Skip to content

Is Suella Braverman saying until a few weeks ago the truth never bothered her? –politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,948
edited 7:47PM in General
Is Suella Braverman saying until a few weeks ago the truth never bothered her? – politicalbetting.com

What is anyone meant to think when they see this sort of bizarre comment? You were a “Tory” for decades. You served as a “Tory” Secretary of State. Does that mean that until 2 weeks ago the truth never bothered you either? pic.twitter.com/oKrsmZqFIs

Read the full story here

«1

Comments

  • TresTres Posts: 3,483
    First
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,450
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,450
    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,423
    edited 7:51PM
    They think the waters at the cult clubhouse cleanse them of all things past.
    I am very hopeful Fareham stays Tory in May and gives her 2 fingers
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 126,334
    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 7,518

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    Thanks for posting threads during your holiday, just to keep us occupied.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 49,041

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 7,538
    Almost phew that Scotland lost in the Cricket or we would never have heard the last of it.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 31,324
    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 86,353
    Russia killed Alexei Navalny with frog toxin, UK and four European allies say
    Intelligence agencies say deadly toxin in skin of Ecuador dart frogs found in Navalny’s body and highly likely resulted in his death
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/14/alexei-navalny-poisoning-death-russia-frog-toxin
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146
    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Leaving Jonathan Powell standing amongst the wreckage.

    One last rodeo as Chief of Staff?

    Times says he likes the foreign stuff and is not interested.

    What could Starmer offer to make him reconsider?

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 49,041
    edited 8:06PM
    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,744
    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 101,164
    The baptismal fire of defection cleanses all sins. Plus defectors feel the need to overcompensate to prove how righteous their decision to defect was (see Lee Anderson from when he first defected onwards).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 101,164

    Almost phew that Scotland lost in the Cricket or we would never have heard the last of it.

    I assume instead of ashes we'd have to provide them sodden mud or something else more appropriate between England/Scotland.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 15,423
    kle4 said:

    The baptismal fire of defection cleanses all sins. Plus defectors feel the need to overcompensate to prove how righteous their decision to defect was (see Lee Anderson from when he first defected onwards).

    Reform do seem to make a humiliation ritual of it though
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899
    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    Reality.

    Reform has a handful.

    Labour has most.

    The dynamic will not exist to disrupt that to the point of crossover.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,874
    This is a bit peculiar.
    I'm watching the wimen's freeski big air. It's being led by an American woman called Eileen Gu who is competing for China, who have apparently spent $6m dollars on her and another American.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Gu
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    Reality.

    Reform has a handful.

    Labour has most.

    The dynamic will not exist to disrupt that to the point of crossover.
    Sadly, that’s lots of wishful thinking.

    We are about to get to the Berlusconi stage in UK politics. If we are lucky.

    If we aren’t, it will be Argentina for some decades.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,704
    FPT
    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,266
    Cookie said:

    This is a bit peculiar.
    I'm watching the wimen's freeski big air. It's being led by an American woman called Eileen Gu who is competing for China, who have apparently spent $6m dollars on her and another American.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Gu

    She was the second highest earning sportswoman last year apparently. Might be helped by the fact she’s one of the most beautiful women in the world but that would be a very cynical take.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,734

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    Reality.

    Reform has a handful.

    Labour has most.

    The dynamic will not exist to disrupt that to the point of crossover.
    Sadly, that’s lots of wishful thinking.

    We are about to get to the Berlusconi stage in UK politics. If we are lucky.

    If we aren’t, it will be Argentina for some decades.
    Let's hope we don't get to live in times that are too interesting.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    1st policy - restoring the Rum ration and prize money in the Royal Navy
  • isamisam Posts: 43,622
    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730
    AnneJGP said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    Reality.

    Reform has a handful.

    Labour has most.

    The dynamic will not exist to disrupt that to the point of crossover.
    Sadly, that’s lots of wishful thinking.

    We are about to get to the Berlusconi stage in UK politics. If we are lucky.

    If we aren’t, it will be Argentina for some decades.
    Let's hope we don't get to live in times that are too interesting.
    https://youtu.be/KD_1Z8iUDho?si=JetihYts9st7k0Zc
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    1st policy - restoring the Rum ration and prize money in the Royal Navy
    What - no sodomy and the lash?

    Snowflakes...
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,874
    boulay said:

    Cookie said:

    This is a bit peculiar.
    I'm watching the wimen's freeski big air. It's being led by an American woman called Eileen Gu who is competing for China, who have apparently spent $6m dollars on her and another American.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Gu

    She was the second highest earning sportswoman last year apparently. Might be helped by the fact she’s one of the most beautiful women in the world but that would be a very cynical take.
    Time magazine named her one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2023.
    Not only had I never heard of her, I was unaware of her sport until half an hour ago.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730
    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Remember that much of political betting is about sentiment rather than facts. Which is why there is so much value. Aka rubes to be fleeced.

    Labour seems to be moving from Denial to Something Will Save Us as the May elections approach.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Has this anything to do with it

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456
    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
  • CookieCookie Posts: 16,874
    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    This would be more convincing if you hadn't used 75% of your posts so far to bash Kemi. It's almost as if you have some sort of agenda.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    That event is basically 60000 cretinous idiots descending on the Town where most local businesses close

    We always go back to the Midlands for a week for some peace and quiet.
  • isamisam Posts: 43,622

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Has this anything to do with it

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133


    I think that will have something to do with it someone was trying to back Rupert Lowe to be next PM at 20/1 six months ago. It was absolutely ludicrous, but the money was there, so I guess it could be the same person or group of people. Maybe even Lowe himself
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899
    Brixian59 said:

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    That event is basically 60000 cretinous idiots descending on the Town where most local businesses close

    We always go back to the Midlands for a week for some peace and quiet.
    Calling the supporters of RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR cretinous idiot is....bold
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 7,549
    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    A steal for some Labour MPs
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    Cookie said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    This would be more convincing if you hadn't used 75% of your posts so far to bash Kemi. It's almost as if you have some sort of agenda.
    Throwing around rumours without links is worrying, agenda or not
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899
    boulay said:

    Brixian59 said:

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    That event is basically 60000 cretinous idiots descending on the Town where most local businesses close

    We always go back to the Midlands for a week for some peace and quiet.
    The festival doesn’t actually happen, they just made it up to get you to fuck off and stop boring them about Kemi for a couple of weeks.
    SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 49,041
    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 49,041
    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Really? Ok looking out and here's hoping. It'll need to be shocking though. There's a lot priced in with them, I'd have thought. Eg did "gassssss em all" move the market much? I don't recall so but maybe it did.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 90,051
    edited 8:56PM
    Labour activists paid for smear campaign against journalists

    Labour Together, the group that helped make Keir Starmer leader, hired lobbyists who falsely suggested reporters were linked to Russia

    The group that helped to get Sir Keir Starmer elected as Labour leader hired lobbyists to investigate the personal, political and religious background of a Sunday Times journalist behind an article about secret donations that funded its work.

    Labour Together paid £36,000 to Apco, a US public affairs firm, to examine the “backgrounds and motivations” of reporters behind a story before the general election. The aim was to discredit The Sunday Times’s reporting by falsely suggesting its journalists might be part of a Russian conspiracy or had relied on emails hacked by the Kremlin.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-activists-smear-sunday-times-journalists-kd269klb8
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    boulay said:

    Brixian59 said:

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    That event is basically 60000 cretinous idiots descending on the Town where most local businesses close

    We always go back to the Midlands for a week for some peace and quiet.
    The festival doesn’t actually happen, they just made it up to get you to fuck off and stop boring them about Kemi for a couple of weeks.
    SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
    Lol

    I pop up to see my mates

    Michael and Andy.

    Thats where I get all the dirt from.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Cookie said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    This would be more convincing if you hadn't used 75% of your posts so far to bash Kemi. It's almost as if you have some sort of agenda.
    Throwing around rumours without links is worrying, agenda or not
    Wait and see.

    It's goid
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Cookie said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    This would be more convincing if you hadn't used 75% of your posts so far to bash Kemi. It's almost as if you have some sort of agenda.
    Throwing around rumours without links is worrying, agenda or not
    It's actually 17,4% but who's counting
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 57,784
    "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730
    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    If you want cheap housing, someone needs to pay for it.

    Government spending other people’s money, by regulation, is one of the reasons that house building collapsed in London. So we have a Labour government and Mayor taking about eliminating the requirement to include x% of affordable flats in developments.

    Regulations should be simple, direct. And enforced. They are replacing cladding, right now, with.. possibly unsafe cladding.

    If the government wants to create cheap housing, it needs to do one of

    - Subsidies rents
    - Building housing itself and charge below the market rate
    - Create a regulatory environment where replacing a window doesn’t consist of 4K for the window and spending 12k on the consultants to do the paperwork. The actual window being made in Poland, and never actually inspected to see if it matches anything in the £12k of paperwork. Could be made of balsa impregnated with napalm for that anyone knows.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730

    Labour activists paid for smear campaign against journalists

    Labour Together, the group that helped make Keir Starmer leader, hired lobbyists who falsely suggested reporters were linked to Russia

    The group that helped to get Sir Keir Starmer elected as Labour leader hired lobbyists to investigate the personal, political and religious background of a Sunday Times journalist behind an article about secret donations that funded its work.

    Labour Together paid £36,000 to Apco, a US public affairs firm, to examine the “backgrounds and motivations” of reporters behind a story before the general election. The aim was to discredit The Sunday Times’s reporting by falsely suggesting its journalists might be part of a Russian conspiracy or had relied on emails hacked by the Kremlin.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-activists-smear-sunday-times-journalists-kd269klb8

    Damien McBride is a part of this government. Which sets the tone, really.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 101,164

    Labour activists paid for smear campaign against journalists

    Labour Together, the group that helped make Keir Starmer leader, hired lobbyists who falsely suggested reporters were linked to Russia

    The group that helped to get Sir Keir Starmer elected as Labour leader hired lobbyists to investigate the personal, political and religious background of a Sunday Times journalist behind an article about secret donations that funded its work.

