Should Gord call an October general election?
September 2nd, 2008
Would this be in Labour’s best long-term interest?
Another opinion poll overnight showing not one iota of improvement in Labour’s position and another month goes by eating into the precious time the party has to get it right before it is forced to face the voters.
Labour’s situation is dire and it is hard to foresee the circumstances in which it can stop Cameron’s Conservatives getting a substantial majority. There is no positive indication anywhere - and there’s been nothing to suggest that it would fare better under new leadership.
Quite simply the Labour government that was elected on May 1st 1997 has run out of steam. The priority now, surely, is how can it return to power in the shortest possible period.
Even many of its own supporters have given up on it with Populus showing this morning that only half those who voted for the party in 2005 plan to do so again.
In the real world outside things look grim - the pound down to its lowest levels, prices soaring, and the threat of rising unemployment and threats of industrial action. On the international front there’s a Russia that’s flexing its muscles, worrying talk of an attack on Iran and the never ending fears about terrorism.
These are not the times for a lame-duck government to cling onto power. For when it loses office, as it surely will, the electorate’s memory of what life was like under Labour will be highly coloured by the final period.
Surely the earlier that the general election is the better it will be for Labour’s long-term chances. It can then start afresh with a new leader and new thinking while it watches the Tories seek to grapple with massive problems across the board.
Why not a statesman-like act by Brown saying he’s calling an October 30th election because a government with a fresh mandate is what’s needed to deal with the mountain of issues facing Britain?
Maybe Labour would be rewarded for doing something in the broad national interest and not just for narrow party advantage. Maybe the outcome would not be as bad as ministers fear. Maybe even such a move would reduce the numbers of wilderness years that Labour looks set to endure.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
This would be very wise for the Labour party, but I certainly won’t put a penny on it. If Gordon showed some balls, came out of September fighting, and showed us all that huge fist we used to hear about… things may not be so bad. They will be bad, but perhaps not in the current 24%-27% that I seem to see daily.
Disaster for Conservatives, bye-bye Brown, but Labour could come back once the smell has gone away?
This is my first post but I have been watching the site for ages. Does anybody still have any confidence in any bets about Brown out before NYE?
From a tactical point of view what he should do is resign, let a new leader get a team together that doesn’t include Ed Balls or Gordon Brown, and formulate some new policies.
Then they should ride the inevitable miniscule bounce to a thumping but not catastrophic defeat.
Calling a general election now, with the pound tanking, unemployment rising and a general air of utter uselessness all through the government would be the biggest party political suicide in British history.
It wouldn’t even be that good for the country as it could even lead to Scottish independence (the SNP would slaughter Labour all over Scotland).
In short, like most questions posed… the answer is a resounding NO.
For us on PBC though he defintely should because we could sell Labour seats and make a killing.
Brown hasn’t the courage. I hope that Darling forces him out, Miliband becomes PM and calls both an early election and Cameron’s bluff.
3 - He has lots of Courage. They are in a box next to his bed before hitting the remainders pile.
Should he? Maybe, interesting argument?
Will he? Not a snowballs chance in Hades.
Carrying on from the last thread:
RodCrosby claimed that the Naturalization Act of 1795 repealed the 1790 Act. This is true (section 4).
However, section 3 of the same Act provides that the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States.
http://rs6.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=538
That Act was repealed by the Naturalization Act of 1802, with similar language in its section 4 (http://rs6.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=002/llsl002.db&recNum=192).
I can’t immediately find a further Act repealing the 1802 Act, but if you can help, please do!
7. I would refer you to Prof Chin’s paper, where he discusses the meaning of “the limits and jurisdiction of the United States”.
On Topic:
An election now means the Conservatives can wait until 2013 for their election. If they can’t fix the economy by then, then whats the point of the Conservatives!
From Last Thread:
Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but are the states on fivethirtyeight.com seem to me moving Obamas way? Who cares about New Hampshire (4 electoral votes) if he can win Ohio (20 votes and latest poll has him 1% beind), and/or Virginia (13 votes and a tie on the latest, although older poll).
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/sarah-palin-compassionate-conservative.html
Plus here is a good summary of Palins views. Are Deomcrats running attack ads on these points yet? If not, why not?
8. A place is either within the limits of the United States or it is outside those limits. It cannot be “neither of the above”.
