politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn might have to face another tricky electoral test in
Comments
-
The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.0 -
I'm very confused by the BBC channel mix TBH. BBC4 is what BBC2 was, BBC2 is full of ancient repeats and stuff that wouldn't make it on BBC1, [BBC3] and BBC1 I haven't actually watched more than a shark docu on in a year.FrancisUrquhart said:
And the fact the "channel" is only on in the evening and is something like 80-90% repeats. In a world with iplayer, Netflix, Twitch, it is a totally outdated vanity project. With iPlayer, there is far less reasons to need to screen repeats of a show multiple times a week, and plenty of opportunity to road test new projects either on BBC2 or iPlayer.Plato_Says said:In no universe can I image BBC3 having more than a tiny audience - it's so achingly Right-On mixed with lots of swearing and Guardian style documentaries about disabled, black, war veterans who are now pacifists, who'd never vote Tory.
I'm not their target demographic, but I can zap myself back to my 18-25self quite easily. And I'd still roll my eyes at it.FrancisUrquhart said:
Finally...been pissing about with this decision for what 18 months?TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February
If content is good, people find it. In a world with twitter etc, when something is good news spreads.0 -
FYI Dan has been reselected. This was specifically to ensure continuity in the event of Sadiq winning the nomination and being a 50/50 chance of becoming MoL.rcs1000 said:
I have friends in the Tooting Conservative Party, who tell me Dan may not be the candidate.Tissue_Price said:
It's gentrifying rapidly. qv. Battersea in May - some people thought that would be close.TheScreamingEagles said:Tissue_Price said:
I don't think they can. The Tories & Tooting, on the other hand... either way the Mayoral election is going to provide us with a nice betting postscript.TheScreamingEagles said:I think the most interesting by election of 2016 would be a Richmond Park by election.
Iff the Lib Dems could take that....
I reckon Tooting should be a Labour held.Tissue_Price said:
I don't think they can. The Tories & Tooting, on the other hand... either way the Mayoral election is going to provide us with a nice betting postscript.TheScreamingEagles said:I think the most interesting by election of 2016 would be a Richmond Park by election.
Iff the Lib Dems could take that....
Is in London after all.
Prices are up 6.69 per cent in the year to June, according to Knight Frank, and show little signs of tailing off just yet, given the changing demographic.
The changes have been noted by local businessman Dan Watkins, who stood as the Conservative candidate for Tooting at the 2015 general election. He failed to defeat the incumbent, Labour’s Sadiq Khan, but Khan recently won his party’s nomination as London mayoral candidate for next summer’s election. If Khan wins, Watkins hopes to be elected in Tooting at the resulting by-election. This time, he thinks he may have a chance due to those demographic shifts.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4473340-8952-11e5-90de-f44762bf9896.html0 -
BBC4 isn't needed either. They could fill BBC1 and BBC2 with all original content. Repeats and things they want to give a whirl on the cheap iPlayer.Plato_Says said:I'm very confused by the BBC channel mix TBH. BBC4 is what BBC2 was, BBC2 is full of ancient repeats and stuff that wouldn't make it on BBC1, [BBC3] and BBC1 I haven't actually watched more than a shark docu on in a year.
FrancisUrquhart said:
And the fact the "channel" is only on in the evening and is something like 80-90% repeats. In a world with iplayer, Netflix, Twitch, it is a totally outdated vanity project. With iPlayer, there is far less reasons to need to screen repeats of a show multiple times a week, and plenty of opportunity to road test new projects either on BBC2 or iPlayer.Plato_Says said:In no universe can I image BBC3 having more than a tiny audience - it's so achingly Right-On mixed with lots of swearing and Guardian style documentaries about disabled, black, war veterans who are now pacifists, who'd never vote Tory.
I'm not their target demographic, but I can zap myself back to my 18-25self quite easily. And I'd still roll my eyes at it.FrancisUrquhart said:
Finally...been pissing about with this decision for what 18 months?TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February
If content is good, people find it. In a world with twitter etc, when something is good news spreads.0 -
Just because you don't understand a very small adjustment (about 0.7% of forecast revenues over 5 years), that doesn't make it 'dodgy', does it?justin124 said:These forecasts are based on modelling - but the fact that £23billion can suddenly appear out of thin air a mere four and a half months on from the July Budget shows how dodgy they inherently are - as is Osborne for relying on them!
0 -
The BBC just added channels for the sake of it. Some daft delusion about competing with Murdoch.
0 -
Family Guy isn't shown on iPlayer for contractual reasons. I suggest this (along with other shows like American Dad!) might the reason for the reluctance.chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
The other output of BBC3 can frankly be handled online with relative ease. The BBC has already done similar, e.g. the Apprentice "Honest Subtitles" etc - nifty little things that don't quite fit in broadcast.0 -
Family Guy goes to ITV soon, I believe.0
-
I assume they bought that as an anchor series that would attract viewers - and lull them into the false security that their other shows would be like it.chestnut said:
The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.0 -
Same with radio. They had some bonkers ideas that they need as many "traditional" channels as possible, when anybody with half a brain can see what the future is. There will still be a demand / need for traditional style telly, but streaming on-demand channels and content is where it is all moving. If BBC isn't careful, yes they have iPlayer (but technically it isn't anywhere near as good as they think it is), but the market is changing and they are still trying to fight an old war e.g. getting snarky about ITV news.chestnut said:The BBC just added channels for the sake of it. Some daft delusion about competing with Murdoch.
0 -
Very convenient though.Richard_Nabavi said:
Just because you don't understand a very small adjustment (about 0.7% of forecast revenues over 5 years), that doesn't make it 'dodgy', does it?justin124 said:These forecasts are based on modelling - but the fact that £23billion can suddenly appear out of thin air a mere four and a half months on from the July Budget shows how dodgy they inherently are - as is Osborne for relying on them!
0 -
BBC3's problem is the amount of filler it just couldn't afford to make it work even as a reduced hours channel.Plato_Says said:In no universe can I image BBC3 having more than a tiny audience - it's so achingly Right-On mixed with lots of swearing and Guardian style documentaries about disabled, black, war veterans who are now pacifists, who'd never vote Tory.
