates who ran and dropped out (but have plenty of political credit in the bank) and Cuomo. Ditto, Trump has Pence in the wings if he has a problem.
4. One of the few people with the ego and money to do it, Bloomberg, just crashed and burned. Why put yourself through it with that immediate example of how hard it is?
Totally agree. I only put £2 on. Bit of a fun bet.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond....
You’re suggesting his reign lifted the nation’s spirits ... ?
It'll certainly do wonders for uniting the mood of my nation.
It may annoy diehard republican Nats like you but for the rest of us we will be very happy for them and many of us will join in the celebrations
Well, I'm a monarchist, and my reaction is What a nauseatingly vain and silly woman. But perhaps she aspires to be the princess of people's hearts.
You are a leftwinger, hardly a diehard monarchist
I am not but I agree with him
The Queen will be the last really respected monarch and apart from William and Kate the rest are wholly irrelevant and few will notice their passing
You voted for Blair twice and like it or not Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne
Do you honestly think Princess Beatrice getting married means anything at all to 90% of the nation, regardless of views on the institution of the monarchy?
Ninth in line is nowhere - she's more chance of winning the lottery than being Queen. Whether you're monarchist or republican or neither... she's an irrelevance.
Without being unkind, that is the jist of it. Big name royals are able to affect the mood of the nation with major events, lesser known or more minor royals just aren't able to do so however positively intentioned it might be. It'd make the news, sure, but even monarchists like myself mostly won't get excited by it.
Will the bride's father be enjoying a prominent role in this uplifting event?
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Fair play, if there was one man to accomplish this mission...
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond....
You’re suggesting his reign lifted the nation’s spirits ... ?
Well, not being a psychotic infanticide and being fertile enough to knock up his wife within literally days of marriage did improve things somewhat.
A bout of plague that delayed his coronation and after 1503, his increasingly bizarre avarice and paranoia may be considered downers.
I gave you a specific example. I suspect you're not really interested, so I won't waste my time anymore. Buy a whole box of nuisance masks. Why not wear a bird-mask like they did in the middle ages. It kept the black death away.
No, I'm very interested in understanding your example.
You're suggesting that if someone coughs in your face you're worse off wearing a mask because the virus will end up on the outside of the mask.
My question is - where would the virus have ended up if you hadn't been wearing a mask?
The Labour drama might be interesting for some in the media but frankly no one else gives a fig . Right wing commentators in particular are trying to make a big deal of this and are obviously frustrated that the virus has taken over the majority of the news.
I think no one gives a fig is todays funniest comment
Tell that to Diane Abbott and the other mps signing their letter
Big G, did you go out to sing Mae Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau for Boris at 20.00 hours? Just been out- here it finished with an Oggi,Oggi, Oggi!
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
You like polling evidence. Straw poll PB and I suspect she would be categorised as a nobody in a question requiring a straight yes or no answer.
If you are in the top 10 in line for the throne by definition you are not a nobody, the line of succession is not dependent on polls
Outside the Queen, Charles and William they are irrelevant and after the Queen passes the hangers on including here will become nonentities
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Fair play, if there was one man to accomplish this mission...
The gap on Betfair between Biden as Next POTUS (2.39) and Dem Winning Party 2020 (2.06) is astonishing. It would tie up money for a while but backing Biden and laying Dems returns 7% in 7 months unless he is replaced and his replacement wins. Albeit you can get 12% by just backing him for the nomination.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
If you really think she looks the Kind Hearts and Coronets type.
The Labour drama might be interesting for some in the media but frankly no one else gives a fig . Right wing commentators in particular are trying to make a big deal of this and are obviously frustrated that the virus has taken over the majority of the news.
I think no one gives a fig is todays funniest comment
Tell that to Diane Abbott and the other mps signing their letter
You can tell from this press conference that the doctors are firmly in control of policy.
So imagine the worst hit the economy could take from this, your absolute worst nightmare, and assume its going to be worse than that.
For two million job losses read four million, in other words.
Oh, it's going to be a grade A catastrophe, through a combination of public fear, changing habits, ongoing social distancing measures and a long and grinding lockdown.
Once discretionary retail gets up and running, a lot of customers won't come back because they'll move online or only go out to buy clothes, in particular, if they're essential and not the sort of basics they can pick up whilst at the supermarket. The shops will also, presumably, be made to put staff on the doors to arrange orderly queues or shoo customers away once they're full (which, for smaller units, may mean only having two people in there at any one time.)
