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.

Happy days are here again.......




Help to Buy scheme take-up praised by David Cameron

PM says mortgage lending scheme helping first-timer buyers with 75% outside south-east on average price of £163,000


Andrew Sparrow, political correspondent

The Guardian, Monday 11 November 2013


Early figures on the take-up of the government's new Help to Buy scheme should allay fears that it will fuel a housing bubble in London and the south-east, David Cameron .suggested on Monday.

In a statement welcoming the news that 2,000 people have already put in offers on homes using the mortgage guarantee scheme, on properties worth £163,000 on average, Cameron said the money was helping young first-time buyers on average incomes.

More than three quarters of the applications have come from outside London and the south-east.The government has been operating its Help to Buy equity loan scheme for newly-built homes since April, but the Help to Buy mortgage guarantee launched only four weeks ago. It enables people to buy homes worth up to £600,000 with a 5% deposit because the government will guarantee 15% of the mortgage.

Downing Street said that 2,000 people had used the scheme to put in offers involving mortgage lending worth £365m. On average people are asking to borrow £155,000, for properties worth on average £163,000, well below the UK average price of £247,000.

More than three-quarters of applicants are first-time buyers and many are in their early 30s, Downing Street said.


More bollox here:
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/nov/11/help-to-buy-david-cameron

Stan - read the article on apprenticeships, and then you'll understand what it was about and be able to comment on it accordingly.

nevertheless, at least some of the points you mentioned are valid even if debatable - but not remotely applicable to the article in question

by the way, are you also saying that the apprentice should be obliged to join a trades union? ..... surely not

So more people encouraged to live beyond their means on our Low wage, Ageist and Sexist little Island eh?

What article is that Cynic, I must have missed it?

stan - i have yet to work out quite how this h-t-b thing works, as from my youngest's investigation, it seems to apply only to those who cannot raise the deposit .... that doesn't sound quite right to me either, but i'm sure there must be some strange hoops through which to jump ... that said, i'ld guess that a number of the big builders offer their own help scheme, just as car dealers do

It's all to do with people who cant raise a deposit for a £600k house.

that's not true either :-)

So why the sudden jump in prices and transactions?

Are people in general really earning more?

Grammar schools do not aid social mobility. Stop this deluded thinking

The figures show clearly that selective schools entrench inequality rather than help the poor. They should all be scrapped


John Harris

The Guardian, Monday 11 November 2013

What can we do about the seizing-up of social mobility, the yawning attainment gap between rich and poor, and all the other aspects of inequality about which politicians and commentators affect to fret? If you have never adequately understood the effects of post-Thatcher capitalism on inequality and always mistrusted the idea of comprehensive education, the answer is simple enough: rewind the clock to the 1940s, bring back selection at 11, and usher in a new age of exacting meritocracy.

Indeed, in certain parts of the country where children sit a version of the 11-plus and grammar schools have never gone away, little islands of wonder are allegedly thriving. Just listen to the former Independent columnist Mary Ann Sieghart, writing last year: "If you are bright but poor and you live in Kent, Essex, Buckinghamshire or Northern Ireland, your parentage doesn't have to dictate your progress. You have nearly the same chance of becoming a cabinet minister, a judge, a newspaper editor or a top rower as your privately educated neighbour. Why is that? Because these areas still have grammar schools, those turbo-chargers of social mobility."

Unfortunately, this is rot. Last week the Sutton Trust educational charity released a report about who exactly goes to England's 164 remaining grammar schools. Though the news was not exactly revelatory, the figures were still striking: 2.7% of their pupils are entitled to free school meals (FSMs) as against 17.5% in other state schools; 13% of entrants to English state–funded grammars come from fee-paying schools, more than double the proportion of 10-year-olds in private education; in areas that have stuck with selection, 66% of high-achievers at 11 who are not on FSMs get places at grammars; among those who are entitled to them, the figure is 40%.


More lefty claptrap here: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/11/grammar-schools-social-mobility-deluded-thinking

nothing to do with peeps trying to buy £600k houses for sure!

there's help around and frankly, i see nothing wrong with that at all .... certainly houses prices and transactions etc are still well below what they were several years ago, so equally certainly, no bubble remotely in sight at present

btw, the salary multiple for buying is no more than 4x which is about what it always was, so again, that puts a brake on peeps getting hopelessly over-extended .... there's other quite strict parameters too .... this is from youngest who is no fool (surprise!) and who earns a good salary

Cynic, see my post 550. In the mean time I wish to correct you on the x salary, Think that you will find it was x2 which was generally excepted as stable and reasonable, it also worked for many years very well.

David Cameron: 95pc mortgages will help people buy their dream home

David Cameron defends government's Help to Buy Scheme as new figures show 75 people are using it to make offers every day



By Steven Swinford, Senior Political Correspondent

10:30PM GMT 10 Nov 2013



David Cameron will on Monday defend the government's controversial Help to Buy scheme new figures revealed that 75 people a day have used it to make offers.


The Prime Minister will say that the scheme is "already delivering" and by helping thousands of families to buy their "dream home".


According to the first official figures released by the government, a total of 2,384 have put in offers under the scheme, which enables people to take out government-backed mortgages of up to 95 per cent. Ten deals have been completed.


Mr Cameron will tomorrow meet some of the first people to apply for mortgages under the scheme in Downing Street. The meeting has echoes of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's meetings with the first right to buy tenants in their new council home in the 1980s.


The meeting comes amid continuing controversy over the scheme. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, has warned it could lead to a housing bubble.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/10439606/David-Cameron-95pc-mortgages-will-help-people-buy-their-dream-home.html

for sure not when i bought in the 70's .... base was most assuredly 3x and, with persuasion, a bit more .... also, if buying as a couple, the second-earner's salary could be utilised (in some way) in the calc

It was 3 x main earner plus 1 x second earner.

Now it's 5 x main earner (at least) plus a bit more if you have a reasonable deposit. Not sure about the 2nd earner.

Whatever the x is, with the Low Wage rip-of Britain conditions that have gradually come in since you lot voted for them in successive Elections, then anything above 2 is ridiculous unless you work in certain Industries/Professions.

stan - bugger off and take your political soapbox with you :-) .... who says "anything above 2x is ridiculous" except you?

mk - categorically 4x is max .... youngest has just been through the exercise with a broker to see what he could borrow/afford and what property where

Another correction for you, I am talking about the "Economic Right Wing Extremism' that you lot continue to vote for that land this county in the usual cycle of mess after mess, So Cobblers to you... fish face -):

The low wage one hour contracts lark started under blair/broon..around 2008.

Wrong Max, The "Low Wage Rip-Off Britain" "Right Wing Extremist Economy" started with you lot voting for Thatcher in 79' time after time... and then the useless Major followed by Tory Blair.

stan - you're off on a (even more silly) tangent yet again .... it's the soapbox political ranting that is just so tiresome on this thread ... shame that a few of you cannot even start to discuss sensibly