I'm not their target demographic, but I can zap myself back to my 18-25self quite easily. And I'd still roll my eyes at it.FrancisUrquhart said:
Finally...been pissing about with this decision for what 18 months?TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February
It has some exceptionally good dramas and comedies but it could only afford a couple of short run dramas and two or three short run comedies a year. This left it will huge gaps to fill with the cheapest imaginable shows.
They also cancelled their dramas far too early (The Shades, In The Flesh, both brilliant and ratings hits but cancelled after one and two seasons respectively with lots of story to go) and they eventually couldn't afford their comedy stars (Cuckoo, Bad Education again brilliant shows and ratings hits).
But more importantly, the lack of budget for original drama and comedy left it chock fill of Stacey Dooley Virtue Signalling Hour and such, which were as dreadful as you could possibly imagine.
They would have been much better negotiating more coverage of the Festival season and focusing on music filler than the virtue signal documentaries which clogged up the channels hours. There's also a pretty good argument they could have done much better in terms of imports (not in terms of quality but in volume).0 -
It does if it seriously undermines what Osborne was telling the electorate six months ago. When did he suggest during the election campaign that all his forecasts were subject to revision and that the degree of austerity needed might fall well short of his Spring Budget forecasts?Richard_Nabavi said:
Just because you don't understand a very small adjustment (about 0.7% of forecast revenues over 5 years), that doesn't make it 'dodgy', does it?justin124 said:These forecasts are based on modelling - but the fact that £23billion can suddenly appear out of thin air a mere four and a half months on from the July Budget shows how dodgy they inherently are - as is Osborne for relying on them!
0 -
I wonder what'll happen to its place on the relevant digital multiplex. Will it be replaced by another free-to-air channel, or will it be left empty ?FrancisUrquhart said:
And the fact the "channel" is only on in the evening and is something like 80-90% repeats. In a world with iplayer, Netflix, Twitch, it is a totally outdated vanity project. With iPlayer, there is far less reasons to need to screen repeats of a show multiple times a week, and plenty of opportunity to road test new projects either on BBC2 or iPlayer.Plato_Says said:In no universe can I image BBC3 having more than a tiny audience - it's so achingly Right-On mixed with lots of swearing and Guardian style documentaries about disabled, black, war veterans who are now pacifists, who'd never vote Tory.
I'm not their target demographic, but I can zap myself back to my 18-25self quite easily. And I'd still roll my eyes at it.FrancisUrquhart said:
Finally...been pissing about with this decision for what 18 months?TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February
If content is good, people find it. In a world with twitter etc, when something is good news spreads.
It is happening in the US already, more and more online only channels or shows, more original content will appear on YouTube, Twitch, Netflix, etc. The idea that the family sits down every night to watch the big moving picture box in the corner of the living room is total outdated idea. Its tablets, mobile, pc, laptop.
From memory it's on the PSB1 mux, which also holds BBC1 and BBC2 (and I think BBC4). That's some valuable bandwidth that'll now be empty. Will it be opened up to commercial broadcasters?
(For anyone boring enough to want to know, digital TV channels are compressed and several placed in an entity called a multiplex (mux). This multiplex, and all the relevant stations, are then broadcast on a set frequency. This is why if you have poor TV reception on one frequency you might lose several stations).0 -
As far as I am aware, E4 does not run original dramas or comedies, leaving its budget completely free to import the best North American shows. While BBC3 could have done more in terms of import volumes, it would also be required to do original programming.Plato_Says said:E4 have it about right IMO, enough rebellion/fun/being controversial. C5 for Big Brother and similar.
Pulpstar said:
BBC3 is the not particularly good answer to E4/ITV/C5.TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February
BBC4 is the real peak Guardian channel, and more in line with what the BBC should be doing.0 -
Years between recessions since 1896:
23
9
25
5
5
12
5
10
17
Mean of ~ 12 years;
We're currently at 7.
The OBR forecasts are not doomed to fail, neither are they sure to succeed.
Since we're most likely just over halfway to the next recession, we should probably be cutting a touch faster than we are at the moment.0 -
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.0 -
Of course forecasts change. You seem very confused: these are not Osborne's forecasts, there are the OBR's, and only the most loony of tinfoil hatters think that Robert Chote is not independent.justin124 said:It does if it seriously undermines what Osborne was telling the electorate six months ago. When did he suggest during the election campaign that all his forecasts were subject to revision and that the degree of austerity needed might fall well short of his Spring Budget forecasts?
In any case, we are talking about the tiniest of minor adjustments, much of it years in the future. It doesn't make a tuppence ha'penny's worth of difference to the degree of 'austerity' needed: we are talking about two or three billion a year out of a public spending bill of £750bn.
(The forecasts will be wrong, of course - that is the one complete certainty in economics).0 -
If Obama and Putin's positions on ISIS were reversed, I think the results for this would be the same. I expect the man on the street barely knows Obama's position.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
It did some absolutely spectacularly good documentaries.Dair said:
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.
Our War is better than anything I've seen on any of the mainstream channels.
Even the WW1 docudramas they did were good.
Being Human - also very good.0 -
I've been watching it in the vain hope that it might help the little 'un get to sleep. Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the arguments, this must be one of the hardest jobs for a PM. He's been speaking for a long time now, and been answering many questions. Yet it is also critically important; much more so than PMQs, whatever decision is finally made.Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Cameron still going in the House of Commons. The Chamber still quite full. I think that means he is winning the argument.
0 -
So Cameron's answer to defeating the murderous IS on the ground is to utilise the moderate Free Syrian Army...who have committed their own share of war crimes too
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/11/human-rights-watchsyrianrebelgroupsguiltyofwarcrimes.html0 -
Have to admit I'm surprised Hollande is relatively popular here.Pulpstar said:
If Obama and Putin's positions on ISIS were reversed, I think the results for this would be the same. I expect the man on the street barely knows Obama's position.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
@Richard_Nabavi What happens if the next OBR forecast suddenly finds ooh I don't know, £20 Billion disappearing into thin air ?0
-
Who is going to blink first? This morning, David Cameron set out the case for military intervention in Syria. This afternoon, the shadow cabinet will meet for one hour (Jeremy Corbyn has stipulated there will be a time limit on their discussions) to consider Labour’s response.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12018575/Syria-will-be-the-spark-for-open-rebellion-of-Labours-shadow-cabinet-against-Jeremy-Corbyn.html
The leader of the Labour party is clear in his mind. His party should oppose the Prime Minister. The majority of Labour’s shadow cabinet are clear in their own minds. Their party should support the Prime Minister.