Consequently, to ascertain McCain’s citizenship at birth, we need not know whether he was born inside those limits or outside them, provided that we can demonstrate that either case gives the same result.
The 1802 Act was not repealed by the Act of Feb. 10, 1855, which reaffirms the language of the 1802 Act.
Not to mention Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada, where he is also ahead (as of Aug 26) and have a combined EV of 19. Thats 5 states, all of which went Bush in 04.
Regarding the requirments to be US President, why on earth are these rules in place anyway? Doesnt sound compatable with the “Imigrant History” of the US. Is their any law that says the PM has to be born in the UK? (Thats an acual Question, not a snotty remark!)
12 - No. We have no rules regarding that. Bonar Law was a Canadian.
10. Chin’s argument is that the Zone was outside the limits, but not outside the jurisdiction of the US, so the 1855 law (and others) did not apply to the Zone. Odd as it may seem, this was precisely what was recognised both by the Insular Cases, and the Act of August 4, 1937, § 1, 50 Stat. 558 ch. 563, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1403(a), which made McCain a citizen at age 11 months..
Read Chin’s paper. It is really well-argued and blows the cursory Tribe-Olsen opinion, which McCain relied on, out out the water…
14 - I’m willing to wager that this legal action will not result in the barring of McCain.
12. simon9999: why on earth are these rules in place anyway?
Granted that this is unsourced, but one of the articles I linked to in the last thread has a commenter claiming that The phrase itself originated in a 1787 letter from John Jay to Geo. Washington, that said: “Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”"
If McCain was born in the United States, he’s a US citizen by the Fourteenth Amendment. If he was not born in the United States, he’s a US citizen by the Acts of Congress I’ve already referenced[*] unless it can be shown that they had been repealed before his birth (and not replaced by other Acts of Congress with equivalent language).
[*]There is (AFAIK) no argument that McCain’s parents John S. McCain Jr. (born in Iowa) and Roberta McCain (née Wright, born in Oklahoma) were US citizens at the time of John S. McCain III’s birth.
12. Do you really think “the Framers” in 1787 could conceive (for example) of a Black man acquiring the vote, never mind being elected President, or of the strange island of Hawaii (discovered by Cook only nine years previously) one day becoming a state of the US?
Or of a canal being built through Panama?
There are certain laws pertaining to British PMs, but they are flexible, capable of being changed by Parliament alone (unlike the US), and I’m too tired to recall precisely what they are….
12 - They were put in place to prevent British people regaining executive control of the country when the nation was young and they felt threatened by Canadians to the north and any future colonists from Britain.
The law is anacronistic now and I am jolly surprised the constitution has never been amended in this respect.
14. RodCrosby: Chin’s argument is that the Zone was outside the limits, but not outside the jurisdiction of the US, so the 1855 law (and others) did not apply to the Zone.
If he wasn’t a citizen of the United States at birth, what citizenship did he then hold?
It’s absurd to believe that there can be a place that is neither within or not within the United States. All places must be one or the other.
It is questions like this that are a brilliant example of why written constitutions are, by their very nature, crap.
Is Barack Obama eligible to be President when he is the messiah? Surely he belongs to the kingdom of his Father rather than any earthly realm
And further to that, the choice of the word “and” instead of “or” in the 1855 Act is instructive. There are places within the limits and jurisdiction of the United States and there are places not within such. A place within the jurisdiction but not the limits is not <within the limits and jurisdiction.
I’ll try and knock up a quick image to explain this as it needs a table, which I can’t easily construct in a variable-width font.
16. See 14, and Chin’s paper. it is very persuasive that the Zone did not fall under any existing statutes at the time of McCain’s birth, and on the consequences of now claiming that it did…
16. Sorry, Rod, I’ve already explained that I’m not persuaded. You can describe it as “persuasive” all you like, but it won’t convince me.
16=23, ofc.
22. As Chin shows, there are 4 possible places, based on that language, and he further shows that those four distinctions are entirely logical, intended, and consistent with subsequent legislation… The Zone was one of them, but only belatedly acknowledged by legislation, in 1937.
It is very hard to see how McCain was a citizen at birth, and consequently even harder to make him “a natural born citizen”…
I havent seen much in the US Media (admititly watching from the UK) about the eligiblity of McCain issue. Is it something that could potentially explode over the next few weeks, or is it just legal semantics?
