Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2020 19:45:38 GMT
Yeah I think we can all empathise with why it’s happening, I saw a reference to Blair and Brown earlier for their unregulation of BTL and Brown’s attack on the pensions which meant investing in property became far more attractive and housing prices have soared from there. Yet more evidence of how New Labour are responsible in part for some of the poor social mobility issues we are experiencing today. But it’s like everything in life- in moderation BTL is fine, even needed as people need temporary homes for convenience for all sorts of reasons. But it should be capped- 2/3 houses at most. What we’ve ended up with is rich people with “property portfolios” (and footballers are a big actor in that sector) who build their ‘business’ and livelihoods around owning as many houses as they can get their hands on. They even have the cheek to call themselves “entrepreneurs” when buying more housing stock just because you can is about as basic bitch in terms of inventive ways to make money that there is. That’s the problem with the whole system- it takes no real intelligence it just takes a certain amount of money and a certain amount of privilege ( that gets you that money in the first place) and then once you’ve got two houses it snowballs and you can invest in more and more and then if you’re a real horrible bastard you convert those houses into HMOs and charge £500 a month for a bedroom in a house with a rotating cast of characters who live with you. The whole system is rotten to the core. I agree with the fact there is a problem, but not your solution. We do not need to constrict supply by punishing the private sector, we need to expand supply by more public sector building of social housing. That in itself will put downward pressure on house price and therefore affordability. You are right, absolutely, that a flexible rental market is needed to supply the younger, more job mobile population. Which is where a quality private sector provision kicks in. But trying to squeeze hard pressed families into that very sector, which is what we are doing doesn't work and costs the taxpayer oodles in in-work benefits. The economics of the madhouse. Well it’s one or the other- build more houses or restrict purchasing of them, they are dofferent recipes for the same outcome: more availability for the first time buyer with the knock on effect that more supply should make house prices more affordable and make it easier to save for a deposit. But, call me a pessimist, I really don’t see any sort of downward pressure out on house prices in my lifetime. We have got to a point where too many livelihoods and retirements are tied up in property. It’s a bubble and we even have the means to artificially keep the bubble inflated through the interest rate which the BoE will continue to lower primarily to avoid a collapse in the housing market. The entire system is set up to fellate the home owner and it annoys me as a non-homeowner because imo, if you can’t afford to weather the bad times you shouldn’t be in the housing market in the first place. The lack of any economic consequence for the homeowner only makes it harder for those on the outside looking in to get on the ladder because the state is complicit in ensuring their asset value only ever increases. So yes, let’s see what the coming years do to aid supply. Won’t be holding my breath! |
|
|
|
Post by devonblue on Jul 3, 2020 18:39:35 GMT
So LiarJohnson says No Deal is a very good deal with the EU. What happened to the oven ready deal?
|
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Jul 3, 2020 19:04:03 GMT
So LiarJohnson says No Deal is a very good deal with the EU. What happened to the oven ready deal? Well, you may have an oven ready deal in your own mind but any deal needs both sides to agree. And the EU will never agree to BJs deal without going to the last minute. Even then it may not happen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 15:48:48 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2020 16:01:16 GMT
The good news, just in case anybody missed it, is that we've passed the deadline for an EU extension.
We're off.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 15:00:43 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 15:12:44 GMT
Has anybody taken the BBC seriously for decades?
So let's look at what they are saying here; Government have serious questions to answer for going to where the supply was during a period of crisis.
This is the same BBC who continually line up Labour activists to interview and 'forget' to mention their affiliation to the party. The same BBC who, post the referendum, put a ratio of 3 remain panellists on their programmes for each panellist putting forward the argument for Leave.
