-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
Completely uninspiring. She is a woman in need of a charisma transplant.
Gilzeantoscore
Justin Edinburgh
How is this clown, preselected for a seat nobody thought Labour could win be considered representative of the wider PLP? He's a nut! You have just reinforced the above post made by dza to perfection. What about Enoch Powell?
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
I set out how some are using higher education as a way to get loans that they don't have to pay back. That is wrong, it undermines the education system. Providers are getting numbers up and some people are more interested in the cash than learning. The qualification is a bonus not their main drive. The private colleges that to be honest specialise in this kind of education, was a Conservative initiative to provide cheaper higher education for inner city types. No need to dig further back to Labour. Furthermore, the current fees setup and student loans was also developed under Conservatives.
Unfortunately, your points about candidates are a generalisation. Some lower income people take higher ed courses and do very well. For example, studying social work, or training to be nurses. They might start out with very poor school grades but excel as they mature. Some 'bright' kids become exceptional at causing trouble or stealing. The intelligence and cunning needed to do this shows they have plenty of ability and capacity for innovation, planning and action. They don't well in school though. There are a lot of people who have high levels of ability, but say, don't have a family environment that encourages education while young. As people mature they develop their own paths, and some need to go back to education. Why would you deny that?
If you are able to identify the type of University you would like graduates to have attended, why are you wasting time interviewing people from other establishments?
monkeybarry
Ian Walker
The art of proof reading is dead I see.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Sounds good. Where do we sign? Push them back on the fishing stuff perhaps.
SpurMeUp
Jimmy Cantrell
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/mar/12/london-property-prices-plunge-as-brexit-effect-deepens
Actual Brexit would probably leave the UK with a bigger property slump and many with negative equity - repaying mortgages worth more than their homes. I think Brexit is now a face saving exercise. How can politicians exit the exit, while saving facing? The simplest solution is for leaders to simply outline why Brexit is so damaging, and give people a choice in a new referendum now we have the cards on the table. Previously people were voting largely in the dark, or for false promises. While it's still complex now, a lot more of what Brexit will look like, is apparent.
While wages have stagnated, prices have risen. Post vote the UK has suffered reduced growth and investment. But its the future Brexit reality that is most worrying. A divided Ireland, boarder checks, lorry queues, the loss of key UK industries like car manufacturing and financial services, falling house prices...hard brexit is not a reality even the most deluded Euro-sceptic would want now surely? So we move into a face saving phase.
This could go one of two ways - watered down Brexit, where we're more like Norway with some concessions, or a retraction of article 50. The problem is, politicians need some form of democratic mandate to action a withdrawal of article 50, and there isn't a lot time. But I think we will eventually, as the logic is relatively simple:
1. hard brexit would be devastating for a number of reasons.
2. soft brexit will leave no one happy. It delivers the EU with less sovregnity. Remainers don't want it, and most Leavers cite things that are important to them this form of exit would not address - immigration control and sovereign courts for example. And we'd have little input into the EUs rule formation.
3. if #1 and #2 are a given (and I await ScaraBoy's retort) then the only sensible thing to do is to cancel Brexit, and focus on the aims of Brexit while staying in the EU. The sooner this 3 stage logic occurs the less damage we'll incur. Despite many in power knowing this, no one has hit on how to make it happen. The face saving conundrum needs innovation.
Actual Brexit would probably leave the UK with a bigger property slump and many with negative equity - repaying mortgages worth more than their homes. I think Brexit is now a face saving exercise. How can politicians exit the exit, while saving facing? The simplest solution is for leaders to simply outline why Brexit is so damaging, and give people a choice in a new referendum now we have the cards on the table. Previously people were voting largely in the dark, or for false promises. While it's still complex now, a lot more of what Brexit will look like, is apparent.
While wages have stagnated, prices have risen. Post vote the UK has suffered reduced growth and investment. But its the future Brexit reality that is most worrying. A divided Ireland, boarder checks, lorry queues, the loss of key UK industries like car manufacturing and financial services, falling house prices...hard brexit is not a reality even the most deluded Euro-sceptic would want now surely? So we move into a face saving phase.
This could go one of two ways - watered down Brexit, where we're more like Norway with some concessions, or a retraction of article 50. The problem is, politicians need some form of democratic mandate to action a withdrawal of article 50, and there isn't a lot time. But I think we will eventually, as the logic is relatively simple:
1. hard brexit would be devastating for a number of reasons.
2. soft brexit will leave no one happy. It delivers the EU with less sovregnity. Remainers don't want it, and most Leavers cite things that are important to them this form of exit would not address - immigration control and sovereign courts for example. And we'd have little input into the EUs rule formation.
3. if #1 and #2 are a given (and I await ScaraBoy's retort) then the only sensible thing to do is to cancel Brexit, and focus on the aims of Brexit while staying in the EU. The sooner this 3 stage logic occurs the less damage we'll incur. Despite many in power knowing this, no one has hit on how to make it happen. The face saving conundrum needs innovation.
Last edited:
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Are the people complaining about a slump in property prices the same ones complaining about the lack of affordable housing? The two are obviously a zero sum game. Housing getting cheaper shouldn't be a concern for anyone apart from the greedy.
Like in many areas, Brexit done well will be both the impetus and tool to deliver massive structural reforms. Away from ponzi schemes and back to things that add value to humanity.
Like in many areas, Brexit done well will be both the impetus and tool to deliver massive structural reforms. Away from ponzi schemes and back to things that add value to humanity.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
House prices should be at 3-4 times annual income (that's the long historical trend). They are currently at nearly 8 times. Basically the value of houses needs to halve to correct itself.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
What's the reality? 20 years of property developers getting obscenely rich while the middle classes become priced out of home ownership? Late capitalism at its finest. No, you can't own anything, you have to rent it from us.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
that a drop in house prices puts a lot of people into negative equity
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Doesn't matter if they don't sell it. They just have to see out the rest of the repayments on the 8x salary basis they signed up to.
It won't happen dramatically anyway. Only a major population drop (might happen slowly after Brexit, but it would need to be plague/famine proportions to have a dramatic affect) or an enormous housebuilding programme (the former should negate this) would cause a sudden and permanent fall.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Corbyn's youthquake vs the baby boomers' and their saving. A class and generational war is coming in 2022.
House prices should be what supply and demand deem them to be. Lots of people want houses, not many are available - therefore houses cost a lot.
There's no housing affordability problem, there's a lack of readiness to move problem. Pretty much anyone can afford a house in Sunderland - if owning a house means that much then people would move. I want to own a Ferrari GTC4Lusso - the lifestyle choices I'd have to make in order to do so mean I have to choose something else. Many people want to own houses but choose to live in London or the South East instead.
Last edited: