Hockey_saint Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 This is why the people comparing his election as leader with Maggie's are deluding themselves. Thatcher won the support of her MPs and had previously had front bench positions. Jezza was gerrymandered onto the ballot , has been disloyal over and over again and people are queuing up to resign from his shadow cabinet . If people are going to compare a Tory leadership election to this one it is IDS. Although he had the support of a majority of MPs , his previous rebellions ( every bit as principled as Jezzas ) meant the whips had real problems keeping discipline and he was knifed pretty quickly. I was listening to a programme on radio 4 about the '76 leadership election. Roy Jenkins, Callaghan, Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Denis Healy and Tony crossland . Contrast these big figures with Burnham & Kendall, Jezza and Mrs Balls. Where were David Blunkett, Alister Darling , Harriet Harman , Ken Livingstone Alan Johnson . These are the type of people that should still be MPs and still hold senior positions. Why are both parties obsessed with youth and " new" . The greatest thing about this win is that Diane Flabbert will get a front bench position and we won't have to put up with the racist on the "This Week" sofa anymore. Can't really disagree with that. I'd like to see how it plays out on both sides to be fair....What I'd really like to see is George Osborne succeed Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 Sorry, I don't follow your reasoning. Encouraging people to invest in buy to rent schemes can surely only be good in increasing the availability of rented property, which in turn will push down rents. If the government were to introduce rent controls and then allow tenants the right to buy the property they rented, the number of people investing in buying property to let would dry up. Larger properties which would have been bought to convert into flats would remain unsold or in need of repair, exacerbating the housing shortage and increasing property prices. The recent legislation allowing people to invest their pensions as they wished instead of being forced into an annuity, made buy to let an attractive proposition. Giving the tenant the right to buy that property removes the attractiveness of that investment avenue. We wouldn't need more people to invest in buy to let if more people could buy, it's not rocket science. People who buy to let are just parasites, forcing prices up out of the reach of first time buyers and making money from them being forced to rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 We wouldn't need more people to invest in buy to let if more people could buy, it's not rocket science. People who buy to let are just parasites, forcing prices up out of the reach of first time buyers and making money from them being forced to rent. I think that's a little bit harsh. If you had to save for your retirement and wanted a steady income with a lump sum at the end....wouldn't you do the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 We wouldn't need more people to invest in buy to let if more people could buy, it's not rocket science. People who buy to let are just parasites, forcing prices up out of the reach of first time buyers and making money from them being forced to rent. If there was no buy to rent, there would be no rental properties at all. I used to rent in Bristol and it was difficult enough finding somewhere decent to rent as things are. At the time I didn't have a hope in hell of buying a property as I was on unstable income with some massive student debts to pay off. I think I worked out once that in the 3 years following graduation from school I lived in 15 different flats and houses (in no less than 5 countries). Buying a house is practically impossible for about the first 10 years after school I'd say. You jump around from college to college, job to job, one relationship to another. Buying and selling properties and short notice every 6 months or so is completely impractical and unaffordable. The reason there is so much B2R is because there is so much demand for short term, rental property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 (edited) If there was no buy to rent, there would be no rental properties at all. I used to rent in Bristol and it was difficult enough finding somewhere decent to rent as things are. At the time I didn't have a hope in hell of buying a property as I was on unstable income with some massive student debts to pay off. I think I worked out once that in the 3 years following graduation from school I lived in 15 different flats and houses (in no less than 5 countries). Buying a house is practically impossible for about the first 10 years after school I'd say. You jump around from college to college, job to job, one relationship to another. Buying and selling properties and short notice every 6 months or so is completely impractical and unaffordable. The reason there is so much B2R is because there is so much demand for short term, rental property. The sheer number of degree places and number of degrees that have been created stipulate that there is one hell of a student property market in any city with a University.... so, any city. Take half a million pounds to Derby, Coventry, Birmingham, Stoke.... you can create yourself £2,000+ a month of income and a property portfolio that in the worst case scenario will just stagnate. It's not parasitic, it's just good investment that deals with demand. They cannot throw up Halls of residence fast enough, office buildings are being turned into Student accomodation in Coventry.... and they charge, for a shoebox, 150 pounds a week. In