    Labour Together paid £36,000 to Apco, a US public affairs firm, to examine the “backgrounds and motivations” of reporters behind a story before the general election. The aim was to discredit The Sunday Times’s reporting by falsely suggesting its journalists might be part of a Russian conspiracy or had relied on emails hacked by the Kremlin.

    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-activists-smear-sunday-times-journalists-kd269klb8

    If you're going to falsely suggest anything why spend any money before doing so?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 60,730

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    Desperate, isn’t he. That’s the difference with @tim s ramping.


    Then I look'd him in the eyes
    And I laugh'd full shrill at the lie he told
    And the gnawing fear he would fain disguise.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    Desperate, isn’t he. That’s the difference with @tim s ramping.


    Then I look'd him in the eyes
    And I laugh'd full shrill at the lie he told
    And the gnawing fear he would fain disguise.
    Predictable and with some form of agenda to attack Kemi in most every post

    The irony is that since he arrived on here, Kemi's approval ratings continue to improve and that should be the leason that it is not working
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 57,784

    I’m registering the “Really Real Restoring Reform, Responsible Revolutionary Renewal, Rebuilding Rights, Reclaiming Resources, Reinvigorating Regional Representation, Radical Rational Resilience” Party

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRR

    For short.

    It’s pronounced as if you are a pirate from Devon.

    To be launched on Saturday 2nd May at the Brixham Pirate Festival, where everybody on the podium will be dressed like Captain Jack Sparrow.

    Like everybody else at the Brixham Pirate Festival.

    https://www.saltwaterescapes.co.uk/whats-on/brixham-pirate-festival/
    1st policy - restoring the Rum ration and prize money in the Royal Navy
    "The Pirate Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules!"
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,266
    Brixian59 said:

    Cookie said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    This would be more convincing if you hadn't used 75% of your posts so far to bash Kemi. It's almost as if you have some sort of agenda.
    Throwing around rumours without links is worrying, agenda or not
    Wait and see.

    It's goid
    Now, look, Percy, I don't mean to be pedantic or anything, but the colour of gold... is gold. That's why it's called gold. What YOU have discovered, if it has a name, is some... Green.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 34,013
    Scott_xP said:
    Tugend isn't debating in good faith there. Literally nobody believes that Braverman was a supine participant in the Tories' immigration failures.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    The story was first covered in September 2025

    A claim of a university offer for a medical course on a part scholarship at 16.a further claim her UK school was crap.

    At that time the alleged university Stamford denied all knowledge, denied the course existed, denied that it would be offered to a 16 year old with O levels.

    The Tories then made claims of other offers frim other universities in the US UK elsewhere.

    The Guardian and some right wing papers covered it.

    Badenoch refused to reply or discuss questions. Other events took over.

    The Tory line that the offer was made seemed to have held.

    However 2 respected journalists, one in the UK one in the US picked up the story.

    Futher forensic investigation has revealed a lot more depth, on the American claims, claims of other offers from the UK, claims about her UK school and conduct there and claims that are new about a rather amateurish attempt to cover the original claim up will be fully exposed.

    It will be extremely damaging, make her attacks on others for far less serious and continued indiscretions look amateur and open a can of worms she simply won't be able to brush off this time.

    We shall see when the allegations are made.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 34,013
    The moves toward Labour victory in the betting, the 'rush of people to join Labour', and perhaps even the Labour stabilisation in the polls (though that seems to be gone now), can all be attributed to one thing. The imminent departure of Sir Working Class Hero.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    The story was first covered in September 2025

    A claim of a university offer for a medical course on a part scholarship at 16.a further claim her UK school was crap.

    At that time the alleged university Stamford denied all knowledge, denied the course existed, denied that it would be offered to a 16 year old with O levels.

    The Tories then made claims of other offers frim other universities in the US UK elsewhere.

    The Guardian and some right wing papers covered it.

    Badenoch refused to reply or discuss questions. Other events took over.

    The Tory line that the offer was made seemed to have held.

    However 2 respected journalists, one in the UK one in the US picked up the story.

    Futher forensic investigation has revealed a lot more depth, on the American claims, claims of other offers from the UK, claims about her UK school and conduct there and claims that are new about a rather amateurish attempt to cover the original claim up will be fully exposed.

    It will be extremely damaging, make her attacks on others for far less serious and continued indiscretions look amateur and open a can of worms she simply won't be able to brush off this time.

    We shall see when the allegations are made.
    Utter desperation and rather sad that Kemi triggers you so
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 63,234

    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    If you want cheap housing, someone needs to pay for it.