20. I agree entirely. They might as well be a Society founded on the true meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls…
Give me Parliamentary Democracy (for all its faults), over interpreting what was in the mind of Benjamin Franklin et al in 1787!
26.
There are indeed four possible places:
(1) within limits and within jurisdiction
(2) within limits, not within jurisdiction
(3) not within limits, within jurisdiction
(4) not within limits, not within jurisdiction
Your claim, AIUI, is that the place of McCain’s birth falls under category (3).
If the 1855 Act has referred to those born out of the limits orthe jurisdiction, it would only apply to case 4. If it did that, then there would be places not covered by either the 1855 Act or the Fourteenth Amendment (which pretty clearly covers only case (1)), but it doesn’t. It refers to those born out of the limits and the jurisdiction, and therefore covers cases (2) and (3) as well.
I agree with you at 28 and David Roe at 20, too, apart from the fact that this is fun!
28 - Plus, no matter how valid their arguments were 200 years ago, the modern world is different!
I also think the US constitution is particularly vile because it codifies the idea that a Black man is worth 2/3 of a white man… And women are worthless.
No matter what amendments exist it is still a bit grim to have it in black and white, so to speak.
Anyway, time for me to go home. Moving to my new flat in darkest Wembley. Moving in with my other half
Good luck, David!
Thanks! Hopefully she’s not in too bad a mood after an overnight drive down the M1!
22. Whilst these laws were originally aimed at stopping British re-assertion by stealth, the mid 19th century saw a resurgence of anti-immigrant feeling which partly gave birth to the Republicans in the lead up to the Civil War. Republicans adopted a strong nativist streak in the 1850s after their foundation (although this was probably opportunistic rather than being a prime concern) and amongst this rhetoric, the political rights of those born abroad loomed large. Mainly, they didn’t want hordes of immigrants coming in and voting for the some populist. In that context the 1855 Act re-affirming the language of 1802 is hardly a surprise.
Five Live reporting Stephen Harper is expected to call an election tomorrow (presumably later today UK time) and the election will be held October 14th.
27. Tough Question. Speaking as a disinterested observer in the UK, who finds admirable qualities in both McCain and Obama, I would certainly say that it ought to be determined by a court of law, especially as the POTUS will have to take the oath to “preserve, protect and defend” that pesky Constitution, which on its proper construction, may in fact debar him from the Presidency…
I can say one thing without fear of contradiction. Never before has the US been faced with one, never mind both, main candidates with seriously arguable questions about their background and eligibility.
McCain: first candidate to be acknowledged as being born outside the US (or its incorporated territories) [although there have been unsubstantiated rumours about previous Presidents; Chester Arthur for example]
Obama: never before has a candidate been acknowledge as having a foreign-citizen father, and spending formative years in a foreign country [and that's ignoring the rumours of foreign birth, Islamisation, etc..]
If I was a US citizen, I’d be outraged that neither candidate had addressed these issues (although McCain has made an attempt), but I’d be even more convinced that the silly “Constitution” belongs only in a museum glass-case, and not as the totemic text of the Nation…
36. RodCrosby: it ought to be determined by a court of law
I agree, though I suspect the present lawsuit will be thrown out as the litigant will be deemed to have no standing (not a candidate, not authorised by a candidate or candidate’s party to sue).
36- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BarackObamaCertificationOfLiveBirthHawaii.jpg
Do the rumours (or should that be rumors?) matter if he has one of these?
What if someone becomes president who genuinely doesn’t know where he was born? It is conceivably possible that a refugee or immigrant might abandon a baby at an orphanage (or whatever), and that baby becomes president, without anyone ever knowing the true identity or provenance of the baby’s parents or birthplace. I assume that the burden of proof is on someone to prove that they were born outside the USA rather than vice versa. As such the constitutional requirement is to some extent unenforceable, let alone unfair.
No, Gordon Brown should not call a G.E. Any government in this sort of depth of gloom would want to wait as long as possible to maximise its chances of winning or improving. Even if GB is so pessimistic that he thinks that Labour can’t possibly win the next G.E., regardless of the date (and I don’t for one moment think that he is), then he would want to (a) wait and hope just in case a miraculous unexpected event happens (b) ensure the survival of as many Labour MPs as possible - it is better to lose and end up with 220 MPs than to lose and end up with 150 (or whatever).