Coventry. The standard terraced housing is a goldmine. I wouldn't look at Landlords as the issue, the issue is the market, Student rental prices are pushing up the private rental market. In an environment where it's more compelling to go short term why go for the residential market? Edited 13 September, 2015 by Colinjb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 The sheer number of degree places and number of degrees that have been created stipulate that there is one hell of a student property market in any city with a University.... so, any city. Take half a million pounds to Derby, Coventry, Birmingham, Stoke.... you can create yourself £2,000+ a month of income and a property portfolio that in the worst case scenario will just stagnate. It's not parasitic, it's just good investment that deals with demand. They cannot throw up Halls of residence fast enough, office buildings are being turned into Student accomodation in Coventry.... and they charge, for a shoebox, 150 pounds a week. In Coventry. The standard terraced housing is a goldmine. You've seen my rants on here and me being the typical emotional leftie but this...I cannot disagree with. If I had the money I would do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 You've seen my rants on here and me being the typical emotional leftie but this...I cannot disagree with. If I had the money I would do the same. Quite frankly, you wouldn't need to work again! The ethics of that are another matter.... (For my daughter I would always set the example of going to work...) But, you wouldn't need to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 You've seen my rants on here and me being the typical emotional leftie but this...I cannot disagree with. If I had the money I would do the same. Nice to see your leftier-than-thou posturing was a total sack of sh it after all, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 Nice to see your leftier-than-thou posturing was a total sack of sh it after all, then. Human nature conquers all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 We wouldn't need more people to invest in buy to let if more people could buy, it's not rocket science. People who buy to let are just parasites, forcing prices up out of the reach of first time buyers and making money from them being forced to rent. It might not be rocket science, but calling people who buy to let parasites suggests that your understanding of it isn't very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 13 September, 2015 Share Posted 13 September, 2015 (edited) Shadow Home Secretary Andy Burnham MP Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn MP Shadow Health Secretary Heidi Alexander MP Shadow Secretary of State for Justice Lord Falconer Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Seema Malhotra MP Shadow BIS Angela Eagle MP Shadow cabinet set to have a majority of women, apparently. Edited 13 September, 2015 by Saint-Armstrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Cameron and Osborne will be laughing their socks off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctoroncall Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 That might be in his head now. But events will overwhelm him before he gets anywhere near that. You need to remember he joined the contest to "broaden the debate" and have a nice chat, not to win, and certainly not to become Prime Minister. What's happened since June was no masterplan that's for sure. That's the socialist way... I'm here to put my thoughts forward, choose me if you like them. He's not one of those who is 'in it to win it' like Blair and by the way here is what I might do policies. It will be interesting to see if he changes approach or keeps to his principals when pressured from the Unions and the New Labourites who will like him to dictate accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Shadow Home Secretary Andy Burnham MP Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn MP Shadow Health Secretary Heidi Alexander MP Shadow Secretary of State for Justice Lord Falconer Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Seema Malhotra MP Shadow BIS Angela Eagle MP Shadow cabinet set to have a majority of women, apparently. :lol: Angela Eagle......jesus.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 It might not be rocket science, but calling people who buy to let parasites suggests that your understanding of it isn't very good. Parasites is probably a but strong but Buy To Let is not doing anything but hinder young people trying to buy a house. My generation and my parents have been lucky enough to ride the housing bubble yet many young people today can't get a mortgage even though they work hard and have a decent job. When I got my first mortgage I didn't have a penny to my name, got a 101% and made 30K in a few years despite making the property worse. My parents have ended up with 4 properties yet didn't even have decent jobs. It's not fair and older people sat on massive equity (thanks to the housing bubble that caused the crash) and hoovering up all the affordable property to rent them out at profit is just wrong. It's not rewarding hard work it is just letting lucky people take the p!ss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Jezzer is pretty uneducated and totally brainwashed, like many beardy lefties, who leave any common sense they possess at the door of the union hall and revel in a group Marxist therapy session. One thing he is not, unlike many of his comrades, is a totally unprincipled hypocrite, which is what the other candidates obviously are, as the vast majority of the leadership voters could clearly see. The other thing he is not is unrealistic and