    Government spending other people’s money, by regulation, is one of the reasons that house building collapsed in London. So we have a Labour government and Mayor taking about eliminating the requirement to include x% of affordable flats in developments.

    Regulations should be simple, direct. And enforced. They are replacing cladding, right now, with.. possibly unsafe cladding.

    If the government wants to create cheap housing, it needs to do one of

    - Subsidies rents
    - Building housing itself and charge below the market rate
    - Create a regulatory environment where replacing a window doesn’t consist of 4K for the window and spending 12k on the consultants to do the paperwork. The actual window being made in Poland, and never actually inspected to see if it matches anything in the £12k of paperwork. Could be made of balsa impregnated with napalm for that anyone knows.
    One of the problems with things like housing policy is that people start suffering from the "silver bullet fallacy". I.e., if this one thing doesn't solve all the issues, then it isn't worth doing.

    The reality is that if you want to make sure more housing is built, and therefore housing is more affordable, then you need to put in place a raft of measures, each of which might only have a small impact on its own, but which together get you where you want to be.

    Here's an entirely non-exhaustive list from me:

    1. Repace stamp duty with a small annual land value levy
    2. Make getting planning permission (and land use change) a lot easier to get
    2a. Have a presumption of 'yes' - a council needs to demonstrate why a development (from an individual home to a block of flats to an estate) should not happen, rather than the other way around
    3. Relax some of the rules around 'net zero' in construction - yes we should be building more energy efficient homes... but not at the expense of building too few homes

    These attack the problem from multiple angles: they encourage more efficient use of existing housing stock, make the market clear more easily, make it easier to get permission to build, and then make it cheaper to build once you have permission.

    And you know what: if there are lots of properties available for rent, then suddenly it is tenants that have power, rather than landlords. They're the ones competing to get you in rather than the other way around.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 34,013
    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    The story was first covered in September 2025

    A claim of a university offer for a medical course on a part scholarship at 16.a further claim her UK school was crap.

    At that time the alleged university Stamford denied all knowledge, denied the course existed, denied that it would be offered to a 16 year old with O levels.

    The Tories then made claims of other offers frim other universities in the US UK elsewhere.

    The Guardian and some right wing papers covered it.

    Badenoch refused to reply or discuss questions. Other events took over.

    The Tory line that the offer was made seemed to have held.

    However 2 respected journalists, one in the UK one in the US picked up the story.

    Futher forensic investigation has revealed a lot more depth, on the American claims, claims of other offers from the UK, claims about her UK school and conduct there and claims that are new about a rather amateurish attempt to cover the original claim up will be fully exposed.

    It will be extremely damaging, make her attacks on others for far less serious and continued indiscretions look amateur and open a can of worms she simply won't be able to brush off this time.

    We shall see when the allegations are made.
    Yes, it seems incredibly serious.

    Labour's dominant figure for the last 30 years forwarding state secrets to American financiers pales into insignificance beside this doesn't it? Will we see 24 hour rolling coverage of the news do you think?
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,866
    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    A potential future shafting may be preferable to the twenty years of consistent, above RPI shafting that tenants have received.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,403
    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Councils can't afford to build more council housing not because of the low rents (we built loads in the 1950s and I'm pretty sure council housing rents weren't market rate back then) but because central government (and by extension we the voters) choose not to give them enough money for that. Personally I would favour having more council house building, subsidised by central government, with right to buy as the mechanism by which that extra housing capacity flows into the private sector. (Happy to pay more tax for that.)

  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    The story was first covered in September 2025

    A claim of a university offer for a medical course on a part scholarship at 16.a further claim her UK school was crap.

    At that time the alleged university Stamford denied all knowledge, denied the course existed, denied that it would be offered to a 16 year old with O levels.

    The Tories then made claims of other offers frim other universities in the US UK elsewhere.

    The Guardian and some right wing papers covered it.

    Badenoch refused to reply or discuss questions. Other events took over.

    The Tory line that the offer was made seemed to have held.

    However 2 respected journalists, one in the UK one in the US picked up the story.

    Futher forensic investigation has revealed a lot more depth, on the American claims, claims of other offers from the UK, claims about her UK school and conduct there and claims that are new about a rather amateurish attempt to cover the original claim up will be fully exposed.

    It will be extremely damaging, make her attacks on others for far less serious and continued indiscretions look amateur and open a can of worms she simply won't be able to brush off this time.

    We shall see when the allegations are made.
    Yes, it seems incredibly serious.

    Labour's dominant figure for the last 30 years forwarding state secrets to American financiers pales into insignificance beside this doesn't it? Will we see 24 hour rolling coverage of the news do you think?
    It should have equal media time to Rayner and Haigh at the very least.

    I note that you don't deny the fact that there are very serious questions to answer.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 456

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    Brixian59 said:

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Kemi too imminent

    Linked to American Uni offer that she and Tory Party and parts of right wing media have tried to hide

    Link please
    It's happening in late April.
    Timed for the local council elections.