Services like hairdressers will also come back, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were made to trade by appointment only and half the chairs were left empty to at least keep the customers 2m apart from each other. The staff will probably be told to wear masks.
God alone knows when the leisure and hospitality industries will be allowed to resume trading. Worst case scenario is that nobody gets to reopen until we have herd immunity or a vaccine, because social distancing, and the whole lot goes to the wall. That'll cause a depression on its own.
Fact is, I don't think it'll get quite that far because the imperative to avert mass unemployment and socio-economic collapse will eventually force the Government to let the virus out of jail. In fact, I've suspected for some time that this is what the Nightingale hospitals are primarily for - not so much dealing with the immediate crisis but warehousing the victims of the second wave. But I certainly wouldn't want to be employed by (or recently laid off from) a business like a cafe or a gym right now.
Yeah, this is some great depression level stuff. I have access to some limited economic data through my job and it's hard to see how this doesn't result in a near fatal blow to the high street. There won't be any reason to leave our homes soon - there won't be anywhere left open to go.
The tax base is clearly going to take a kicking, it's not a question of us all paying more tax, it's going to be a fact that there simply aren't enough people left working to pay enough tax to keep public services going. Austerity will seem mild compared to the cuts that will need to be made.
The alternative is we print a load of funny money. Which I think is where we are headed.
Yes, I don’t see Boris making more cuts. They will print money to avoid economic disaster.
Indeed. The future is really going to pay for this one.
Or we will discover the debt and deficit hawks have been talking nonsense for the past decade and a half. Our current situation is unprecedented (I think) in that it is not a normal market failure of supply or demand that can be fixed by government stepping in. This is where we have "voluntarily" shut down large sections of the economy. Maybe when lockdown ends, it will return to normal. Maybe it won't. Who knows? The Treasury must be prepared to act but it is hard to know in advance what will be needed and where.
You print money but keep it as a specific liability (monetisation of debt). You then have a specific surcharge (a Corona solidarity charge) that can only be applied to paying down this liability. And once it’s gone it’s gone.
The risk with money printing is that the emergencies get a little less... real... every time. Eventually you're printing it to avoid the most minor of recessions.
I think this ends - perhaps twenty years from now - with governments debasing the currency.
It was inevitable from the day the Bank of England was founded, as was predicted by a wide man
Is that an epic typo, or was he the first City fat cat?
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
If you really think she looks the Kind Hearts and Coronets type.
You can tell from this press conference that the doctors are firmly in control of policy.
So imagine the worst hit the economy could take from this, your absolute worst nightmare, and assume its going to be worse than that.
For two million job losses read four million, in other words.
Oh, it's going to be a grade A catastrophe, through a combination of public fear, changing habits, ongoing social distancing measures and a long and grinding lockdown.
Once discretionary retail gets up and running, a lot of customers won't come back because they'll move online or only go out to buy clothes, in particular, if they're essential and not the sort of basics they can pick up whilst at the supermarket. The shops will also, presumably, be made to put staff on the doors to arrange orderly queues or shoo customers away once they're full (which, for smaller units, may mean only having two people in there at any one time.)
Services like hairdressers will also come back, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were made to trade by appointment only and half the chairs were left empty to at least keep the customers 2m apart from each other. The staff will probably be told to wear masks.
God alone knows when the leisure and hospitality industries will be allowed to resume trading. Worst case scenario is that nobody gets to reopen until we have herd immunity or a vaccine, because social distancing, and the whole lot goes to the wall. That'll cause a depression on its own.
Fact is, I don't think it'll get quite that far because the imperative to avert mass unemployment and socio-economic collapse will eventually force the Government to let the virus out of jail. In fact, I've suspected for some time that this is what the Nightingale hospitals are primarily for - not so much dealing with the immediate crisis but warehousing the victims of the second wave. But I certainly wouldn't want to be employed by (or recently laid off from) a business like a cafe or a gym right now.
Yeah, this is some great depression level stuff. I have access to some limited economic data through my job and it's hard to see how this doesn't result in a near fatal blow to the high street. There won't be any reason to leave our homes soon - there won't be anywhere left open to go.
The tax base is clearly going to take a kicking, it's not a question of us all paying more tax, it's going to be a fact that there simply aren't enough people left working to pay enough tax to keep public services going. Austerity will seem mild compared to the cuts that will need to be made.
The alternative is we print a load of funny money. Which I think is where we are headed.
Yes, I don’t see Boris making more cuts. They will print money to avoid economic disaster.
Indeed. The future is really going to pay for this one.