deluded, qualities which are eroded by old age. No, he is aware he is simply going to be the mouth piece of the Marxist fringes of society, who have spent the last 25 years watching the total disintegration of their political theories. All hastened by a better educated and informed voter who wants more out of life than the possibility of having their hard earned wages garnished in ever increasing taxes of by socialist pedal pushers like him who have never had a proper job in their lives, but simply want a re-distribution of wealth from the middle classes to the benefit classes. I voted for him because he will, at regular occasions and in bad tempered exchanges, have the opportunity to demonstrate to the British population, exactly what the left wing and their union bosses, have to offer to Britain. I also predict that consequently the Labour party will split, yet again and the centre left will join the Lib Dems to form a Social Democrat party, with Jezzer and his chums returning to the Monster Raving Looney fringes, where they belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 It will be interesting to see if he changes approach or keeps to his principals when pressured from the Unions and the New Labourites who will like him to dictate accordingly. I think you'll find the Unions are his principals now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint1977 Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Cameron and Osborne will be laughing their socks off. Not neccessarily from the Conservative party workers that I know, a New Labour winner would have been far more likely to back staying in the EU at the referendum but given the Old Left's historical antipathy it is far from a given Corbyn would get behind staying in. Which would present a huge headache as the corporations who fund the Tory Party and lean on it's leadership to see a big return on their investment in policy-making overwhelmingly want to stay in. The big problem - as Lord Duckhunter points out (and we don't often agree on these subjects) - is that the Old Left are making the 1975 comparison with Maggie. I don't agree with some of what LD says because Maggie and co kept their free market dogma very well hidden until after the 1979 election, concentrating on a smaller sub-set of socio-economic policies and focusing on the (correct) absurdities of the social contract. Where I do agree with LD is that this is IDS all over again - the Tories gave up on the 2005 election by electing him leader. It was a knee-jerk reaction, as was electing Hague at least a decade too early given the distinguished figure he has gone on to become. It appears Labour have repeated the dose, losing an election to the centre ground and going for someone extreme. GM - I agree on the possibility of a Labour split but I wouldn't get too excited as the referendum is a very dangerous and divisive issue for the Tory Party and could have a similar impact. In fact, if the vote was 'no', would Cameron and Osborne want to stay in power? Being pro-European myself, I wouldn't if I were them. On the other hand, if the Tory left and Labour right split away to join the LDs, we could end up with an SDP-type party with a greater mass of MPs and silent support (as opposed to the noise of the Marxist Old Left and Thatcherite plastic American brigade). Would suit me and would be a party I could actually be enthusiastic about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Jezzer is pretty uneducated and totally brainwashed, like many beardy lefties, who leave any common sense they possess at the door of the union hall and revel in a group Marxist therapy session. One thing he is not, unlike many of his comrades, is a totally unprincipled hypocrite, which is what the other candidates obviously are, as the vast majority of the leadership voters could clearly see. The other thing he is not is unrealistic and deluded, qualities which are eroded by old age. No, he is aware he is simply going to be the mouth piece of the Marxist fringes of society, who have spent the last 25 years watching the total disintegration of their political theories. All hastened by a better educated and informed voter who wants more out of life than the possibility of having their hard earned wages garnished in ever increasing taxes of by socialist pedal pushers like him who have never had a proper job in their lives, but simply want a re-distribution of wealth from the middle classes to the benefit classes. I voted for him because he will, at regular occasions and in bad tempered exchanges, have the opportunity to demonstrate to the British population, exactly what the left wing and their union bosses, have to offer to Britain. I also predict that consequently the Labour party will split, yet again and the centre left will join the Lib Dems to form a Social Democrat party, with Jezzer and his chums returning to the Monster Raving Looney fringes, where they belong. Excellent post. I wonder if the idiot bellends in the Labour party realise that as long as they avoid major scandal and balls-ups, they have handed the Tories an unchalleneged run at the country for a generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 I wonder how the new look labour will effect things in Scotland? New labour clearly wasn't a hit and the SNP benefitted by taking the left side of the political spectrum. Scotland does seem to be quite left in it's leaning so a new more socialist Labour party might be a problem for the SNP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Excellent post. I wonder if the idiot bellends in the Labour party realise that as long as they avoid major scandal and balls-ups, they have handed the Tories an unchalleneged run at