    Frankly who cares what you post

    Though others may
    The story was first covered in September 2025

    A claim of a university offer for a medical course on a part scholarship at 16.a further claim her UK school was crap.

    At that time the alleged university Stamford denied all knowledge, denied the course existed, denied that it would be offered to a 16 year old with O levels.

    The Tories then made claims of other offers frim other universities in the US UK elsewhere.

    The Guardian and some right wing papers covered it.

    Badenoch refused to reply or discuss questions. Other events took over.

    The Tory line that the offer was made seemed to have held.

    However 2 respected journalists, one in the UK one in the US picked up the story.

    Futher forensic investigation has revealed a lot more depth, on the American claims, claims of other offers from the UK, claims about her UK school and conduct there and claims that are new about a rather amateurish attempt to cover the original claim up will be fully exposed.

    It will be extremely damaging, make her attacks on others for far less serious and continued indiscretions look amateur and open a can of worms she simply won't be able to brush off this time.

    We shall see when the allegations are made.
    Utter desperation and rather sad that Kemi triggers you so
    I hate hypocrisy

    Ms holier than though is about to be challenged.

    Let's she what she's made of
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899
    Has anyone here watched Pluribus?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 7,518
    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    If you want cheap housing, someone needs to pay for it.

    Government spending other people’s money, by regulation, is one of the reasons that house building collapsed in London. So we have a Labour government and Mayor taking about eliminating the requirement to include x% of affordable flats in developments.

    Regulations should be simple, direct. And enforced. They are replacing cladding, right now, with.. possibly unsafe cladding.

    If the government wants to create cheap housing, it needs to do one of

    - Subsidies rents
    - Building housing itself and charge below the market rate
    - Create a regulatory environment where replacing a window doesn’t consist of 4K for the window and spending 12k on the consultants to do the paperwork. The actual window being made in Poland, and never actually inspected to see if it matches anything in the £12k of paperwork. Could be made of balsa impregnated with napalm for that anyone knows.
    One of the problems with things like housing policy is that people start suffering from the "silver bullet fallacy". I.e., if this one thing doesn't solve all the issues, then it isn't worth doing.

    The reality is that if you want to make sure more housing is built, and therefore housing is more affordable, then you need to put in place a raft of measures, each of which might only have a small impact on its own, but which together get you where you want to be.

    Here's an entirely non-exhaustive list from me:

    1. Repace stamp duty with a small annual land value levy
    2. Make getting planning permission (and land use change) a lot easier to get
    2a. Have a presumption of 'yes' - a council needs to demonstrate why a development (from an individual home to a block of flats to an estate) should not happen, rather than the other way around
    3. Relax some of the rules around 'net zero' in construction - yes we should be building more energy efficient homes... but not at the expense of building too few homes

    These attack the problem from multiple angles: they encourage more efficient use of existing housing stock, make the market clear more easily, make it easier to get permission to build, and then make it cheaper to build once you have permission.

    And you know what: if there are lots of properties available for rent, then suddenly it is tenants that have power, rather than landlords. They're the ones competing to get you in rather than the other way around.
    I would consider a £200 fee for a planning objection, refundable if the planning application is denied. It would hopefully discourage some of the more ridiculous objections.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 8,266

    Has anyone here watched Pluribus?

    Many times.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 24,446
    I see the posh lads lost to some Scottish posh lads.

    Meanwhile the lads wearing the Saudi kit won at the ground where Jewish fans aren't welcome.

    I've not been watching folk pratting about in the snow, so can't comment on those activities.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146

    Has anyone here watched Pluribus?

    Three episodes in. Weird but interesting.

  • isamisam Posts: 43,622

    The moves toward Labour victory in the betting, the 'rush of people to join Labour', and perhaps even the Labour stabilisation in the polls (though that seems to be gone now), can all be attributed to one thing. The imminent departure of Sir Working Class Hero.

    The only working class hero born in the sixties who wasn’t brought up in social housing

    The principled vegetarian who eats meat when he’s peckish

    The multi millionaire whose brother died in poverty

    What a guy
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 57,784
    isam said:

    The moves toward Labour victory in the betting, the 'rush of people to join Labour', and perhaps even the Labour stabilisation in the polls (though that seems to be gone now), can all be attributed to one thing. The imminent departure of Sir Working Class Hero.

    The only working class hero born in the sixties who wasn’t brought up in social housing

    The principled vegetarian who eats meat when he’s peckish

    The multi millionaire whose brother died in poverty

    What a guy
    "Smoke me a kipper, Bongo. I'll be back for breakfast!"

    "Ace Starmer - what a guy!"
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 90,051
    edited 9:56PM

    I see the posh lads lost to some Scottish South African / Australian / New Zealand / English rejected posh lads.

    Meanwhile the lads wearing the Saudi kit won at the ground where Jewish fans aren't welcome.

    I've not been watching folk pratting about in the snow, so can't comment on those activities.