Or we will discover the debt and deficit hawks have been talking nonsense for the past decade and a half. Our current situation is unprecedented (I think) in that it is not a normal market failure of supply or demand that can be fixed by government stepping in. This is where we have "voluntarily" shut down large sections of the economy. Maybe when lockdown ends, it will return to normal. Maybe it won't. Who knows? The Treasury must be prepared to act but it is hard to know in advance what will be needed and where.
You print money but keep it as a specific liability (monetisation of debt). You then have a specific surcharge (a Corona solidarity charge) that can only be applied to paying down this liability. And once it’s gone it’s gone.
The risk with money printing is that the emergencies get a little less... real... every time. Eventually you're printing it to avoid the most minor of recessions.
I think this ends - perhaps twenty years from now - with governments debasing the currency.
It was inevitable from the day the Bank of England was founded, as was predicted by a wide man
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
I think the point is - speaking as somebody who actually has two spare rooms - that if our property tax system wasn’t such a shambles we would make more efficient lifestyle choices.
The Labour drama might be interesting for some in the media but frankly no one else gives a fig . Right wing commentators in particular are trying to make a big deal of this and are obviously frustrated that the virus has taken over the majority of the news.
I think no one gives a fig is todays funniest comment
Tell that to Diane Abbott and the other mps signing their letter
Big G, did you go out to sing Mae Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau for Boris at 20.00 hours? Just been out- here it finished with an Oggi,Oggi, Oggi!
Nothing round here but I like the Oggi, Oggi, Oggi bit
@Cyclefree Gardening Corner #gardeningcorner Slightly off the beat: I hear that Primroses are edible. Which parts of a primrose can I eat, and what do I use them for. Is it as simple as flowers for garnish and leaves for salads?
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
We in UK are amongst the most 'spare bedroomed' in the world. I did some pan european stuff on this a while back. And Europe is the most 'spare bedroomed' region in the world. UK isn't an outlier high but we are top 5 or 6 IIRC.
My 'king for a day' solution is to remove stamp duty and turn council tax, remove council tax and replace it with a true ad volorem tax. say 1% of your properties value every year.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond....
You’re suggesting his reign lifted the nation’s spirits ... ?
Well, not being a psychotic infanticide and being fertile enough to knock up his wife within literally days of marriage did improve things somewhat.
A bout of plague that delayed his coronation and after 1503, his increasingly bizarre avarice and paranoia may be considered downers.
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
So what do you change? Abolish Capital Gains Tax?
The quickest and esyest thing to change would be to abolish the inheritances tax loop hole on main homes.
If you own a home up to 1,000,000 it can be inherited with no inheritance tax, this provides an incentive for people with big houses in there old age to keep hold of it even if they don't need or patiualy want it rater then move in to a small house and have £1,000,000 in the bank that will be taxed.
Personalty I would get rid of all inheritances tax, but if we are going to keep it then this rule makes it even more damaging than it otherwise would be.
The gap on Betfair between Biden as Next POTUS (2.39) and Dem Winning Party 2020 (2.06) is astonishing. It would tie up money for a while but backing Biden and laying Dems returns 7% in 7 months unless he is replaced and his replacement wins. Albeit you can get 12% by just backing him for the nomination.
As a 77 year old man, your actuarial risk of death in the next 12 months in the USA is 4.4%. That's 12 months rather than 7, but still accounts for a fair bit of that.
And that's not factoring in coronavirus, the risk of incapacity short of death, the risk of scandal, and the fact that (based on stats over the past century) being President or a presidential candidate is far riskier than being a cop or a fireman in terms of chance of death in the course of your duties.
So it seems to me a fair return, but not generous.
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
So what do you change? Abolish Capital Gains Tax?
The quickest and esyest thing to change would be to abolish the inheritances tax loop hole on main homes.
If you own a home up to 1,000,000 it can be inherited with no inheritance tax, this provides an incentive for people with big houses in there old age to keep hold of it even if they don't need or patiualy want it rater then move in to a small house and have £1,000,000 in the bank that will be taxed.
Personalty I would get rid of all inheritances tax, but if we are going to keep it then this rule makes it even more damaging than it otherwise would be.
In fairness there is a proviso for downsizing - though as I have no personal experience of that situation I have no idea as to the nitty-gritty of that.
If Boris is making a list based on anecdata, I've recently heard mumblings around the need for dentists, chiropodists, children's clothes (the buggers keep growing even if you don't feed them) and opticians.
