Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Labour is Unions, companies and rich folk. A large amount of their money used to come from large individual donations. That has changed and most donors have left Labour and now they have not much more than the unions. It will be interesting to see if they get any money for the election.

I bet they do.

MK.

The figures (from memory) I used was incomes and not salaries.

But either would do.

The thing relevant is distribution of "income" to age of "group" who may wish to initiate in housing market and accept "unreasonable" risk.

Hyper-valuation, within the market increasing, due to subprime mortgage.

Also, more of a problem is low expected increases in incomes for the lower end of the income groups.

£200 grand for first time house Cyners, cant swing a cat round in them cereal boxes.

you obviously live in a very smart and expensive area ..... in any case, as a first time buyer, you can't expect to live in a some 4-bedroom detached with a nice garden

=============

MK - you're right of course; my brain was being unusually dead even for me, so add £8k pa = approx £650 pm for capital over 25 years, bring the monthly total to about £1,600 on a £200k house

However, don't forget there is surely still mortgage tax relief and also, as the years go by, both capital and interest get repaid.

i'm sure there's someone here who can readily work out the true monthly repayment (have arbitrarily allowed 4% interest over the period)before tax relief

anyway, surely it's better to have some help than none?

electionista ‏@electionista 23h
UK - YouGov/Sunday Times poll: CON 31%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 13%

Anyone else think theirs a chance of Britain becoming a 2 party nation?.

Heres my senario going up to next election...... Tories do a deal with UKIP and have 44% of vote, labour have 42% so obviously cant beat them even with fringe partys.

Lib dems become fed up and frustrated so join labour which gives them 52% of vote a overal majority of 8%.

As time goes by more and more Liberals fully join labour and both partys integrate, meanwhile Tory back benches cant do with extreme right wing antics of UKIP and their alliance breaks up.

Tories are left as a small fringe party and dead in the water.

COULD EASILY HAPPEN.

Cynic,

There is one thing which is not being taken into consideration and that is a number of first time buyers are graduates who have run up debts because University and "secondary" education "living costs" of £30,000-£40,000 by the time they get into the "work market".

It may be different for the kids of mummies and daddies, who have benefitted, or lived on down handed money. They may not deterred from going onto to secondary education knowing that they maybe bailed out by their parents.

The policies being introduced are splitting those from whose parents have, from those of parents who don't.

This is one of the reasons I dislike the many of the present Con party policies and the braying mob which they are designed for.

Also, I dislike the fact general taxation (Tax payers money) is being directed into subsidising those who have the good fortune to have an "income" high enough to purchase a property, against increasing the number of "state" owned properties for those on lesser incomes and prospects.

The Hairyfax seem to be offering near 5x salary for a single buyer.

ie, an income of £26k gets you an offer of £124800 without the bells and whistles.

An income of £42k will get you the £200k

http://www.halifax.co.uk/mortgages/forms/minicalc/container.asp#result


Doesent seem to be especially prudent.


Then tried the repayment thingy to find out how much per month, but it blew up :-)


Problem loading page


Sorry, the page you’re looking for can’t be found.

Fred did you know that 2/3rds of the houses Maggie sold off on the cheap have now fallen into private landlords hands.?.

>> Fred.

Good point about student debt, forgot that one :-(

By
Kevin Maguire

Ed Miliband should treat David Cameron like the loser he truly is
30 Sep 2013 07:52

One of the lessons of the past six months is the Labour leader should treat the PM with less respect

Dave Cameron's used to playing second fiddle to Boris Johnson but to be shunted to third in the queue behind Nigel Farage is personally humiliating.

Sensitive soul, the Prime Minister. Thin-skinned too, easily riled. And petulant if not treated with the deference he demands - aren't you David? So both Johnson and UKIP upstart Farage beating him in the Tory popularity contest will have the PM turning crimson in Manchester.

One of the lessons of the past six months is Labour's Ed Miliband should treat Cameron with less respect.

The destruction of the welfare state by Cameron and his axeman Iain Duncan Smith, who married into money, is an act of social vandalism that demands the gloves come off.

While both front crawl at weekends, Cameron in the Chequers pool, IDS in the pool at his wife's mini Chequers, disabled people hit by the bedroom tax fear eviction.

Nor is Trust Fund Tory "Sir" George Osborne short of a few bob.