    Fixed for you..
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,704
    edited 9:54PM
    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    The great thing about you lefties is the amazing way you invert reality.

    Rents are expensive because housing is expensive.

    Housing is expensive because we've made permission to build houses very difficult to obtain and insisted on loads of expensive regulations about how houses are built, whilst at the same time importing millions more people all of whom need somewhere to live.

    Any solution which doesn't involve making housing cheaper to build, or reducing the number of people chasing it is just pointless tinkering round the edges if you're lucky, or actively making matters worse if you're not.

  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 477
    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    If you want cheap housing, someone needs to pay for it.

    Government spending other people’s money, by regulation, is one of the reasons that house building collapsed in London. So we have a Labour government and Mayor taking about eliminating the requirement to include x% of affordable flats in developments.

    Regulations should be simple, direct. And enforced. They are replacing cladding, right now, with.. possibly unsafe cladding.

    If the government wants to create cheap housing, it needs to do one of

    - Subsidies rents
    - Building housing itself and charge below the market rate
    - Create a regulatory environment where replacing a window doesn’t consist of 4K for the window and spending 12k on the consultants to do the paperwork. The actual window being made in Poland, and never actually inspected to see if it matches anything in the £12k of paperwork. Could be made of balsa impregnated with napalm for that anyone knows.
    One of the problems with things like housing policy is that people start suffering from the "silver bullet fallacy". I.e., if this one thing doesn't solve all the issues, then it isn't worth doing.

    The reality is that if you want to make sure more housing is built, and therefore housing is more affordable, then you need to put in place a raft of measures, each of which might only have a small impact on its own, but which together get you where you want to be.

    Here's an entirely non-exhaustive list from me:

    1. Repace stamp duty with a small annual land value levy
    2. Make getting planning permission (and land use change) a lot easier to get
    2a. Have a presumption of 'yes' - a council needs to demonstrate why a development (from an individual home to a block of flats to an estate) should not happen, rather than the other way around
    3. Relax some of the rules around 'net zero' in construction - yes we should be building more energy efficient homes... but not at the expense of building too few homes

    These attack the problem from multiple angles: they encourage more efficient use of existing housing stock, make the market clear more easily, make it easier to get permission to build, and then make it cheaper to build once you have permission.

    And you know what: if there are lots of properties available for rent, then suddenly it is tenants that have power, rather than landlords. They're the ones competing to get you in rather than the other way around.
    1 okay
    2 not helpful
    2a already the case
    3 short term and dumb at a societal and environmental level. Fuel poverty destroys family life. We need to avoid climate catastrophe.

    4 allow councils to levy a 10% council tax on unbuilt permissions in land banks. This would put either1.4million homes back into the build phase or drive land value down. Making home building more profitable.
  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 477

    Has anyone here watched Pluribus?

    Tried and failed. Tried again. Failed again. Seems to lack humour.

    I do recommend Down Cemetery Road instead.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,780
    https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/academics-warn-voting-system-not-fit-multi-party-politics

    Over 50 Academics Warn That Voting System Is Not Fit For Multi-Party Politics
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 42,450

    I see the posh lads lost to some Scottish posh lads.

    Meanwhile the lads wearing the Saudi kit won at the ground where Jewish fans aren't welcome.

    I've not been watching folk pratting about in the snow, so can't comment on those activities.

    https://x.com/oldroyd_tom/status/2022740550403944950?s=20
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,780
    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Reform or on Matt Goodwin?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146
    I swear this is the front door of a PBer regular.




    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2022771089340850653
  • isamisam Posts: 43,622

    isam said:

    Barnesian said:

    Reform and Labour now neck and neck for most seats in the next GE.
    What has caused that change?

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Tres said:

    First

    Like SCOTLAND !!!
    The more you talk about the match it only increases the chances of me deploying the Farage photo.

    (You'll all be delighted to know I've made an agreement with a very long term lurker and Westminster village person that if Matt Goodwin loses the by-election I will never use that photo again.)
    And I thought I couldn't be any more desperate (!) for him to lose.

    There's been a big shortening of the Lab GE price in the last few days btw. Not sure why?
    Because the people responsible for the "strategy" and "Comms" since the election have all been fired?
    Lol, yes could be. Quite a move though. I was trying to get matched at 4 last week (although didn't unfortunately) and now - whoosh - it's in to nearly 3.
    A friend of mine is doing a political podcast. i think this one was recorded before the market moves on Most Seats, but that will get a mention on the next one I would have thought. He seems to think that someone must be about to dish some dirt on Reform

    https://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-hi5gx-2b0c9324
    Dirt on Reform or on Matt Goodwin?
    I think Reform, because it’s in relation to the Most Seats market, not the By-Election. Reform have drifted from EVS to 15/8 on Betfair Exchange, quite a sizeable move
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146
    edited 10:19PM
    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 7,549
    I saw that Rachel Tea Leaves is predicting growth
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 90,051
    edited 10:25PM

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899

    Has anyone here watched Pluribus?