If it can be done safely(one in, one out, different chairs etc.), barbers/hairdressers. I've bought some hair clippers but am wary of having a go, as it might be a complete disaster.
I haven't been to a hairdresser for many years.. it probably shows, but the money it's saved me must be well past the "new computer" or "weekend break" level, and approaching the value of a decent second-hand car. And then there's convenience and cumulative time-savings.
You can't go too wrong with clippers, provided short hair suits you. The trick is sorting out your mirror setup. Two mirrors if you can arrange it, and get your head around "how to move my hand while watching a reflection of my reflection" to sort out the back of your head ...
I did wonder whether the long-term effects of this pandemic would be a change to men's hairstyles and more hair-related self-reliance!
One week into lockdown, I finally took the plunge and shaved my head. It took my family a little getting used to but it's not actually a major departure from my ordinarily-fairly-military hairstyle. It was easier than I imagined. You don't really even need to be able to see the back of your head. It's going to save me a fortune.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
LOL - shall we say 1% then?
Well, if we accept Henry VII and George I as at some point having been ninth or probably more down the list at some point in their lives, although the latter one is problematic, that means 2 out of 41 monarchs have been that low.
So statistically the chance would appear to be just under 5%.
For Scotland, the only comparable one I can think of is Robert the Bruce, but laws of succession in Scotland were somewhat different anyway and therefore it doesn’t quite apply.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
Just as a matter of interest, over the 950-odd years since 1066, how many times has the ninth in line ended up on the throne?
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
I can only think of one - 1485.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months: Edward Prince of Wales Richard Duke of York and Norfolk Edward Earl of Warwick Richard Duke of Gloucester Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond....
You’re suggesting his reign lifted the nation’s spirits ... ?
Well, not being a psychotic infanticide and being fertile enough to knock up his wife within literally days of marriage did improve things somewhat.
A bout of plague that delayed his coronation and after 1503, his increasingly bizarre avarice and paranoia may be considered downers.
Ah, nuanced Tudor propaganda.
As Michael Hicks so acidly said when asked by a member of the Richard III society why he spouted Tudor propaganda, ‘Madame, there was no such thing; nothing Henry VII said about Richard III could possibly have been worse than the truth.’
The gap on Betfair between Biden as Next POTUS (2.39) and Dem Winning Party 2020 (2.06) is astonishing. It would tie up money for a while but backing Biden and laying Dems returns 7% in 7 months unless he is replaced and his replacement wins. Albeit you can get 12% by just backing him for the nomination.
As a 77 year old man, your actuarial risk of death in the next 12 months in the USA is 4.4%. That's 12 months rather than 7, but still accounts for a fair bit of that.
And that's not factoring in coronavirus, the risk of incapacity short of death, the risk of scandal, and the fact that (based on stats over the past century) being President or a presidential candidate is far riskier than being a cop or a fireman in terms of chance of death in the course of your duties.
So it seems to me a fair return, but not generous.
Christ, 4.4% fair enough. I suspect his risk is quite a bit lower owing to his wealth, political importance (i.e. he'd get the best doctors) and general fitness (he's just campaigned a hell of a lot, he must be fairly spry) but nonetheless I see your point.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
BigG the republican Blair voter, who knew he was such a radical?
If Boris is making a list based on anecdata, I've recently heard mumblings around the need for dentists, chiropodists, children's clothes (the buggers keep growing even if you don't feed them) and opticians.
If it can be done safely(one in, one out, different chairs etc.), barbers/hairdressers. I've bought some hair clippers but am wary of having a go, as it might be a complete disaster.
I haven't been to a hairdresser for many years.. it probably shows, but the money it's saved me must be well past the "new computer" or "weekend break" level, and approaching the value of a decent second-hand car. And then there's convenience and cumulative time-savings.
You can't go too wrong with clippers, provided short hair suits you. The trick is sorting out your mirror setup. Two mirrors if you can arrange it, and get your head around "how to move my hand while watching a reflection of my reflection" to sort out the back of your head ...
I did wonder whether the long-term effects of this pandemic would be a change to men's hairstyles and more hair-related self-reliance!
One week into lockdown, I finally took the plunge and shaved my head. It took my family a little getting used to but it's not actually a major departure from my ordinarily-fairly-military hairstyle. It was easier than I imagined. You don't really even need to be able to see the back of your head. It's going to save me a fortune.