the country for a generation.don't worry the Tories will fight amongst themselves re the Euro vote and the waters will muddy again. None of them are loyal to a cause but have a nonsense view of the UK standing alone in the modern world. Many of the younger voters will never have been around when the Labour left last had power. You will get the trendy celebs etc spout 'what fun' it is to have leftish party , where they will protect their wealth but harp on about spreading they rest out. I recall Benn doing the same when the Wealth tax was going to happen. It was interesting to see that Scottish woman who did well in the last election start trying to pop at Corbyn as she knows his policies are similar to the SNP. The next election will be close again IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 I wonder how the new look labour will effect things in Scotland? New labour clearly wasn't a hit and the SNP benefitted by taking the left side of the political spectrum. Scotland does seem to be quite left in it's leaning so a new more socialist Labour party might be a problem for the SNP?I am praying that Jezzer will join forces with UKIP and the Tory right wing to help get us out of the migrant camp that is now the EU and as a consequence, the Jocks vote for separation to take control their dwindling oil income. These two events will give us annual savings of £6.7bn for the EU exit and a parting gift of £17 bn from Scotland. So that's an additional £23.7 bn a year Britain can spend on the NHS, education and defence, instead of spending it on the ungrateful Jocks and work shy tax dodgers from Southern Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 The sheer number of degree places and number of degrees that have been created stipulate that there is one hell of a student property market in any city with a University.... so, any city. Take half a million pounds to Derby, Coventry, Birmingham, Stoke.... you can create yourself £2,000+ a month of income and a property portfolio that in the worst case scenario will just stagnate. It's not parasitic, it's just good investment that deals with demand. They cannot throw up Halls of residence fast enough, office buildings are being turned into Student accomodation in Coventry.... and they charge, for a shoebox, 150 pounds a week. In Coventry. The standard terraced housing is a goldmine. I wouldn't look at Landlords as the issue, the issue is the market, Student rental prices are pushing up the private rental market. In an environment where it's more compelling to go short term why go for the residential market? too bleedin right....my nipper has just got a place at Coventry £140 for a shoebox....although he does get a Ben&Jerrys and Pukka Pie machine thrown into the communal lounge area so he wont starve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 too bleedin right....my nipper has just got a place at Coventry £140 for a shoebox....although he does get a Ben&Jerrys and Pukka Pie machine thrown into the communal lounge area so he wont starve! Priory Hall? By the Cathedral? Or one of those 'Study Inn' type places that have taken over all the abandoned office and retail zones? God that place is a dump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Priory Hall? By the Cathedral? Or one of those 'Study Inn' type places that have taken over all the abandoned office and retail zones? God that place is a dump. Callice Court been to visit a few times and seems decent Coventry flying up rankings now 15th best in country! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Priory Hall? By the Cathedral? Or one of those 'Study Inn' type places that have taken over all the abandoned office and retail zones? God that place is a dump. Is J Block still there? I can't remember what I paid back in '76. About tuppence a month I think it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 (edited) Is J Block still there? I can't remember what I paid back in '76. About tuppence a month I think it was. The one on stilts? Yes, that's still there. G Block was where I lived in my first year and still going strong now. H block has now been condemned due to concrete rot...... Callice Court been to visit a few times and seems decent Coventry flying up rankings now 15th best in country! It's about the only thing the City has to shout about, the Engineering and Nursing Schools were always it's strong suit. Callice Court is ok, brand spanking new and pretty much on the campus. Edited 14 September, 2015 by Colinjb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 he does get a Ben&Jerrys and Pukka Pie machine thrown into the communal lounge area so he wont starve! My optimistic, full of wonder self imagines a free to use machine which will make you quality ice cream and pies on demand. Add in a beer tap and you've got the perfect three years. Sadly I doubt thats exactly what you meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 My optimistic, full of wonder self imagines a free to use machine which will make you quality ice cream and pies on demand. Add in a beer tap and you've got the perfect three years. Sadly I doubt thats exactly what you meant. Sadly not he has to pay....well we do thanks to them slashing his grant due to ridiculous way they do maintenance loans now that dont take into consideration hardly any circumstance just parents salary. Mind you I have lined him up 3 jobs....including Wasps steward who are moving to Ricoh arena soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 The big problem - as Lord Duckhunter points out (and we don't often agree on these subjects) - is that the Old Left are making the 1975 comparison with Maggie. I don't agree with some of what LD says because Maggie