    Tried and failed. Tried again. Failed again. Seems to lack humour.

    I do recommend Down Cemetery Road instead.
    It's not a laugh a minute is it?

    Scope for an interesting discussion on individuality and creativity. If it goes there.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,704
    edited 10:28PM

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    If you want cheap housing, someone needs to pay for it.

    Government spending other people’s money, by regulation, is one of the reasons that house building collapsed in London. So we have a Labour government and Mayor taking about eliminating the requirement to include x% of affordable flats in developments.

    Regulations should be simple, direct. And enforced. They are replacing cladding, right now, with.. possibly unsafe cladding.

    If the government wants to create cheap housing, it needs to do one of

    - Subsidies rents
    - Building housing itself and charge below the market rate
    - Create a regulatory environment where replacing a window doesn’t consist of 4K for the window and spending 12k on the consultants to do the paperwork. The actual window being made in Poland, and never actually inspected to see if it matches anything in the £12k of paperwork. Could be made of balsa impregnated with napalm for that anyone knows.
    One of the problems with things like housing policy is that people start suffering from the "silver bullet fallacy". I.e., if this one thing doesn't solve all the issues, then it isn't worth doing.

    The reality is that if you want to make sure more housing is built, and therefore housing is more affordable, then you need to put in place a raft of measures, each of which might only have a small impact on its own, but which together get you where you want to be.

    Here's an entirely non-exhaustive list from me:

    1. Repace stamp duty with a small annual land value levy
    2. Make getting planning permission (and land use change) a lot easier to get
    2a. Have a presumption of 'yes' - a council needs to demonstrate why a development (from an individual home to a block of flats to an estate) should not happen, rather than the other way around
    3. Relax some of the rules around 'net zero' in construction - yes we should be building more energy efficient homes... but not at the expense of building too few homes

    These attack the problem from multiple angles: they encourage more efficient use of existing housing stock, make the market clear more easily, make it easier to get permission to build, and then make it cheaper to build once you have permission.

    And you know what: if there are lots of properties available for rent, then suddenly it is tenants that have power, rather than landlords. They're the ones competing to get you in rather than the other way around.
    1 okay
    2 not helpful
    2a already the case
    3 short term and dumb at a societal and environmental level. Fuel poverty destroys family life. We need to avoid climate catastrophe.

    4 allow councils to levy a 10% council tax on unbuilt permissions in land banks. This would put either1.4million homes back into the build phase or drive land value down. Making home building more profitable.
    4 Is the usual short term idiocy from the left. Why are none of you capable of thinking through the second order effects of your desired policies?
    In the short term, yes, you'd get piles of homes finished to dodge the tax (although this will be limited by the fact there isn't spare building capacity in the country to build 1.4 million extra houses any time soon). Medium to long term, you'd get less houses built and at higher prices.

    Buying land and getting planning permission is a slow and expensive activity. Developers don't actually do it for the fun of it, they do it do they've a supply pipeline of more places to build houses, so their workforce can keep building houses at a steady rate (this being by far the cheapest way to do it). The pool of 1.4 million plots with planning and nothing happening now will mostly be a different pool to five years ago.

    Developers can also only sell houses on large developments at a given rate without crashing the price and as their margins really aren't that great, so they'd usually be better off not building at-all than building all the houses on a development and crashing the price for which they can sell them.

    If you penalise house builders for holding the land required to make their business model work, you're increasing their costs. With increased costs, they'll only be able to make a profit by selling more expensive houses. That means the more marginal, cheaper, houses won't get built. Trebles all round for you, lefty idiots.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 90,051
    edited 10:26PM
    Down Cemetery Road - started well, thought ended weak. You can see why they picked Slow Horses before these books by the same author.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761
    edited 10:27PM

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    I posted the poll earlier

    1,000 size

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 49,041
    theProle said:

    kinabalu said:

    theProle said:

    FPT

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.

    Prices are information.

    If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever

    Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
    That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
    The problem with most systems of rent control is that they favour insiders, at the expense of outsiders. Rents are usually kept below market levels, and are combined with security of tenure, which makes it hard to remove poor tenants.

    That can be great for existing tenants, but terrible for new tenants. No landlord is going to offer property for letting, if he has to charge below market rents, and is stuck with a perpetual tenant. New properties for letting will however, be offered by the kind of landlord who sends men with baseball bats round to collect the rent and evict tenants.

    Where limited rent control, with limited security of tenure works, is in the commercial sector. Courts can determine an open market rent, and if a landlord wants possession from a good tenant, they must pay compensation.

    But, it is very easy to evict a bad commercial tenant, often by just locking them out. Whereas, with residential tenancies, it can take a year to evict a tenant who has stopped paying rent.
    Ok so that is to highlight potential problems with it. Almost everything causes potential problems. The question is are the potential problems caused worse than the actual problems potentially mitigated. I submit, given our cost of living crisis and malfunctioning approach to residential property, that it's worth looking at and certainly shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the mass parroting of "never worked wherever it's been tried".
    The problem with rent controls is that usually it's intended to shaft landlords, to the benefit of tenants.