That’s the way I’m going as well I think. My combover is a bloody nuisance and no longer convincing. Another five weeks of lockdown and it will be a case of taking the lot off.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
I'm slightly surprised you're a republican Big G. My position is pretty much the same as yours - my republicanism is greatly tempered by the fact that the queen is bloody brilliant. I really don't know what we will do without her. Her death will be - I won't say a crisis, but a bigger existential challenge for the country than Brexit.
If Boris is making a list based on anecdata, I've recently heard mumblings around the need for dentists, chiropodists, children's clothes (the buggers keep growing even if you don't feed them) and opticians.
If it can be done safely(one in, one out, different chairs etc.), barbers/hairdressers. I've bought some hair clippers but am wary of having a go, as it might be a complete disaster.
I haven't been to a hairdresser for many years.. it probably shows, but the money it's saved me must be well past the "new computer" or "weekend break" level, and approaching the value of a decent second-hand car. And then there's convenience and cumulative time-savings.
You can't go too wrong with clippers, provided short hair suits you. The trick is sorting out your mirror setup. Two mirrors if you can arrange it, and get your head around "how to move my hand while watching a reflection of my reflection" to sort out the back of your head ...
I did wonder whether the long-term effects of this pandemic would be a change to men's hairstyles and more hair-related self-reliance!
One week into lockdown, I finally took the plunge and shaved my head. It took my family a little getting used to but it's not actually a major departure from my ordinarily-fairly-military hairstyle. It was easier than I imagined. You don't really even need to be able to see the back of your head. It's going to save me a fortune.
I'd suggest at least checking the back of the head afterwards, or getting someone else to, just in case! Depends on how short you're cutting it but it's easy to leave things a bit uneven there. Then again, if you're hardly seeing anyone, I'm not even sure that that matters!
I do heartily recommend it, unless you want a fancy hairstyle it's not a gruesome task that you save a lot of time and effort by outsourcing, but I also feel a bit guilty for all the barbers going out of business...
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
We in UK are amongst the most 'spare bedroomed' in the world. I did some pan european stuff on this a while back. And Europe is the most 'spare bedroomed' region in the world. UK isn't an outlier high but we are top 5 or 6 IIRC.
My 'king for a day' solution is to remove stamp duty and turn council tax, remove council tax and replace it with a true ad volorem tax. say 1% of your properties value every year.
Thank you. I suspect there is merit in what you say. I'd be interested in analysis of how much of the 15m spare bedrooms that might free up (noting it's quite possible that we will move to more people working from home in the long term following recent experience, which makes spare rooms more valuable to people). But there seems to be some scope as you say.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
BigG the republican Blair voter, who knew he was such a radical?
And do not forget that to many on here I am a diehard (hate the word) tory !!!
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
BigG the republican Blair voter, who knew he was such a radical?
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
We in UK are amongst the most 'spare bedroomed' in the world.
Yeah, the Windsors have a huge number of spare bedrooms
I trust people are aware that in Italy, France, Belgium, Spain and I suspect others there have been serious outbreaks and deaths in care homes. It is of course tragic and sad but I'm pretty sure most countries have treated their elderly in much the same way - no doubt with errors - but not I think with malice. Remember it is the nature of the beast we are dealing with that the elderly and infirm are those most at risk.
Indeed. But our government was unique - among the ones not run by complete loonies - in the delusion that it would be possible to let the virus run through about two thirds of the population while "cocooning" the vulnerable.
One might have expected even politicians as dim as Johnson and Hancock to question how that would be done for care homes.
Interesting to see you are now describing the Social Democratic government of Sweden as 'complete loonies'!
Idiot.
Can you really not understand the difference between a policy of achieving herd immunity on the one hand, and a policy of trying to prevent the virus spreading without a lockdown on the other?
No, because there is none, especially without mass testing which Sweden, unlike say South Korea, is not doing,
Indeed. I suspected you couldn't understand the difference.
You clearly do not understand that if you do not have a lockdown by definition the virus will spread more widely and you will be pursuing a herd immunity policy, even if by default.
If you pursue mass testing and tracing you might be able to avoid a lockdown and pursuing herd immunity but Sweden is not mass testing
You really are unbelievably thick, aren't you?
Obviously Sweden is trying to avoid a majority of its population getting the virus. Advocates of the Swedish strategy are even claiming they will succeed.
You may not agree - I don't agree myself - but to say that "by definition" not having a lockdown means the virus will spread until herd immunity stops it, and to imply that that is what the Swedish government is trying to do, is just plain stupid. Obviously the idea of the Swedish strategy is that social distancing will succeed without the need for a lockdown.