The Tory leader evidently enjoys running the country, displaying the repellent sense of entitlement of a chap who believes he was born to rule.

But Miliband needs to finish what he started last week in Brighton and treat Cameron as a Number 10 tenant facing eviction.

Johnson looks down on Cameron, the old Bullingdon hierarchy when the London Mayor was senior club man continuing into contemporary Tory politics. Farage's contempt for Cameron is why a national Tory-UKIP electoral pact is impossible with Dave in Downing Street. It'll be excruciating for the PM when the "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists, mostly" stream out of the security zone to cheer Farage the Turbo Tory in Manchester.

I've seen Cameron put on a good face in public but inside he'll be hurting.

To embrace so publicly the Thatcher he'd shunned is a sign of weakness, not strength. The Tory slogan "For hardworking people" is a breach of the trade descriptions act when Cameron sides with six energy rip-off conglomerates against businesses and households.

Behind the studied self-congratulation is the slowest economic recovery in history, Cameron stealing the living standards of families.

Growth of 2.2% in three years when the Office for Budget Responsibility predicted 8.2% is why sidekick Osborne is a downgraded Chancellor.

Carving up the NHS for privatisation will come back to haunt Cameron. Cameron lurching Rightwards, posing in 2013 as the leader the Tory faithful wanted in 2010, won't help in 2015.

By the next election he'll have led the Cons for nigh on a decade. Familiarity breeds contempt and Miliband will be secretly cheered by Farage and, who knows, maybe Johnson, when he shows Cameron no mercy.

It's the best way of saving the welfare state and all that's good about Britain.



Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed-miliband-should-treat-david-2322703#ixzz2gMTjuhp1

I haven't got a clue about how the parties will line up at the next election, but I can see if UkiP, BNP and cons align themselves together, many Lib/Dems voters will vote Labour, in an attempt to prevent the "far right combination" getting into power.

The present tory rhetoric may divorce the "more moderate followers" from their rank ranks.

============

I wonder how many times maggie's name and stormy norman's names will be taken in vain by our gallant leaders this week at Manchester.

fred - you are rather (intentionally i suspect) muddling up several issues in one ..... i could certainly argue that many children should not go to university for worthless degrees in the first place and/or ask how many of them take term/holiday work to keep themselves at least half-way solvent .... but that is a totally different issue.

try staying with the question, which is really whether or not there should be help for first time buyers.
while there may be some question as to the detail of the plan proposed - i happen to think a £600k level is preposterous and should be set considerably lower - i think the concept can be nothing but good, but then of course i believe in private ownership ..... you may think everyone should live in a commune

btw, it is also exceedingly patronising (not sure that that is the right word) of you to think that it is only wealthy parents who help there offspring ...... that is total baloney, though heaven forfend that i should accuse you of bending the facts to suit your stance

Fred said.......
Fred1new - 30 Sep 2013 09:14 - 30168 of 30169
I haven't got a clue about how the parties will line up at the next election, but I can see if UkiP, BNP and cons align themselves together, many Lib/Dems voters will vote Labour, in an attempt to prevent the "far right combination" getting into power.

The present tory rhetoric may divorce the "more moderate followers" from their rank ranks...........................ends

more or les how I see it aswel hence my prediction of a 2 party country.

George Osborne in crackdown on jobless costs

Benefits claimants may be forced to attend jobcentres daily, undertake community work or go on intensive programmes


Patrick Wintour and Nicholas Watt

The Guardian, Monday 30 September 2013


George Osborne will continue the government's push to reduce welfare spending by announcing a nationwide scheme on Monday to force 200,000 long-term unemployed benefit claimants to either undertake community work, attend a jobcentre every day or go on a full-time intensive programme to tackle the underlying reasons for their failure to find work.

In his set-piece speech to the Conservative party conference in Manchester, the chancellor will also repeatedly warn that the battle to secure Britain's recovery is not yet "even close to being over" – a message designed to remind voters of the risk of returning to Labour.

The £300m jobs programme, appealing to the electorate's demand for stronger welfare measures, will start in April and will be aimed at 200,000 jobseekers allowance claimants.