    What actually happens is it shafts future tenants, because there is nowhere to rent, because it's not worth being a landlord, and definitely not worth building more houses to rent out.

    If you don't believe this, look at the council house system. That's got artificially low rents, with the result that councils can't afford to build more. Guess what - council houses turn out to be amazing deals for tenants, but it's virtually impossible to get one, with waiting lists of years, even if you're poor.
    Rent controls aren't a substitute for increasing supply, this is clearly true. But neither are they something that universal experience the whole world over tells us are bound to be counterproductive.

    A reboot of our social housing sector - with controlled rents - is imo one of the best things we could do. A great use of resource with benefits on many levels.

    A version of the same problem you highlight btw applies in the private sector too where rents are free market. Houses aren't built unless profit margins are high enough, which in turn bakes in ever higher prices.
    The great thing about you lefties is the amazing way you invert reality.

    Rents are expensive because housing is expensive.

    Housing is expensive because we've made permission to build houses very difficult to obtain and insisted on loads of expensive regulations about how houses are built, whilst at the same time importing millions more people all of whom need somewhere to live.

    Any solution which doesn't involve making housing cheaper to build, or reducing the number of people chasing it is just pointless tinkering round the edges if you're lucky, or actively making matters worse if you're not.
    It's a both ways relationship between rents and prices. Each is a function of the other for a given yield (which depends on interest rates).

    Yes that's right that regulation and increased population drives rents and prices higher. But so do other factors - eg the long period of ultra low interest rates, the explosion of btl and other mortgage products, and the lack of social housing.

    No silver bullets (to echo rcs) but I do think this last point is important and it's one that's amenable to government action.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,780

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    It might just be people wanting a none of the above option and “Restore Britain” sounds good as a name/slogan, but they have no idea of the policies. We need to know the polling question. Were Restore Britain prompted? We’re they described in some way?
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,438
    isam said:

    The moves toward Labour victory in the betting, the 'rush of people to join Labour', and perhaps even the Labour stabilisation in the polls (though that seems to be gone now), can all be attributed to one thing. The imminent departure of Sir Working Class Hero.

    The only working class hero born in the sixties who wasn’t brought up in social housing

    The principled vegetarian who eats meat when he’s peckish

    The multi millionaire whose brother died in poverty

    What a guy
    Random question, you for isam, as I knew back in the day you used to vote Labour and left when Ed didn't fully get on board with Glasman. Would you still consider for voting a genuine 'Blue Labour' government/party? And if so, what would they need to do policy wise - and what kind of leader would they need to have - that the current government isn't doing?
    I'm genuinely curious, as I think McSweeney tried - and very much failed - to get voters like you back onside. For one if the Blue Labour strategy isn't viable, maybe they should just go for some kind 'National Popular Front' strategy (i.e. try to cannabilise the Greens and max out the left liberal vote as much as possible).
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 18,780

    I swear this is the front door of a PBer regular.


    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2022771089340850653

    Why is he reduced to posting AI slop?
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 2,318

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    If he'd linked to the poll we might be able to find out...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 57,899

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    I posted the poll earlier

    1,000 size

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133
    Except...nobody in that 1,000 would have a scooby how Restore differs from Reform. Or anyone else.

    It is meaningless.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 69,761

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    I posted the poll earlier

    1,000 size

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133
    Except...nobody in that 1,000 would have a scooby how Restore differs from Reform. Or anyone else.

    It is meaningless.
    It does seem weird
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146

    This is fantastic news. If actually holds out for more than one week



    Rupert Lowe MP
    @RupertLowe10
    ·
    1h
    Important news. The first opinion poll conducted since I announced yesterday that Restore Britain would become a national political party has us on 10%.

    In this poll, we are ahead of the Lib Dems.

    10%. In 24 hours.

    I call that a bloody good start.

    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2022767014364762165

    Is this another one of those nonsense polled 28 people, 3 of which were Ruptert Lowe, his wife and one of his kids? I find it hard to believe anybody has any idea who Restore Britain is.
    I posted the poll earlier

    1,000 size

    https://x.com/i/status/2022770204116136133
    Except...nobody in that 1,000 would have a scooby how Restore differs from Reform. Or anyone else.

    It is meaningless.
    I expect it is true that most voters can easily mix the words 'Reform' and 'Restore' when asked in the street or on the phone.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 46,618

    I see the posh lads lost to some Scottish posh lads.

    Meanwhile the lads wearing the Saudi kit won at the ground where Jewish fans aren't welcome.

    I've not been watching folk pratting about in the snow, so can't comment on those activities.

    Finn Russell isnae posh!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 70,146

    I swear this is the front door of a PBer regular.


    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2022771089340850653

    Why is he reduced to posting AI slop?
    Because he is losing.

Sign In or Register to comment.