Yet Sweden already has a death rate higher than all its neighbours, Denmark, Finland and Norway. Either you support a lockdown or you don't, if you don't fine but you cannot criticise the government then on any grounds but the lockdown is too heavy
You implied Sweden's policy was herd imunity. It isn't.
From that article: ”For comparison, the current COVID-19 death rate in Sweden is at 40 deaths per million of population. ” ... ”...as Sweden currently has 591 reported COVID-19 deaths (as of this writing) among its 10.1-million population. ” Literally in the next paragraph.
40 per million and 591 per ten million... and the writer didn’t spot the problem. (A few days later and it’s now 919 per ten million - or 92 per million, of course.)
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
I'm slightly surprised you're a republican Big G. My position is pretty much the same as yours - my republicanism is greatly tempered by the fact that the queen is bloody brilliant. I really don't know what we will do without her. Her death will be - I won't say a crisis, but a bigger existential challenge for the country than Brexit.
I will shed a tear when the Queen passes as I think she has been just amazing and especially at times of crisis as recently. I would not have expected to say that 20 years ago but she deserves all our respect for her service to her country
I simply have no affection for Charles, though William and Kate could be good for the monarchy
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
We in UK are amongst the most 'spare bedroomed' in the world. I did some pan european stuff on this a while back. And Europe is the most 'spare bedroomed' region in the world. UK isn't an outlier high but we are top 5 or 6 IIRC.
My 'king for a day' solution is to remove stamp duty and turn council tax, remove council tax and replace it with a true ad volorem tax. say 1% of your properties value every year.
But people don't have spare bedrooms because the market is inefficient. People have spare bedrooms because they value spare bedrooms. Sometimes their family come to stay. It's nice to be able to accommodate them. Are we highly spare bedroomed in the UK because our families our more than usually dispersed geographically? We had the family zoom call on Sunday - Northumberland, Cheshire, Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, Suffolk, Hertfordshire, Greater London (north) and Greater London (south). I don't think we're atypical.
The gap on Betfair between Biden as Next POTUS (2.39) and Dem Winning Party 2020 (2.06) is astonishing. It would tie up money for a while but backing Biden and laying Dems returns 7% in 7 months unless he is replaced and his replacement wins. Albeit you can get 12% by just backing him for the nomination.
As a 77 year old man, your actuarial risk of death in the next 12 months in the USA is 4.4%. That's 12 months rather than 7, but still accounts for a fair bit of that.
And that's not factoring in coronavirus, the risk of incapacity short of death, the risk of scandal, and the fact that (based on stats over the past century) being President or a presidential candidate is far riskier than being a cop or a fireman in terms of chance of death in the course of your duties.
So it seems to me a fair return, but not generous.
Christ, 4.4% fair enough. I suspect his risk is quite a bit lower owing to his wealth, political importance (i.e. he'd get the best doctors) and general fitness (he's just campaigned a hell of a lot, he must be fairly spry) but nonetheless I see your point.
Probably, and presumably he wouldn't be standing if he had a huge, life limiting health condition. But the reality in your late 70s is that the chance of something fatal or debilitating to the extent that you can't operate anything like normally again is non-negligible. You can buy yourself some improvement, but a massive stroke is a massive stroke, and that's without a virus which poses a particular risk to over 70s stalking the land.
For comparison, Pete Buttigieg's actuarial risk of death in the next year as a 38 year old man is 0.2%, and Amy Klobuchar's as a 59 year old woman is 0.65%. So it's a big gap.
Even in Scotland more people support the monarchy than oppose it, the fact some Celtic supporters (who have always been Nat and republican) turned out to buy a record really means nothing, you need little more than 1 man and his dog buying a record to top the Scottish charts
There is supporting the monarchy then there is getting excited about a nobody marrying a rich nobody neither of whom have done anything to gain the respect of the people. An event most people I would think will ignore.
Beatrice is 9th in line to the throne, hardly a nobody
She is a nobody
As has been shown 9th in line to the thrown does not mean you have zero chance of becoming monarch
Thrown is a good word with the minor royals. They should all disappear into irrelevance
Well since you are clearly not a monarchist, it is hardly surprising you think that way.
To be honest I have been a republican most of my life, probably following my grandmother demanding I stood and sang the national anthem on the queens coronation in 1953, but to be fair over the last couple of decades I have grown to greatly respect the Queen and will be sad when she passes
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
BigG the republican Blair voter, who knew he was such a radical?
As an ex-Goldman guy myself, I tend to agree with most of your concerns about the UK economy. The high level of stamp duty, for example, is utter madness as it dicourages the efficient allocation of a scarce resource.