and co kept their free market dogma very well hidden until after the 1979 election, concentrating on a smaller sub-set of socio-economic policies and focusing on the (correct) absurdities of the social contract. Where I do agree with LD is that this is IDS all over again - the Tories gave up on the 2005 election by electing him leader. It was a knee-jerk reaction, as was electing Hague at least a decade too early given the distinguished figure he has gone on to become. It appears Labour have repeated the dose, losing an election to the centre ground and going for someone extreme. I don't think Maggie kept her " dogma" well hidden , I think she used the shambles on the left to become more radical than she ever thought possible in '79. Had labour stayed together under Owen or Healy I'm sure she would have governed more from the centre, and not been so radical. This is a great opportunity for Call me Dave to do the same , but I doubt he will. He take the Blair approach which is to use the weakness of his opponent's to pinch the centre ground , to attract their " soft" voters. It may win elections, as Blair did, but ultimately you end up disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 (edited) I don't think Maggie kept her " dogma" well hidden , I think she used the shambles on the left to become more radical than she ever thought possible in '79. Had labour stayed together under Owen or Healy I'm sure she would have governed more from the centre, and not been so radical. This is a great opportunity for Call me Dave to do the same , but I doubt he will. He take the Blair approach which is to use the weakness of his opponent's to pinch the centre ground , to attract their " soft" voters. It may win elections, as Blair did, but ultimately you end up disappointed. There is a big difference between then and now. When Thatcher came to power there had been 30 years of 'socially progressive' policies under both Tories and Labour - creation of the NHS, massive council house building, workers rights etc, but a lot of industrial unrest. It was perceived that the pendulum had swung too far - although Id argue poor industrial relations were symptomatic of poor industrial policy, weak management and lack of investment rather than caused by bolshy workers. Since Thatchers election we have had 35 years of right of centre policies - prioritising corporations over individuals. Corbyn's election is a sign that people are wanting the pendulum to shift back - not a sign that the opposition is in la la land. Cameron will continue to shift more money back to the wealthy. Corbyn is unlikely to become PM, but UK politics is going to become far more divided than it has been since WW2. One nation is dead unfortunately, US style 'screw you, Im only looking out for my 50% of the electorate' nihilist politics is now the norm. Edited 14 September, 2015 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Not neccessarily from the Conservative party workers that I know, a New Labour winner would have been far more likely to back staying in the EU at the referendum but given the Old Left's historical antipathy it is far from a given Corbyn would get behind staying in. Which would present a huge headache as the corporations who fund the Tory Party and lean on it's leadership to see a big return on their investment in policy-making overwhelmingly want to stay in. The big problem - as Lord Duckhunter points out (and we don't often agree on these subjects) - is that the Old Left are making the 1975 comparison with Maggie. I don't agree with some of what LD says because Maggie and co kept their free market dogma very well hidden until after the 1979 election, concentrating on a smaller sub-set of socio-economic policies and focusing on the (correct) absurdities of the social contract. Where I do agree with LD is that this is IDS all over again - the Tories gave up on the 2005 election by electing him leader. It was a knee-jerk reaction, as was electing Hague at least a decade too early given the distinguished figure he has gone on to become. It appears Labour have repeated the dose, losing an election to the centre ground and going for someone extreme. GM - I agree on the possibility of a Labour split but I wouldn't get too excited as the referendum is a very dangerous and divisive issue for the Tory Party and could have a similar impact. In fact, if the vote was 'no', would Cameron and Osborne want to stay in power? Being pro-European myself, I wouldn't if I were them. On the other hand, if the Tory left and Labour right split away to join the LDs, we could end up with an SDP-type party with a greater mass of MPs and silent support (as opposed to the noise of the Marxist Old Left and Thatcherite plastic American brigade). Would suit me and would be a party I could actually be enthusiastic about. I believe it is a mistake to make such sweeping generalisations about how the EU referendum would go if Labour had elected a more Blairite leader. Both the Conservative Party and Labour have their factions who wish to leave the EU and they will form cross-bench alliances in the pre-referendum campaigns. Their votes won't be whipped by their Parties. Furthermore, it isn't as clear cut to assert that corporations who fund the Conservative Party will definitely all pressurise them to stay in. Increasingly it is being argued effectively that if we were to leave the EU, not only would we establish new markets in the wider World, but that the EU manufacturers would need to keep us as customers for their products and we would be able to ensure that reciprocal levels of trade continued. It is interesting to speculate on whether the Labour leadership competition or the EU referendum will