This is a big shame, because once we had a national broadcaster that we could trust, now it's run by only one side of the political debate, and unless it changes, a lot, very soon, it's going to become a commercial channel, then we'll be right where America are, with 2 cartoon news outlets neither of which could produce an unbiased segment if their very lives depended on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 15:56:54 GMT
Has anybody taken the BBC seriously for decades? So let's look at what they are saying here; Government have serious questions to answer for going to where the supply was during a period of crisis. This is the same BBC who continually line up Labour activists to interview and 'forget' to mention their affiliation to the party. The same BBC who, post the referendum, put a ratio of 3 remain panellists on their programmes for each panellist putting forward the argument for Leave. This is a big shame, because once we had a national broadcaster that we could trust, now it's run by only one side of the political debate, and unless it changes, a lot, very soon, it's going to become a commercial channel, then we'll be right where America are, with 2 cartoon news outlets neither of which could produce an unbiased segment if their very lives depended on it. That’s as maybe- but it’s a deflection from the crux of the article which is PPE contracts being given to Tory party affiliates with no tendering process. If one were to be generous you could say that in isolation perhaps it could be considered an “oversight”, but this is off the back of Jenrick and his 1,500 unaffordable flats on the isle of dogs along with a legislative sweetener for a Tory donor. It all reeks of a venal government that is cut from the same mould as previous Tory governments- contracts for mates, the rich get rich richer and inequality in this country gets ever more endemic. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 16:16:16 GMT
Has anybody taken the BBC seriously for decades? So let's look at what they are saying here; Government have serious questions to answer for going to where the supply was during a period of crisis. This is the same BBC who continually line up Labour activists to interview and 'forget' to mention their affiliation to the party. The same BBC who, post the referendum, put a ratio of 3 remain panellists on their programmes for each panellist putting forward the argument for Leave. This is a big shame, because once we had a national broadcaster that we could trust, now it's run by only one side of the political debate, and unless it changes, a lot, very soon, it's going to become a commercial channel, then we'll be right where America are, with 2 cartoon news outlets neither of which could produce an unbiased segment if their very lives depended on it. That’s as maybe- but it’s a deflection from the crux of the article which is PPE contracts being given to Tory party affiliates with no tendering process. If one were to be generous you could say that in isolation perhaps it could be considered an “oversight”, but this is off the back of Jenrick and his 1,500 unaffordable flats on the isle of dogs along with a legislative sweetener for a Tory donor. It all reeks of a venal government that is cut from the same mould as previous Tory governments- contracts for mates, the rich get rich richer and inequality in this country gets ever more endemic. And if supply was slowed up due to a lengthy tendering process? At least those NHS heroes would have had more opportunity to practice their TikTok dance routines rather than deliver care I guess, then some may have been happy. It is what it is, if anything wrong has been done it'll come out in the wash, but the BBC trying to take a stance on literally anything at all where morals or questions of decency are involved, well, make your own mind up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 16:31:44 GMT
That’s as maybe- but it’s a deflection from the crux of the article which is PPE contracts being given to Tory party affiliates with no tendering process. If one were to be generous you could say that in isolation perhaps it could be considered an “oversight”, but this is off the back of Jenrick and his 1,500 unaffordable flats on the isle of dogs along with a legislative sweetener for a Tory donor. It all reeks of a venal government that is cut from the same mould as previous Tory governments- contracts for mates, the rich get rich richer and inequality in this country gets ever more endemic. And if supply was slowed up due to a lengthy tendering process? At least those NHS heroes would have had more opportunity to practice their TikTok dance routines rather than deliver care I guess, then some may have been happy. It is what it is, if anything wrong has been done it'll come out in the wash, but the BBC trying to take a stance on literally anything at all where morals or questions of decency are involved, well, make your own mind up. I posted some articles on here a couple of months ago that local businesses were complaining after being turned away by the government when they were offering to do runs of PPE, to the point they went direct to their local authority/NHS and I questioned at the time whether the red tape was simply that not enough “beaks were getting wet“. This seems to suggest I may not have been wide of the mark. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 16:33:23 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 17:01:10 GMT
And if supply was slowed up due to a lengthy tendering process? At least those NHS heroes would have had more opportunity to practice their TikTok dance routines rather than deliver care I guess, then some may have been happy. It is what it is, if anything wrong has been done it'll come out in the wash, but the BBC trying to take a stance on literally anything at all where morals or questions of decency are involved, well, make your own mind up. I posted some articles on here a couple of months ago that local businesses were complaining after being turned away by the government when they were offering to do runs of PPE, to the point they went direct to their local authority/NHS and I questioned at the time whether the red tape was simply that not enough “beaks were getting wet“. This seems to suggest I may not have been wide of the mark. Bad smell emerging from this pandemic handling fiasco. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 17:18:14 GMT
Be serious. Some battery manufacturer, with zero medical insight, has access to a few boxes of masks in a store somewhere in China, and the government say 'Thanks, but we need stock that we can trust, it's workers and patients lives at stake here, so we need to go to credible supply sources, or at least dentists etc who will have stock of known quality with a tracible supply chain and which have been known to have been correctly stored'. And that's a stick to hit the government with. Then, when you actually read what this battery manufacturer is saying, they wanted to make a profit for acting as a 'middle man'. So why no criticism of him in the same way as there appears to be criticism of someone else, who just happens to be a Tory? It's fine to say what you think, and we all do a bit of double standards sometimes, so I'm not trying to be overly argumentative here, just my observations on what's been said. The government have done plenty wrong during this, but not accepting medical supplies from a battery manufacturer and having him line his pocket as part of the deal isn't one of those things, this should be on the inside back page of the Parish Gazette, just below the Lost Budgie section, it certainly shouldn't be on our BBC's website. And this is why they'll be a commercial station in a few years time, probably before this term of government is ended. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 17:53:16 GMT
Be serious. Some battery manufacturer, with zero medical insight, has access to a few boxes of masks in a store somewhere in China, and the government say 'Thanks, but we need stock that we can trust, it's workers and patients lives at stake here, so we need to go to credible supply sources, or at least dentists etc who will have stock of known quality with a tracible supply chain and which have been known to have been correctly stored'. And that's a stick to hit the government with. Then, when you actually read what this battery manufacturer is saying, they wanted to make a profit for acting as a 'middle man'. So why no criticism of him in the same way as there appears to be criticism of someone else, who just happens to be a Tory? It's fine to say what you think, and we all do a bit of double standards sometimes, so I'm not trying to be overly argumentative here, just my observations on what's been said. The government have done plenty wrong during this, but not accepting medical supplies from a battery manufacturer and having him line his pocket as part of the deal isn't one of those things, this should be on the inside back page of the Parish Gazette, just below the Lost Budgie section, it certainly shouldn't be on our BBC's website. And this is why they'll be a commercial station in a few years time, probably before this term of government is ended. Where is Karen Brost’s medical insight? bylinetimes.com/2020/07/02/lifestyle-company-with-no-employees-or-trading-history-handed-25-million-ppe-contract/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:06:04 GMT
Be serious. Some battery manufacturer, with zero medical insight, has access to a few boxes of masks in a store somewhere in China, and the government say 'Thanks, but we need stock that we can trust, it's workers and patients lives at stake here, so we need to go to credible supply sources, or at least dentists etc who will have stock of known quality with a tracible supply chain and which have been known to have been correctly stored'. And that's a stick to hit the government with. Then, when you actually read what this battery manufacturer is saying, they wanted to make a profit for acting as a 'middle man'. So why no criticism of him in the same way as there appears to be criticism of someone else, who just happens to be a Tory? It's fine to say what you think, and we all do a bit of double standards sometimes, so I'm not trying to be overly argumentative here, just my observations on what's been said. The government have done plenty wrong during this, but not accepting medical supplies from a battery manufacturer and having him line his pocket as part of the deal isn't one of those things, this should be on the inside back page of the Parish Gazette, just below the Lost Budgie section, it certainly shouldn't be on our BBC's website. And this is why they'll be a commercial station in a few years time, probably before this term of government is ended. Where is Karen Brost’s medical insight? bylinetimes.com/2020/07/02/lifestyle-company-with-no-employees-or-trading-history-handed-25-million-ppe-contract/Maybe there was some procurement protocol that this company satisfied? Maybe the missing element was that this company were contracted to supply a certain standard and quantity, which it doesn't sound as if Matey in his industrial unit in Telford would have the infrastructure to manage? This is the job of the opposition, to question these things effectively, starmer isn't up to it, but hopefully there are people behind him who can work out what the questions are and ask them in the correct way. But one of those questions isn't 'Why wasn't a battery manufacturer in Shropshire awarded a contract to supply PPE'. Here's where that battery company trade from, hardly inspiring, is it, www.google.co.jp/maps/@52.6709665,-2.4211688,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_Km-_jrEW-Pm2p1v5ni_LQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_Km-_jrEW-Pm2p1v5ni_LQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D355.65955%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 On the last accounts I can see they had capital and reserves of £601, so yes, lets give them a multi-million pound contract. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:08:52 GMT
And it’s as well to bring up the elephant in the room: that we aren’t talking about some baker’s aprons or some hair nets for catering staff, we are talking about lives that are at risk so any amount that can be added to the pool of equipment is worth requisitioning- unless you think that the government are right to turn their noses up and risk lives being lost because 0 gowns/visors are better than 500?
By all accounts the stuff we bought from Turkey was utter tat so if you are going to try and defend the government “medical insight” is a strange card to play....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:09:41 GMT
Maybe there was some procurement protocol that this company satisfied? Maybe the missing element was that this company were contracted to supply a certain standard and quantity, which it doesn't sound as if Matey in his industrial unit in Telford would have the infrastructure to manage? This is the job of the opposition, to question these things effectively, starmer isn't up to it, but hopefully there are people behind him who can work out what the questions are and ask them in the correct way. But one of those questions isn't 'Why wasn't a battery manufacturer in Shropshire awarded a contract to supply PPE'. Or, maybe, not enough beaks were getting wet? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:15:53 GMT
And it’s as well to bring up the elephant in the room: that we aren’t talking about some baker’s aprons or some hair nets for catering staff, we are talking about lives that are at risk so any amount that can be added to the pool of equipment is worth requisitioning- unless you think that the government are right to turn their noses up and risk lives being lost because 0 gowns/visors are better than 500? By all accounts the stuff we bought from Turkey was utter tat so if you are going to try and defend the government “medical insight” is a strange card to play.... Not defending anything, just questioning why pick suck a vacuous argument with such a weak link to a company that imports batteries and solar panels from China when so many serious mistakes have been made. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:18:56 GMT
And it’s as well to bring up the elephant in the room: that we aren’t talking about some baker’s aprons or some hair nets for catering staff, we are talking about lives that are at risk so any amount that can be added to the pool of equipment is worth requisitioning- unless you think that the government are right to turn their noses up and risk lives being lost because 0 gowns/visors are better than 500? By all accounts the stuff we bought from Turkey was utter tat so if you are going to try and defend the government “medical insight” is a strange card to play.... Not defending anything, just questioning why pick suck a vacuous argument with such a weak link to a company that imports batteries and solar panels from China when so many serious mistakes have been made. Well that’s just ancillary to the main issue which is the strange circumstances surrounding the awarding of the contracts- to a Tory councillor and to a company with no business history. Put all that lot in with the isle of dogs nonsense and it’s not a very good look at all. Put it another way: would anyone dare to argue that this cabinet are straight as a die? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 18:19:13 GMT
And it’s as well to bring up the elephant in the room: that we aren’t talking about some baker’s aprons or some hair nets for catering staff, we are talking about lives that are at risk so any amount that can be added to the pool of equipment is worth requisitioning- unless you think that the government are right to turn their noses up and risk lives being lost because 0 gowns/visors are better than 500? By all accounts the stuff we bought from Turkey was utter tat so if you are going to try and defend the government “medical insight” is a strange card to play.... I think we understand each other's positions on this, my final comment, the bloke didn't even have the PPE, he knows someone in China who said that they did. It's a non-story. |
|