Labour’s internal phoney war is about to be brought to an end by a real war. The mood among shadow ministers has changed. “We haven’t got any choice,” one said to me yesterday. “We have to take him on now.”0 -
0
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12018575/Syria-will-be-the-spark-for-open-rebellion-of-Labours-shadow-cabinet-against-Jeremy-Corbyn.htmlScott_P said:Who is going to blink first? This morning, David Cameron set out the case for military intervention in Syria. This afternoon, the shadow cabinet will meet for one hour (Jeremy Corbyn has stipulated there will be a time limit on their discussions) to consider Labour’s response.
The leader of the Labour party is clear in his mind. His party should oppose the Prime Minister. The majority of Labour’s shadow cabinet are clear in their own minds. Their party should support the Prime Minister.
Labour’s internal phoney war is about to be brought to an end by a real war. The mood among shadow ministers has changed. “We haven’t got any choice,” one said to me yesterday. “We have to take him on now.”
For all the sound and fury, I expect relatively few Labour MPs to vote for it (though probably still enough for a majority in the Commons). Most of them are not going to want to infuriate the grassroots that much.
Certainly if anyone entertains thoughts of becoming a post-Corbyn leader, voting for these air strikes would completely rule them out of contention.0 -
Corbyn's ? lets face it even safe seats might not be safe for the incumbent if their ideology not deemed pure enough for the maoists - I mean CorbynistasPlato_Says said:What's the definition of a *safe Labour seat* these days?
0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12018575/Syria-will-be-the-spark-for-open-rebellion-of-Labours-shadow-cabinet-against-Jeremy-Corbyn.htmlScott_P said:Who is going to blink first? This morning, David Cameron set out the case for military intervention in Syria. This afternoon, the shadow cabinet will meet for one hour (Jeremy Corbyn has stipulated there will be a time limit on their discussions) to consider Labour’s response.
The leader of the Labour party is clear in his mind. His party should oppose the Prime Minister. The majority of Labour’s shadow cabinet are clear in their own minds. Their party should support the Prime Minister.
Labour’s internal phoney war is about to be brought to an end by a real war. The mood among shadow ministers has changed. “We haven’t got any choice,” one said to me yesterday. “We have to take him on now.”
It is the right thing to do (Like Afghanistan was, not Iraq or Libya with hindsight). But if we get dragged into this quite deeply and there is no real end in sight in say 2018, Corbyn will be play the "I told you so" card, even though it is a mirage.0 -
That would be embarrassing, but you can only plan on the basis of what you currently have as your best estimate.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi What happens if the next OBR forecast suddenly finds ooh I don't know, £20 Billion disappearing into thin air ?
But these adjustments are rounding errors anyway. People shouldn't take them too seriously either way; the forecast deficit is the (hopefully small!) difference between two very large numbers, both of which are subject to considerable uncertainty and which depend on many factors outside the government's control.0 -
I was mainly looking at the last three or four years and they haven't done a decent documentary since Our war back in, what 2010 or so.BannedInParis said:
It did some absolutely spectacularly good documentaries.Dair said:
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.
Our War is better than anything I've seen on any of the mainstream channels.
Even the WW1 docudramas they did were good.
Being Human - also very good.
Being Human was the only drama they gave a decent run to. I have little doubt that The Shades and In The Flesh could both have been as successful as Being Human if BBC3 had not cancelled them so prematurely.
Also once a channel gets into the habit of early cancelling shows they find it hard to retain viewer trust and viewers stop even giving their shows a chance - it's called the Fox Effect and is probably why almost every show on Fox fails so badly (ignoring Empire).0 -
Cameron's figures?Scott_P said:@NCPoliticsUK: YouGov (Trust to make right decisions on #Syria)
Corbyn:
Trust 21
Don't Trust 68
Putin:
Trust 21
Don't Trust 680 -
From DWP
While Oldham office has the highest cumulative number of [Universal Credit] starts of any Jobcentre Plus Office (6,013)
0 -
Interestingly I have not heard any of the advocates so keen for "Keynes" that due to the increasingly bright picture, we should cut further and faster.Richard_Nabavi said:
That would be embarrassing, but you can only plan on the basis of what you currently have as your best estimate.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi What happens if the next OBR forecast suddenly finds ooh I don't know, £20 Billion disappearing into thin air ?
But these adjustments are rounding errors anyway. People shouldn't take them too seriously either way; the forecast deficit is the (hopefully small!) difference between two very large numbers, both of which are subject to considerable uncertainty and which depend on many factors outside the government's control.
You can bet your bottom dollar that if we head into recession they'll be yelling at GO to turn the fiscal taps on though
Osborne isn't perfect, but he is the best choice available
0 -
Kezia Dugdale must get sick and tired of being given the dockyard hooker treatment every Thursday at FMQs. I genuinely felt sorry for her when she led on oil revenues and Nicola slapped her down by pointing out how she was essentially laughing at people losing jobs and livelihoods.
You could tell in her tone in the next question that she was totally deflated and realised just how insidious she was being.0 -
I'd also put the recent Reggie Yates ones in there.Dair said:
I was mainly looking at the last three or four years and they haven't done a decent documentary since Our war back in, what 2010 or so.BannedInParis said:
It did some absolutely spectacularly good documentaries.Dair said:
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.
Our War is better than anything I've seen on any of the mainstream channels.
Even the WW1 docudramas they did were good.
Being Human - also very good.
Being Human was the only drama they gave a decent run to. I have little doubt that The Shades and In The Flesh could both have been as successful as Being Human if BBC3 had not cancelled them so prematurely.
Also once a channel gets into the habit of early cancelling shows they find it hard to retain viewer trust and viewers stop even giving their shows a chance - it's called the Fox Effect and is probably why almost every show on Fox fails so badly (ignoring Empire).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05rbyhq
The nationalists one is pretty o.o
I agree - not enough and stopped too soon - but there's some good stuff there.0 -
At the end of last week prevailing opinion within the PLP was that they should push for a “free vote” on Syria, allowing both sides an opportunity to save face. But over the weekend views started to harden. Partly that was as a result of the reaction on the doorsteps to Jeremy Corbyn’s response to the Paris attacks, and his shoot-to-kill comments in particular. “We were out leafleting on tax credits in rock solid Labour areas, and people were handing us the leaflets back. I’ve never seen a reaction like it before,” said one backbencher.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12018575/Syria-will-be-the-spark-for-open-rebellion-of-Labours-shadow-cabinet-against-Jeremy-Corbyn.htmlScott_P said:Who is going to blink first? This morning, David Cameron set out the case for military intervention in Syria. This afternoon, the shadow cabinet will meet for one hour (Jeremy Corbyn has stipulated there will be a time limit on their discussions) to consider Labour’s response.
The leader of the Labour party is clear in his mind. His party should oppose the Prime Minister. The majority of Labour’s shadow cabinet are clear in their own minds. Their party should support the Prime Minister.
Labour’s internal phoney war is about to be brought to an end by a real war. The mood among shadow ministers has changed. “We haven’t got any choice,” one said to me yesterday. “We have to take him on now.”
0 -
Ouch for Corbyn, comparing the difference between him and Cameron.TheScreamingEagles said:
Unelectable.0 -
@JamesTapsfield: DUP's Nigel Dodds not mincing words on Corbyn/McDonnell. Accuses them of "petulant, putrid response of irresponsible revolutionary bedsit"0
-
Didn't see that. After the end of Bad Education and particularly the completely unwarranted cancellation of In the Flesh which was truly groundbreaking and exceptionally good, I pretty much gave up on BBC3.BannedInParis said:
I'd also put the recent Reggie Yates ones in there.Dair said:
I was mainly looking at the last three or four years and they haven't done a decent documentary since Our war back in, what 2010 or so.BannedInParis said:
It did some absolutely spectacularly good documentaries.Dair said:
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.
Our War is better than anything I've seen on any of the mainstream channels.
Even the WW1 docudramas they did were good.
Being Human - also very good.
Being Human was the only drama they gave a decent run to. I have little doubt that The Shades and In The Flesh could both have been as successful as Being Human if BBC3 had not cancelled them so prematurely.
Also once a channel gets into the habit of early cancelling shows they find it hard to retain viewer trust and viewers stop even giving their shows a chance - it's called the Fox Effect and is probably why almost every show on Fox fails so badly (ignoring Empire).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05rbyhq
The nationalists one is pretty o.o
I agree - not enough and stopped too soon - but there's some good stuff there.0 -
"irresponsible revolutionary bedsit"
What a classic Wolfie Smith analogyScott_P said:@JamesTapsfield: DUP's Nigel Dodds not mincing words on Corbyn/McDonnell. Accuses them of "petulant, putrid response of irresponsible revolutionary bedsit"
0 -
I am not the least bit confused - but you appear very presumptuous. Osborne set up the OBR , but given how misleading they have proved he might as well have stuck to relying on the Treasury 's own forecasts.At the end of the day the OBR is no more likely to be correct than other forecasters such as the NIESR.Richard_Nabavi said:
Of course forecasts change. You seem very confused: these are not Osborne's forecasts, there are the OBR's, and only the most loony of tinfoil hatters think that Robert Chote is not independent.justin124 said:It does if it seriously undermines what Osborne was telling the electorate six months ago. When did he suggest during the election campaign that all his forecasts were subject to revision and that the degree of austerity needed might fall well short of his Spring Budget forecasts?
In any case, we are talking about the tiniest of minor adjustments, much of it years in the future. It doesn't make a tuppence ha'penny's worth of difference to the degree of 'austerity' needed: we are talking about two or three billion a year out of a public spending bill of £750bn.
(The forecasts will be wrong, of course - that is the one complete certainty in economics).0 -
If you can find it, its worth a look. I'd actually put it as one of the bravest BBC documentaries of recent years, but only because you *really* start fearing for Reggie Yates' personal safety.Dair said:
Didn't see that. After the end of Bad Education and particularly the completely unwarranted cancellation of In the Flesh which was truly groundbreaking and exceptionally good, I pretty much gave up on BBC3.BannedInParis said:
I'd also put the recent Reggie Yates ones in there.Dair said:
I was mainly looking at the last three or four years and they haven't done a decent documentary since Our war back in, what 2010 or so.BannedInParis said:
It did some absolutely spectacularly good documentaries.Dair said:
In the last couple of years : -Pulpstar said:
Can't remember the last BBC3 programme anyone got excited about tbh. HBO OTOH...chestnut said:The most popular programme on BBC3 was an American cartoon (Family Guy).
I'm not sure how that plays into the unique, cultural, quality contribution the Beeb supposedly makes.
In the Flesh
Bad Education
Cuckoo
Siblings
All appear to have had good ratings and audience appreciation. Their original dramas and comedies did really well. There just weren't enough of them.
Our War is better than anything I've seen on any of the mainstream channels.
Even the WW1 docudramas they did were good.
Being Human - also very good.
Being Human was the only drama they gave a decent run to. I have little doubt that The Shades and In The Flesh could both have been as successful as Being Human if BBC3 had not cancelled them so prematurely.
Also once a channel gets into the habit of early cancelling shows they find it hard to retain viewer trust and viewers stop even giving their shows a chance - it's called the Fox Effect and is probably why almost every show on Fox fails so badly (ignoring Empire).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05rbyhq
The nationalists one is pretty o.o
I agree - not enough and stopped too soon - but there's some good stuff there.0 -
Its 27 billion. I believe thats over a period, possibly the parliament. The statement itself certainly says 8 billion this year. Osborne is ignoring the tax credit cuts for this year but they will come in anyway by 2019.justin124 said:
These forecasts are based on modelling - but the fact that £23billion can suddenly appear out of thin air a mere four and a half months on from the July Budget shows how dodgy they inherently are - as is Osborne for relying on them!Richard_Nabavi said:
To be honest I don't think that even John McDonnell is so stupid as to try that idiotic line.justin124 said:No - but that the need for further Austerity was far less than Osborne was suggesting last May. £23 billion does not appear out of thin air in just a few months. Labour and other critics can now reasonably say that Osborne cannot be relied upon to tell the truth. 'Dodgy' Osborne might have a ring to it.
If you don't understand how these forecasts are made, and can't read the OBR's explanation of what assumptions have changed, then it's probably best not to make a fool of yourself by commenting on the subject.0 -
Perhaps that is why Robert Peston refers to £23billion.flightpath01 said:
Its 27 billion. I believe thats over a period, possibly the parliament. The statement itself certainly says 8 billion this year. Osborne is ignoring the tax credit cuts for this year but they will come in anyway by 2019.justin124 said:
These forecasts are based on modelling - but the fact that £23billion can suddenly appear out of thin air a mere four and a half months on from the July Budget shows how dodgy they inherently are - as is Osborne for relying on them!Richard_Nabavi said:
To be honest I don't think that even John McDonnell is so stupid as to try that idiotic line.justin124 said:No - but that the need for further Austerity was far less than Osborne was suggesting last May. £23 billion does not appear out of thin air in just a few months. Labour and other critics can now reasonably say that Osborne cannot be relied upon to tell the truth. 'Dodgy' Osborne might have a ring to it.
If you don't understand how these forecasts are made, and can't read the OBR's explanation of what assumptions have changed, then it's probably best not to make a fool of yourself by commenting on the subject.0 -
The PM just quoted the Kantian Imperative in the HoC0
-
Rob Merrick @Rob_Merrick
Amazing fact from PM - the 'raptor pod' camera on a Tornado means plane can "hover over the Isle of Wight and read the hands on Big Ben"0 -
That could be Blair. Nauseating.MonikerDiCanio said:Plato_Says said:PM: I have examined my conscience over air strikes
Quote There's no part of me that wants to take part in any military action that i don't believe is 100 per cent necessary for our own safety and security. That's what this is about. [Referring] back to the Iraq vote, and I know that was a time of great difficulty for the House and the country and has become hugely controversial. But we must not let that hold us back from making correct and thought-through decisions when we are under such threat. And we are. Thant bomb in Paris - that could have been London.
If they had their way it would be London. I can't stand here and say we're safe from all these threats. We are not. I can't stand here either and say that we will remove the threat through the action that we take. But do I stand here with advice behind me that taking action will degrade and reduce that threat over time, absolutely. And I've examined my conscience and that's what it is telling me.
No thats you0 -
-
IFS say 2.6m families will be on average £1,600 worse off because of the spending review.0
-
Ego above country. Pure classScott_P said:0 -
Well, that was a fun 24 hours.TheScreamingEagles said:IFS say 2.6m families will be on average £1,600 worse off because of the spending review.
You have to admire Osborne's chutzpah that he thinks he can get away with outright lying time and time again, though.0 -
@rosschawkins: IFS: If Osborne is unlucky he'll have to change plans, raise taxes or abandon surplus target, and he's already abandoned welfare cap0
-
And cue the howling....TheScreamingEagles said:IFS say 2.6m families will be on average £1,600 worse off because of the spending review.
0 -
So much ego, so little canvas...oxfordsimon said:Ego above country. Pure class
0 -
True, although the OBR has the advantage of better and earlier access to government information, and I imagine it's also better-resourced. The key thing is that it is independent, which is the whole point; it gives a firm, independent base so that we can focus on the effects of policy changes.justin124 said:At the end of the day the OBR is no more likely to be correct than other forecasters such as the NIESR.
0 -
Probably only in clear weather.Plato_Says said:Rob Merrick @Rob_Merrick
Amazing fact from PM - the 'raptor pod' camera on a Tornado means plane can "hover over the Isle of Wight and read the hands on Big Ben"
Here's another one I heard. On the ridge above Portsmouth, at the site of one of Palmerston's Follies, sits the outline of a Type-45 destroyer. It is in fact a testbed for the ship's radar systems.
Allegedly from there it can track individual cars on the French coast. As that's not line-of-sight, I assume some signal bouncing's (*) going on.
(*) Forgot the correct term.0 -
Is UC live anywhere? or is the point that Oldham is leading the way?chestnut said:From DWP
While Oldham office has the highest cumulative number of [Universal Credit] starts of any Jobcentre Plus Office (6,013)
0 -
Awkward
The Times has undermined its red-top stablemate by admitting that its story about a controversial Sun poll run, which stated that “one in five Muslims sympathises with IS”, was misleading.
In its “corrections and clarifications” column on Thursday it stated:
“We reported the findings of a Survation poll of 1,000 British Muslims... Asked ‘How do you feel about young Muslims who leave the UK to join fighters in Syria?’, 14% of respondents expressed ‘some sympathy’ and 5% ‘a lot of sympathy’.
The survey did not distinguish between those who go to fight for Islamic State and those who join other factions in Syria, and it did not ask about attitudes towards Isis itself. Our headline, ‘One in five British Muslims has sympathy for Isis’, was misleading in failing to reflect this.”
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2015/nov/26/the-times-admits-story-on-the-suns-jihadi-poll-was-misleading0 -
I'm pleased they're closing BBC3 and not BBC4 which is one of my favourite channels. BBC3 is dire.Plato_Says said:In no universe can I image BBC3 having more than a tiny audience - it's so achingly Right-On mixed with lots of swearing and Guardian style documentaries about disabled, black, war veterans who are now pacifists, who'd never vote Tory.
I'm not their target demographic, but I can zap myself back to my 18-25self quite easily. And I'd still roll my eyes at it.FrancisUrquhart said:
Finally...been pissing about with this decision for what 18 months?TheScreamingEagles said:This will get the lefties and luvvies all excited
BBC3 to close in February0 -
103 backbench questions on the Syria statement. The right thing to do0
-
http://order-order.com/2015/11/26/isis-release-slick-new-propoaganda-video/
This reminds me. We haven't had a new video from John Cantlie for a long time. I think we have to presume the worst.0 -
I didn't know Oldham West and Royton was natural UKIP territory... You live and learnTissue_Price said:I don’t know the seat or the MP but my understanding is that, unlike Oldham West and Royton, this is not natural UKIP territory.
Islington North?0 -
0
-
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?0 -
"Sweden's deputy Prime Minister Asa Romson cries as she announces U-turn on asylum policy"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/refugee-crisis-sweden-deputy-prime-minister-cries-as-she-announces-u-turn-on-asylum-policy-a6749531.html0 -
Well, it is and it isn't.isam said:
I didn't know Oldham West and Royton was natural UKIP territory... You live and learnTissue_Price said:I don’t know the seat or the MP but my understanding is that, unlike Oldham West and Royton, this is not natural UKIP territory.
Islington North?
There's a lower ceiling on UKIP support there than in a lot of northern towns, due to the high ethnic minority population - BUT the white population is more attracted to anti-immigration politics than a lot of places, as shown by the fact it was one of the BNP's best areas in the 2000s.0 -
I think it is more than the Tories lost a lot of seats in 1997 that they wouldn't usually have. That took out a generation of politicians in their 40s/50... add 18 years and you get the age group in which Labour is over-representedGarethoftheVale2 said:I've been looking at the age of MPs by party and it is quite interesting:
Labour have 15 MPs over the age of 70 including 4 over the age of 80 (Kaufman, Skinner, Winnick and Flynn), while the Cons only have 8 MPs over 70 (Haselhurst is the oldest by some way at 78). Lab also has more MPs in their 60s (50 vs. 40 for the Cons). Unsurprisingly the SNP's MPs are the youngest with only 6 over 60.
It suggests the Cons have been better at persuading some of the old guard to stand aside and reduces the probability of a by-election in a Con seat due to an MP passing away.0 -
Nothing about the crisis in the Labour party makes sense until you find the honesty to admit that far leftists have taken over its leadership, and the clarity to see them for what they are.......
Contrary to the wishful thinking of so many Corbyn supporters, these are not decent, well-meaning men, who want to take Labour back to its roots. Nor are they pacifists and idealists you can look on with an indulgent smile and say, ‘I wish they were right, but their ideas will never work in the real world, more’s the pity’.
To the delight of the Conservative Party, SNP and Ukip, they are genuine extremists from a foul tradition, which has never before played a significant role in Labour Party history. The roots they spring from are the roots of British Leninism, not British social democracy.....
It is taking longer than I expected, but the sheer ugliness of the world Corbyn and McDonnell inhabit is slowly dawning on many. God help the Labour Party when it becomes common knowledge.
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/far-leftists-not-laugh-mao-mock-communism-laugh-forget-communism/0 -
That could be Blair. Nauseating.MonikerDiCanio said:Plato_Says said:PM: I have examined my conscience over air strikes
Quote There's no part of me that wants to take part in any military action that i don't believe is 100 per cent necessary for our own safety and security. That's what this is about. [Referring] back to the Iraq vote, and I know that was a time of great difficulty for the House and the country and has become hugely controversial. But we must not let that hold us back from making correct and thought-through decisions when we are under such threat. And we are. Thant bomb in Paris - that could have been London.
If they had their way it would be London. I can't stand here and say we're safe from all these threats. We are not. I can't stand here either and say that we will remove the threat through the action that we take. But do I stand here with advice behind me that taking action will degrade and reduce that threat over time, absolutely. And I've examined my conscience and that's what it is telling me.
What, specifically, do you find nauseating about that extract?0 -
@politicshome: Crispin Blunt on whether MPs will back intervention in Syria: "In short yes" #wato0
-
Pooling and Sharing, twas English taxpayers who paid.blackburn63 said:0 -
Are you trying to be serious?watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
'large' property companies are just that 'large'. Many relatively small individual holders of rented properties still hold over 15 properties. The notion that this is just to do with conniving with mega millions companies wink wink nudge nudge is ridiculous.
In his statement Osborne said - ''It will be introduced from April next year and we'll consult on the details so that corporate property development isn't affected.''
he also said ''and we'll reinvest some of that money in local communities in London and places like Cornwall which are being priced out of home ownership.''
Buy to let boom is a result of Brown ruining pensions value. This measure might help genuine home buyers, who knows, but I think that as sure as night follows day we can expect the treasury to follow on behind any neat new money making industry with some tax wheeze or another.0 -
Re this - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/11/25/jeremy-corbyn-and-the-finsbury-park-mosque/ - it would be interesting to know how often he has visited this mosque before. The article suggests the association is of long standing. Was he close to it when Abu Hamza was using it as a base for his terrorist activities?
It is very depressing that a Leader of the Opposition should see no problem at all with associating with people such as these. Still the Labour Party were warned about this and they still went ahead and elected them. They can hardly complain now if they are seen by some us as terrorist sympathizers.0 -
Walsall North, Newport West and Bolsover are all potentially vulnerable to either Tories or UKIP. Only Manchester Gorton is a guaranteed Labour seat in all circumstances.GarethoftheVale2 said:I've been looking at the age of MPs by party and it is quite interesting:
Labour have 15 MPs over the age of 70 including 4 over the age of 80 (Kaufman, Skinner, Winnick and Flynn), while the Cons only have 8 MPs over 70 (Haselhurst is the oldest by some way at 78). Lab also has more MPs in their 60s (50 vs. 40 for the Cons). Unsurprisingly the SNP's MPs are the youngest with only 6 over 60.
It suggests the Cons have been better at persuading some of the old guard to stand aside and reduces the probability of a by-election in a Con seat due to an MP passing away.0 -
It's one of the better ideas in the statement but it's a long way from what is needed.Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
The ideal solution is to introduce a rental tax to which certain organisations would be exempt with a stated intention to build it up, bit by bit to at least the level of VAT. A slow movement over 10 years would push property from BTL into Owner-Occupation.0 -
Ouch. From Nick Cohen, he's taking no prisoners.
...They dismiss the mass murders, and the suppression of every right that makes life worth living with a giggle and a snort, and imply that you are a bit of a prude if you cannot do the same. Then they throw a copy of Mao’s Little Red Book across the chamber of the House of Commons and look round with utter bemusement when no one gets the gag.
Journalists, politicians and voters need to understand that an unexamined and largely uncriticised ideology is now the ideology of Her Majesty’s Opposition. A disgraceful past has made a disgraceful present, and if Labour MPs do not change it soon, it will provoke a mass Krondstadt moment that will drive millions away from Labour politics for good.0 -
"The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. "Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
This does seem to be a thing about Osborne.
Big company = good, small entrepreneur = bad.
The same attitude is shown with the new travel/tax claims that small consultancies might not be able to claim.
Instead he could exempt the stamp duty on anyone who spends more than x% renovating (or building) a rental property - applicable to anyone. That would be fairer.
0 -
I'm not aware that Christian churches get help from local authorities. Its a sad affair from start to finish. And stories like this make it hared than ever for apologists for Corbyn to pretend he is just some genial friendly guy. He has a warped agenda.Cyclefree said:Re this - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/11/25/jeremy-corbyn-and-the-finsbury-park-mosque/ - it would be interesting to know how often he has visited this mosque before. The article suggests the association is of long standing. Was he close to it when Abu Hamza was using it as a base for his terrorist activities?
It is very depressing that a Leader of the Opposition should see no problem at all with associating with people such as these. Still the Labour Party were warned about this and they still went ahead and elected them. They can hardly complain now if they are seen by some us as terrorist sympathizers.0 -
Alasdair Milne was forced out by the BBC board and its chairman Marmaduke Hussey in 1987 in large part, as Jean Seaton recounts in her authorised history Pinkoes and Traitors: The BBC and the Nation 1974-1987 (Profile, £30), for a perception of left-wing bias and more specifically his handling of “Maggie’s Militant Tendency”, an episode of Panorama made by Michael Cockerell alleging far-right involvement in the Conservative Party. The programme’s claims fell apart, specifically the notion that there was an attempt to infiltrate the party by far-right elements analogous to the organised infiltration of Labour by the Militant Tendency. The BBC was sued for libel over the programme by three MPs named in it — their action partly funded by the billionaire Jimmy Goldsmith — and the BBC eventually made an out-of-court settlement of nearly £1 million, according to Seaton.
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/features-december-2015-michael-mosbacher-seumas-milne-jeremy-corbyn
Sounds familiar....0 -
Although people already pay income tax on rental income, and the changes to the W&T allowance and the mortgage interest relief are designed to reduce the return on investmentDair said:
It's one of the better ideas in the statement but it's a long way from what is needed.Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
The ideal solution is to introduce a rental tax to which certain organisations would be exempt with a stated intention to build it up, bit by bit to at least the level of VAT. A slow movement over 10 years would push property from BTL into Owner-Occupation.0 -
Its a very slimming portrait.blackburn63 said:0 -
I await a Bolsover by-election with crates of champers no matter who wins.AndyJS said:
Walsall North, Newport West and Bolsover are all potentially vulnerable to either Tories or UKIP. Only Manchester Gorton is a guaranteed Labour seat in all circumstances.GarethoftheVale2 said:I've been looking at the age of MPs by party and it is quite interesting:
Labour have 15 MPs over the age of 70 including 4 over the age of 80 (Kaufman, Skinner, Winnick and Flynn), while the Cons only have 8 MPs over 70 (Haselhurst is the oldest by some way at 78). Lab also has more MPs in their 60s (50 vs. 40 for the Cons). Unsurprisingly the SNP's MPs are the youngest with only 6 over 60.
It suggests the Cons have been better at persuading some of the old guard to stand aside and reduces the probability of a by-election in a Con seat due to an MP passing away.0 -
In this case, you need big companies to increase the supply of properties. Individuals tend to buy 1, 2 or 3 existing properties. We need investors to build 50 or 100 units for rent at a time.MarkHopkins said:
"The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. "Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
This does seem to be a thing about Osborne.
Big company = good, small entrepreneur = bad.
The same attitude is shown with the new travel/tax claims that small consultancies might not be able to claim.
Instead he could exempt the stamp duty on anyone who spends more than x% renovating (or building) a rental property - applicable to anyone. That would be fairer.0 -
If Seumas Milne is no longer a Stalinist he has certainly not travelled far from Stalinism. What is most worrying is that on Milne’s appointment, Corbyn’s own campaign stated: “Seumas shares Jeremy’s worldview almost to the letter . . . they sing from the same hymn sheet.”flightpath01 said:
I'm not aware that Christian churches get help from local authorities. Its a sad affair from start to finish. And stories like this make it hared than ever for apologists for Corbyn to pretend he is just some genial friendly guy. He has a warped agenda.Cyclefree said:Re this - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/11/25/jeremy-corbyn-and-the-finsbury-park-mosque/ - it would be interesting to know how often he has visited this mosque before. The article suggests the association is of long standing. Was he close to it when Abu Hamza was using it as a base for his terrorist activities?
It is very depressing that a Leader of the Opposition should see no problem at all with associating with people such as these. Still the Labour Party were warned about this and they still went ahead and elected them. They can hardly complain now if they are seen by some us as terrorist sympathizers.
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/features-december-2015-michael-mosbacher-seumas-milne-jeremy-corbyn?page=0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,20 -
I've advocated before, a charge equivalent to the rate of NIC on profits derived from letting more than two propertiesCharles said:
Although people already pay income tax on rental income, and the changes to the W&T allowance and the mortgage interest relief are designed to reduce the return on investmentDair said:
It's one of the better ideas in the statement but it's a long way from what is needed.Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
The ideal solution is to introduce a rental tax to which certain organisations would be exempt with a stated intention to build it up, bit by bit to at least the level of VAT. A slow movement over 10 years would push property from BTL into Owner-Occupation.0 -
Guido asked Labour Press Office last night if that Little Red Book was actually Seumas' treasured copy...FrancisUrquhart said:
If Seumas Milne is no longer a Stalinist he has certainly not travelled far from Stalinism. What is most worrying is that on Milne’s appointment, Corbyn’s own campaign stated: “Seumas shares Jeremy’s worldview almost to the letter . . . they sing from the same hymn sheet.”flightpath01 said:
I'm not aware that Christian churches get help from local authorities. Its a sad affair from start to finish. And stories like this make it hared than ever for apologists for Corbyn to pretend he is just some genial friendly guy. He has a warped agenda.Cyclefree said:Re this - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/11/25/jeremy-corbyn-and-the-finsbury-park-mosque/ - it would be interesting to know how often he has visited this mosque before. The article suggests the association is of long standing. Was he close to it when Abu Hamza was using it as a base for his terrorist activities?
It is very depressing that a Leader of the Opposition should see no problem at all with associating with people such as these. Still the Labour Party were warned about this and they still went ahead and elected them. They can hardly complain now if they are seen by some us as terrorist sympathizers.
http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/features-december-2015-michael-mosbacher-seumas-milne-jeremy-corbyn?page=0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,20 -
A plumber pays income tax on their income after having to charge VAT on his labour. One of the reasons BTL is such an effective revenue generator is that it is completely absent to one aspect of the tax system.Charles said:
Although people already pay income tax on rental income, and the changes to the W&T allowance and the mortgage interest relief are designed to reduce the return on investmentDair said:
It's one of the better ideas in the statement but it's a long way from what is needed.Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
The ideal solution is to introduce a rental tax to which certain organisations would be exempt with a stated intention to build it up, bit by bit to at least the level of VAT. A slow movement over 10 years would push property from BTL into Owner-Occupation.
The core problem with BTL is that it is a social harm in a country where home ownership has been prioritised for 30 years. It creates distortions in the market and solves absolutely no market failure, Without BTL, the purchase price of property would depend on the amount of disposable income available for rents. With BTL, the profitability of the sector leaves BTL as the primary driver of property prices (outside London which has its own issues).
It certainly shouldn't be clamped down on in one bite, that would be a pretty hard shock for the economy to deal with. But a slow correction by applying a Rental tax would gradually reduce the impact that BTL has on the market.0 -
That's why I said "x% renovating (or building)".Charles said:
In this case, you need big companies to increase the supply of properties. Individuals tend to buy 1, 2 or 3 existing properties. We need investors to build 50 or 100 units for rent at a time.MarkHopkins said:
"The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. "Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
This does seem to be a thing about Osborne.
Big company = good, small entrepreneur = bad.
The same attitude is shown with the new travel/tax claims that small consultancies might not be able to claim.
Instead he could exempt the stamp duty on anyone who spends more than x% renovating (or building) a rental property - applicable to anyone. That would be fairer.
The rule should be applicable to the actions required (increasing rental stock from non-habitable), not to whether the business is large or small.
0 -
The real problem with uy to let is that it isn't buy to let at all, it is borrow to let !0
-
Harry's place provides a very useful service by shinning a spot light on areas(certain areas of) the left would not like to be widely know.nCyclefree said:Re this - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/11/25/jeremy-corbyn-and-the-finsbury-park-mosque/ - it would be interesting to know how often he has visited this mosque before. The article suggests the association is of long standing. Was he close to it when Abu Hamza was using it as a base for his terrorist activities?
It is very depressing that a Leader of the Opposition should see no problem at all with associating with people such as these. Still the Labour Party were warned about this and they still went ahead and elected them. They can hardly complain now if they are seen by some us as terrorist sympathizers.0 -
Not any more, given the changes Osborne made in the summer.Pulpstar said:The real problem with uy to let is that it isn't buy to let at all, it is borrow to let !
0 -
The travel expenses issue was announced yesterday only limited companies impacted by the intermediaries legislation are impacted. We now await for the consultation on the new intermediaries legislation to see how that is being changed.MarkHopkins said:
"The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. "Charles said:
This policy is very simple:watford30 said:I see there's a row brewing over Osborne's decision to help out his chums with large property companies.
'What will fuel their anger is that large firms owning more than 15 properties are not expected to have to pay the higher charge.'
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3334304/Huge-stamp-duty-rises-rental-properties-second-homes-set-kill-booming-market.html
If Labour manage to get their act into gear by 2020, an Osborne lead Tory party will have a fight on it's hands to stay in office. He's wound up a lot of natural Conservative voters.
1. BTL-buyers will have to pay 3% more tax. All other things being equal, they will reduce their bids by 3%, which will reduce the price that owner-occupiers have to pay to compete with the BTL segment.
2. The exemption for more than 15 properties is because the government is trying to persuade the insurance companies to get involved in the private rental sector by building specific rental developments. Putting up their taxes will not help this. So it's not about "helping out his chums". It's all about reducing house prices and reducing rents.
Surely a good thing?
This does seem to be a thing about Osborne.
Big company = good, small entrepreneur = bad.
The same attitude is shown with the new travel/tax claims that small consultancies might not be able to claim.
Instead he could exempt the stamp duty on anyone who spends more than x% renovating (or building) a rental property - applicable to anyone. That would be fairer.
As for 15 properties I suppose the difference is between one of letting as a business and letting as an investment.0 -
He is right though isn't he.Plato_Says said:Ouch. From Nick Cohen, he's taking no prisoners.
...They dismiss the mass murders, and the suppression of every right that makes life worth living with a giggle and a snort, and imply that you are a bit of a prude if you cannot do the same. Then they throw a copy of Mao’s Little Red Book across the chamber of the House of Commons and look round with utter bemusement when no one gets the gag.
Journalists, politicians and voters need to understand that an unexamined and largely uncriticised ideology is now the ideology of Her Majesty’s Opposition. A disgraceful past has made a disgraceful present, and if Labour MPs do not change it soon, it will provoke a mass Krondstadt moment that will drive millions away from Labour politics for good.0