cause splits within parties and the formation of subsequent new parties. Having survived for decades with their party split over Europe, I can't see the Conservatives needing to change, especially as it seems that Labour have shot themselves in the foot by electing a rabid leftie to lead them. Labour could wait their chance to depose Corbyn and then reassess their position, but if they cannot manage that a couple of years before the next election, they will be a strong contender as a party where a large faction allies itself with the Lib Dems to form another party. And then we have another situation mentioned by GM that is pertinent; the SNP. On the one hand, the Scottish SNP witch will be worried that Labour's lurch to the left that Corbyn entails is a threat to their prospects in Scotland at the next GE. She is already using this as an excuse for another referendum, on the pretence that with Corbyn unelectable, the Scots should have an opportunity to stop being governed by the wicked Tories. And then there is the prospect of antagonism being caused by the SNP taking the opportunity of stirring things in our English Parliament by siding with Corbyn on left-wing policies that affect only English voters, thus stirring the West Lothian issue so that we are more likely to accept the break-up of the Union. And of course, the SNP will have an ally of Corbyn over Trident. In the middle of this Parliament we have the referendum and UKIP presents another scenario where there could be a potential change to the political landscape. Once the referendum has taken place, UKIP as a single policy party has no reason to continue, unless it can reinvent itself to champion other national causes. So there are several interesting potential developments during this Parliament which could change things drastically within the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Cameron will continue to shift more money back to the wealthy. Or more correctly, allow them to keep more of their own money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Corbyn's election is a sign that people are wanting the pendulum to shift back Only 250,000 people voted for him. I doubt that will swing the pendulum very far. It's about the same as the Southsea Common branch of the Portsmouth supporter's club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Parasites is probably a but strong but Buy To Let is not doing anything but hinder young people trying to buy a house. My generation and my parents have been lucky enough to ride the housing bubble yet many young people today can't get a mortgage even though they work hard and have a decent job. When I got my first mortgage I didn't have a penny to my name, got a 101% and made 30K in a few years despite making the property worse. My parents have ended up with 4 properties yet didn't even have decent jobs. It's not fair and older people sat on massive equity (thanks to the housing bubble that caused the crash) and hoovering up all the affordable property to rent them out at profit is just wrong. It's not rewarding hard work it is just letting lucky people take the p!ss. I do actually agree with this. Housing market should be much more regulated. Those with the inclination would probably still be able to get around it by employing various corporate structures but there are a lot of very mediocre people accumulating vastly undeserved wealth easily through property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winnersaint Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 The sheer number of degree places and number of degrees that have been created stipulate that there is one hell of a student property market in any city with a University.... so, any city. Take half a million pounds to Derby, Coventry, Birmingham, Stoke.... you can create yourself £2,000+ a month of income and a property portfolio that in the worst case scenario will just stagnate. It's not parasitic, it's just good investment that deals with demand. They cannot throw up Halls of residence fast enough, office buildings are being turned into Student accomodation in Coventry.... and they charge, for a shoebox, 150 pounds a week. In Coventry. The standard terraced housing is a goldmine. I wouldn't look at Landlords as the issue, the issue is the market, Student rental prices are pushing up the private rental market. In an environment where it's more compelling to go short term why go for the residential market? Just under 40 years ago in the months following the FA Cup win I began my degree course training to be a teacher in Worcester. I can't really remember how many students were present within the then college of higher education but it wasn't huge. Most students were accommodated on site in halls of residence, a few lived out, usually because they were local and some came in daily from Birmingham and the Black Country, but they were very much in the minority. The student population made up a tiny proportion of the city's population and was self contained within the campus in St John's. Venturing outside involved going to local pubs, and that was about it. We as students in economic and social terms were an irrelevance. Fast forward to this time last year and we took our daughter to Worcester to begin life as a student there. It was an odd experience going back. In the intervening years via various name changes and amalgamations with other higher education institutions well in excess of 10000 students now attend the university. It is one of the fastest growing in the country, bucking the trend, with 20% more applications this year than in our daughter's year. The student population now represents around 15% of the city's total, and as such is now longer an economic and social irrelevance. Non more so in the residential lettings sector of the local economy. A drive towards the campus from St Johns, which in the late seventies was just simply a residential street is full of student accommodation. Our daughter shares a house with 5 others on the street. Each pays a bit over £100 a week in rent. Between now and when the lease is up at the end of June my daughter and her housemates will have paid in excess of £37000 in rent to the landlord. Buy to let is a growing business in Worcester. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Or more correctly, allow them to keep more of their own money. Whilst employing staff on or below the national minimum wage, or on zero hours contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Whilst employing staff on or below the national minimum wage, or on zero hours contracts. And, as a consequence, being subsidised by you and me as taxpayers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 And, as a consequence, being subsidised by you and me as taxpayers That ignores smaller businesses like nurseries. If the minimum wage rises to the level Jeremy wants then every nursery in the country will be out of business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 That ignores smaller businesses like nurseries. If the minimum wage rises to the level Jeremy wants then every nursery in the country will be out of business. Didn't the Tories say sh!t like that about about the minimum wage when Labour introduced it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 (edited) Or more correctly, allow them to keep more of their own money. Markets only work if they are regulated. Unregulated markets quickly become monopolies. Not many people want a return to an absolute monarch with a few supplicant landowners and everbody else as serfs. If you had a grasp of some economic fundamentals you wouldnt write half the stuff you do. Edited 14 September, 2015 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 That ignores smaller businesses like nurseries. If the minimum wage rises to the level Jeremy wants then every nursery in the country will be out of business. No it wont - it will mean the tax saved on tax credits acan be used to subsidise the higher costs of childcare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Only 250,000 people voted for him. I doubt that will swing the pendulum very far. It's about the same as the Southsea Common branch of the Portsmouth supporter's club. I dont mean this vote in isolation - you can see it in elections throughout Europe. The left and right are growing and the middle ground is disappearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 No it wont - it will mean the tax saved on tax credits acan be used to subsidise the higher costs of childcare. I'll believe that when I see the government prepared to pay a proper hourly rate per child. Never ever going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 (edited) Didn't the Tories say sh!t like that about about the minimum wage when Labour introduced it? You may describe it as sh*t but I doubt you have any experience in that particular sector. Try talking to nursery providers for their response. All those I know are finding the new rise incredibly difficult to cope with, particularly because they are also coping with the 30 free hours being introduced imminently (Southampton have volunteered to trial it for some unknown reason.) Edited 14 September, 2015 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 And, as a consequence, being subsidised by you and me as taxpayers I find this argument extremely tenuous. Are we also subsidising those who choose not to work at all and stay at home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 Nice to see your leftier-than-thou posturing was a total sack of sh it after all, then. I never once said I was totally left and I'm sure I wrote on here that I once voted conservative. But I am also a disabled person and I hate to see the disabled being treated as badly as they have been. I also take offence to the term "the benefit classes" wtf does that even mean? More tory nonsense? I would have been more for new labour but the minute they bent over and said "ohhh please Mr Camoron, we've been very naughty boys and girls, please punish those working class oiks with things like removing working tax credits and say, whilst you're at it, kick that kid in the wheelchair as well"...well that was enough for me. Corbyn is a throwback and the wrong person for the job but the rest just seemed to want to allow more of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoPints Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 That ignores smaller businesses like nurseries. If the minimum wage rises to the level Jeremy wants then every nursery in the country will be out of business. No they won't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 14 September, 2015 Share Posted 14 September, 2015 No they won't Without proper subsidies from the government they will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 15 September, 2015 Share Posted 15 September, 2015 I dont mean this vote in isolation - you can see it in elections throughout Europe. The left and right are growing and the middle ground is disappearing. That's an impressive bit of extrapolation there, and not what I see at all. I'm not convinced that middle England sees Syriza as a role model. I think Corbyn won because the "middle ground" couldn't get their act together and put up a candidate to run against him. One single candidate. The labour party organisation is still a mess, far too many vested interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now