The only reason land is in short supply is that such a system works for both developers and Government as it keeps house prices high and generates strong stamp duty receipts as the demand for housing always outstrips the supply.
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
oooh. one of my favourite bug bears!! bear with me.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
Is having about 20% of bedrooms being spare bedrooms uncommon internationally, though?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
We in UK are amongst the most 'spare bedroomed' in the world. I did some pan european stuff on this a while back. And Europe is the most 'spare bedroomed' region in the world. UK isn't an outlier high but we are top 5 or 6 IIRC.
My 'king for a day' solution is to remove stamp duty and turn council tax, remove council tax and replace it with a true ad volorem tax. say 1% of your properties value every year.
Thank you. I suspect there is merit in what you say. I'd be interested in analysis of how much of the 15m spare bedrooms that might free up (noting it's quite possible that we will move to more people working from home in the long term following recent experience, which makes spare rooms more valuable to people). But there seems to be some scope as you say.
the work we did was for one of the big retirement home builders so there was some self-interest to the work! But is was quite compelling. The biggest barriers to downsizing amongst the elderly was familiarity with area/home, keeping bedrooms available for visits, pressure from childrent/inheritors, and cost. Cost was actually quite low (which somewhat bolloxes my argument but hey ho!) The resistance from kids/inheritors is interesting. The inheritance tax wrinkle of homes being exempt meant they liked mum/dad/granny keeping the house so they could cope the lot tax free (and obviously then sell it and trouser the gain tax free).
Keeping a spare room for visits is understandable but illogical. As Kirsty says on Location location location, a home is for ever not just for Christmas. Just put up an inflatable mattress and buy a sofa bed.
Comments
Ninth in line is nowhere - she's more chance of winning the lottery than being Queen. Whether you're monarchist or republican or neither... she's an irrelevance.
"Bernie Sanders Endorses Joe Biden for President
The Vermont senator added the weight of his left-wing support to Mr. Biden’s candidacy in a step toward Democratic unity against President Trump."
Thank Christ for that. Well done Bernie.
There's a job for Bernie. Welfare reform?
Also, something weird has happened to Vanilla. Again.
To extend Churchills famous quote below. The strong horse has just been shot and we're loading up the cart.
“Some regard private enterprise as if it were a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look upon it as a cow that they can milk. Only a handful see it for what it really is--the strong horse that pulls the whole cart.”
Massive recession????? we followed the medical experts advice
Millions unemployed??? we followed the medical experts advice
Soaring debt mountain???? we followed the medical experts advice
Recession related deaths???? we followed the medical experts advice
Maybe it can.
'Sweden's chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell admitted that the strategy of building up “herd immunity” is “partially correct”.'
https://sputniknews.com/europe/202003171078590525-in-search-of-coronavirus-herd-immunity-sweden-refuses-to-close-borders-schools/
No need to be exact. A rough number is fine.
French government admitting failings - including in PPE
Extending lock down until about 8th May
French borders to remain closed even when lockdown begins to be (slowly) lifted.
I then watched as they did a piece on other countries.
I can't say in all cases it was biased but they certainly gave a very misleading position about the UK
Some things will never change
Said developers have land banks but they have unwitting allies in local communities who also help to keep the supply of land scarce by restricting what can be built on and what kinds of development are permissible.
Starting in 1483, the following were eliminated over the next 26 months:
Edward Prince of Wales
Richard Duke of York and Norfolk
Edward Earl of Warwick
Richard Duke of Gloucester
Edward of Middleham Prince of Wales
John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln
His two brothers
Leaving Henry Earl of Richmond.
Not including Henry Earl of Northumberland or the King of Portugal, or any women.
Our housing problem in the UK is not one of 'shortage' it is misallocation. We have about 65M people and about 80M bedrooms in the UK. The issue is lots of single and couple elderly folk knocking around in big houses. The reason for this is, ta da, the ridiculous transaction taxes on moving. We have put so much friction into the property market the bedrooms don't get allocated efficiently. Any housing 'shortage' is illusory, it is not physical, we can leave our greenfields alone. it is a market failure through abjectedly bad tax policy.
1. Biden may be an imperfect candidate, but he isn't awful and polls suggest he has a reasonable chance. If you're Gates or someone like him, who I am sure isn't a Trump fan, why on earth would you split the anti-Trump vote?
2. Biden has just won the nomination, and in the end fairly comfortably. When Sanders dropped out, Biden had a big polling lead, endorsements from the major drop-outs, and had got a good turnout at the main electoral tests after an early wobble. Basically, he's got a fair amount of goodwill, so what's your argument to step in?
3. If Biden develops a huge problem - he gets ill or massive bad news drops - there are plenty of credible listed candidates including candidates who ran and dropped out (but have plenty of political credit in the bank) and Cuomo. Ditto, Trump has Pence in the wings if he has a problem.
4. One of the few people with the ego and money to do it, Bloomberg, just crashed and burned. Why put yourself through it with that immediate example of how hard it is?
Tell that to Diane Abbott and the other mps signing their letter
I gave you a specific example. I suspect you're not really interested, so I won't waste my time anymore. Buy a whole box of nuisance masks. Why not wear a bird-mask like they did in the middle ages. It kept the black death away.
Sigh.
A bout of plague that delayed his coronation and after 1503, his increasingly bizarre avarice and paranoia may be considered downers.
You're suggesting that if someone coughs in your face you're worse off wearing a mask because the virus will end up on the outside of the mask.
My question is - where would the virus have ended up if you hadn't been wearing a mask?
I don't know, and am genuinely interested. But my immediate reaction to your post is to think that those who can afford it keep a spare room. I am typing this in mine, and if I have a guest they will stay in it - but I've no desire to make it permanently available to someone else. That's not to do with transaction tax - it's a lifestyle choice. So how many of the 15m spare rooms you claim are friction problems, and how many are lifestyle choices? I'm not saying you're wrong, just asking the question.
They didn't call him Cariad by chance
Slightly off the beat: I hear that Primroses are edible. Which parts of a primrose can I eat, and what do I use them for.
Is it as simple as flowers for garnish and leaves for salads?
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1249777101785481216
My 'king for a day' solution is to remove stamp duty and turn council tax, remove council tax and replace it with a true ad volorem tax. say 1% of your properties value every year.
If you own a home up to 1,000,000 it can be inherited with no inheritance tax, this provides an incentive for people with big houses in there old age to keep hold of it even if they don't need or patiualy want it rater then move in to a small house and have £1,000,000 in the bank that will be taxed.
Personalty I would get rid of all inheritances tax, but if we are going to keep it then this rule makes it even more damaging than it otherwise would be.
And that's not factoring in coronavirus, the risk of incapacity short of death, the risk of scandal, and the fact that (based on stats over the past century) being President or a presidential candidate is far riskier than being a cop or a fireman in terms of chance of death in the course of your duties.
So it seems to me a fair return, but not generous.
So statistically the chance would appear to be just under 5%.
For Scotland, the only comparable one I can think of is Robert the Bruce, but laws of succession in Scotland were somewhat different anyway and therefore it doesn’t quite apply.
After that the monarchy needs to be scaled down though I accept Charles and William will probably be the next two to serve as monarch
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1249778994137964544
https://twitter.com/Emilie_Oldknow/status/1249660297750724608
I do heartily recommend it, unless you want a fancy hairstyle it's not a gruesome task that you save a lot of time and effort by outsourcing, but I also feel a bit guilty for all the barbers going out of business...
She would have been well advised not to refer to her opponents as ‘pube heads’ on WhatsApp then.
https://twitter.com/Emilie_Oldknow/status/1249778348336742401
”For comparison, the current COVID-19 death rate in Sweden is at 40 deaths per million of population. ”
...
”...as Sweden currently has 591 reported COVID-19 deaths (as of this writing) among its 10.1-million population. ”
Literally in the next paragraph.
40 per million and 591 per ten million... and the writer didn’t spot the problem.
(A few days later and it’s now 919 per ten million - or 92 per million, of course.)
I simply have no affection for Charles, though William and Kate could be good for the monarchy
As for the rest they need putting out to grass
Are we highly spare bedroomed in the UK because our families our more than usually dispersed geographically? We had the family zoom call on Sunday - Northumberland, Cheshire, Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, Suffolk, Hertfordshire, Greater London (north) and Greater London (south). I don't think we're atypical.
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1249781924308094976
For comparison, Pete Buttigieg's actuarial risk of death in the next year as a 38 year old man is 0.2%, and Amy Klobuchar's as a 59 year old woman is 0.65%. So it's a big gap.
Keeping a spare room for visits is understandable but illogical. As Kirsty says on Location location location, a home is for ever not just for Christmas. Just put up an inflatable mattress and buy a sofa bed.
p.s. I have no idea who she is or or the other person is maybe its sensible I don't know,