politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Even Tory leavers are giving Starmer positive approval ratings

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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

ydoethur said:

contrarian said:

Chris said:

contrarian said:

Chris said:

ukpaul said:

Chris said:

Black_Rook said:

contrarian said:

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.

ABZ said:

rcs1000 said:

blairf said:

kyf_100 said:

blairf said:

NickPalmer said:

Black_Rook said:

Chris said:

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?

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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

rcs1000 said:

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.

ydoethur said:

Endillion said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

kyf_100 said:

Black_Rook said:

contrarian said:

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.

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

nico67 said:

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.

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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...

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

rottenborough said:

noisywinter said:

Alistair said:

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?

RandallFlagg said:

Corbyn goes, and still the Labour party is an utterly embarrassing shambles.

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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...

CD13 said:

Mr Chris,

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.

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

ydoethur said:

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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...

Love that our @ydoethur rose to the challenge!

Charles said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

kyf_100 said:

Black_Rook said:

contrarian said:

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

Charles said:

rcs1000 said:

Charles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

kle4 said:

The_Apocalypse said:

kyf_100 said:

Black_Rook said:

contrarian said:

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

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

nico67 said:

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!

rottenborough said:

RandallFlagg said:

Corbyn goes, and still the Labour party is an utterly embarrassing shambles.

Starmer has only had nine days to sort the clusterf*ck out. Give him a chance.

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

IshmaelZ said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

ABZ said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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?

MyBurningEars said:

ukpaul said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

OT re lifting lockdown.

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!

alex_ said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

alex_ said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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.

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

Quincel said:

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.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

alex_ said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

IshmaelZ said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

HYUFD = Monarchist = Socialist!

HYUFD = Monarchist = Conservative

blairf said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

alex_ said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

nichomar said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The apple doesn't fall far from the tone deaf tree.

https://twitter.com/brawday/status/1249749690754744320?s=20

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

Straight in at number 1 in the Scottish charts.

https://youtu.be/XrwKRlBsDNc

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?

blairf said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

Quincel said:

Got to love a good outlier poll.

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1249778994137964544

blairf said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.

RobD said:

ydoethur said:

bigjohnowls said:

Han Dodges

https://twitter.com/Emilie_Oldknow/status/1249660297750724608

Hmmm.

She would have been well advised not to refer to her opponents as ‘pube heads’ on WhatsApp then.

I think this might be a fake account.

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

blairf said:

stodge said:

rcs1000 said:

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.