Polling suggests there is continued public support for ever tougher welfare crackdowns and with the Tories trailing in the polls and in need of a strong response to Ed Miliband's populist conference speech last week, strategists have returned to one of their strongest and most familiar policy areas to push the message that they are on the side of hard-working people.

"For the first time, all long-term unemployed people who are capable of work will be required to do something in return for their benefits to help them find work," Osborne will say, adding: "But no one will get something for nothing. Help to work – and in return work for the dole."



More balony here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/29/george-osborne-crackdown-jobless-costs

GF,

I couldn't remember the figures for the sell off of "council" houses.

Was not against it and thought somebody who had lived in a house for 10 or more years should be able to purchase at approximately the going rate.

What I was against was that with the money raised further "council" housing was not built.

Also, although some of the "council" housing was not upgraded and newer stock and facilities improved.

From what I remember, even at that time although some of maintenance and building of properties was partly by council employed work force and sometimes by "contracted in" private concerns.

No problems with that, but the consequence was the the Skill labour force of council employees was reduced subsequent to the "housing sell offs".
---------------------


Also, relating to this the "bedroom tax" is obnoxious and expecting a person who has lived in a house for 30 years and likely to be in their 65-70s to move to properties which aren't there or outside their support communities is stupid.

It leads to greater fragmentation of society, but I suppose this is what Cameron meant by his "Big Society".

I wonder if Dave and George will give up a few of their state financed properties.

I think both partys can take the blame for not building enough houses Fred.

theirs certainly a supply side weakness and I cant see it being overcome.

Max so if these unemployed our out on the job 30 plus hours per week, how on earth do they get trained in new skills in order to enable them to rejoin the jobs market?.

Personnaly just think its another gimmick by the nasty party in order to try and boost support.

Nigel Farage has made an offer the Tories shouldn't refuse

The Tories are simply too unpopular to turn down a Ukip pact in local elections – it might just keep them in power


Simon Jenkins

theguardian.com, Monday 30 September 2013 09.32 BST

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/30/nigel-farage-tories-ukip-local-elections



'Nigel Farage is not going to win the next general election, but if he can help a few Eurosceptic Tories save their seats, he will win the thanks of many other Tories.' Photograph: Nils Jorgensen/i-Images


Ukip's offer not to stand against local Conservative candidates who agree with its policies should be a no-brainer for the Tories. Bring it on. Why should the party order a Eurosceptic Tory MP to commit suicide, just because David Cameron dislikes the Ukip leader, Nigel Farage? Why should the Tories collectively deny themselves any way of securing a majority in the next parliament for the same reason?

British elections are still in the dark ages. Indirect systems based on electoral colleges, which include the UK and America, are determined by "swing constituencies". An American presidential election is decided in just a dozen states, which means that campaigning is non-existent elsewhere.

British elections are not so clear-cut, but the principle is the same. The overwhelming majority of seats are "safe" and campaigning in them is a waste of time and money. Effort should concentrate on the 50 or so "key marginals". Of these, 32 Tory-held ones have been identified by the party's private pollster, Lord Ashcroft, as meriting total attention. And the most glaring fact about them, he shouts from the rooftops, is that Ukip has roughly tripled its vote share in them since 2010. Forget national swings. Focus on the marginals.

Farage has little to lose in these seats. He is not going to win the next general election – he will be lucky to pick up more than a few seats. But if he can help a few Eurosceptic Tories save theirs, he will win their thanks and the gratitude of many other Tories for being a decent sort of chap, which so far has been his chief electoral asset. Besides, as he says cheekily, "we are a party that believes in localism."

As for the Tories, they have done everything to help Farage's cause, from ineptitude over the EU referendum to anti-rural policies detested by many of their supporters, such as centralised planning, windfarms and high-speed rail. For the Tories to ridicule Ukip just now is senseless. It may be a fly-by-night protest party, but like the SDP in the 1980s, it has the potency to deny its mother party at least one election victory. The Tory watchword just now should be survival.

sticky - i think i heard on the radio this morning that the above applied to those who had already been through some gov't training scheme or other and still seemed disinclined to find a job ..... i could easily be wrong

for all that, i don't hear any squawks from CA (i think) where the unemployed are obliged to pick citrus fruit when in season if they want unemployment benefit

on the other side, reporting to the dole office every day is just nuts if applied across the board, for all sorts of obvious reasons, including swamping the damn place