29. From Chin (edited to correspond to your ordering)
‘Wong Kim Ark thus recognizes four categories. A person can be:
1) both in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction, like a Chinese immigrant in California;
2) in the United States but not subject to its jurisdiction, like a British soldier occupying Washington, D.C. during the War of 1812;
3) out of the United States but subject to its jurisdiction, like a sailor on a United States warship in Tripoli. or
4) neither in the United States nor subject to its jurisdiction, like a Brazilian citizen in São Paulo;
Only persons born in the first category are citizens by birth under the Fourteenth Amendment; only those born in the fourth category to U.S. citizens are covered by §1993 [1855 law].
The Canal Zone is in the third category. Under doctrine of the Insular Cases, the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization’s conclusion that “Children of American parents in the Canal Zone are not outside the jurisdiction of the United States, neither are they within the limits of the United States” is inescapable.’
438. “Federal law says anyone born in the Panama Canal Zone after Feb. 26, 1904, as a child of U.S. citizens is declared to be a U.S. citizen himself or herself. Some have questioned, however, whether this makes McCain a “natural-born citizen,” a term the Constitution doesn’t define any further; the federal law took effect about one year after McCain’s birth, and doesn’t say the person’s citizenship was considered to have been acquired at birth.” (Oakland Tribune, August 28, 2008)
Maybe some embittered pedant will come along and try to argue that “natural-born” excludes those delivered by caesarian section…
39. First, under English Law, and I’d guess under US Law, no man is capable of giving evidence as to the circumstances of his own birth [for fairly obvious reasons.] The Courts will want not only documentary evidence, but if possible eye-witness testimony, that the John Smith on the birth certificate is the same John Smith who is standing in court today…
Rules on the citizenship of foundlings are complex, but you are basically correct. The presumption is of citizenship in the place of discovery, unless rebutted before the age of 21.
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0123-nugent.shtm
When I did A-Level Politics one of the possible essay titles we grappled with was
“The Constitution is what happens.” (quotation by Professor J.A.G.Griffith of LSE). Discuss.”
Equally, even a written and codified constitution (such as that of the USA) is open to interpretation according to what the lawyers or Supreme Court want to “happen”.
If McCain were, hypothetically, under a cloud of allegations of corruption or criminality, and if his selection as GOP candidate were tainted by all sorts of electoral or procedural irregularities, and if there were an alternative viable GOP candidate with substantial support waiting to stand for president, then the Supreme Court could quite easily find a way to interpret “natural born” in a way to exclude McCain from being eligible.
44. Oh **** stupid italics. End of italics should be after Discuss.”
42. I don’t think “embittered” has anything to do with it. The adherence to a 200 year old Constitution makes this bed, and everyone has to lie upon it, I’m afraid. As I said, there are at the very least arguable reasons why both McCain and Obama are ineligible.
41.
only those born in the fourth category to U.S. citizens are covered by §1993 [1855 law].
Which would be true if the word used was “or”, but it’s “and”.
As I commented back in June this year on Anthony’s site, I think he has plans to do so. The key deciding factor is a splurge in government advertisement (a.k.a. propaganda) on the main source of plebeian information - the TV.
I had made a similar claim earlier in the year, but June was the expected date. Many mocked, but my hunch was vindicated by an article in late June by Bagehot in The Economist. So sometimes you have to go with your analytical skills and trust your hunches.
Oh, and the Queen’s Speech is penciled for December iirc. That suggests the Government lacks a mandate to pass it’s legislation within a standard Parliamentary session.
46- No, Obama has a birth certificate saying he was born in Hawaii. Therefore he is eligable to be President. There must be some government office in Hawaii that has a copy of it.
48- Why didnt they have the election in June?
I asked this yesterday, but can someone explain why Darling isn’t obliged to resign after what happened to Sterling yesterday?
50
Why?
No previous Chancellor has.
(fired yes, see Lamont)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7590870.stm
“New tax measures come into force this month that should see about 22 million people receive a rebate of around £60.”
Think it will do any good? The American version was $600.
51 - who was the last Chancellor to manage to move the markets so dramatically and so directly? (with comments, furthermore, which later had to be ‘clarified’).
There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of an election being called. It would be political suicide.
53- Was it really that dramatic? The Euro going from 1.24 to 1.228 and the Dollar from 1.81 to 1.79?
53
Sterling had already fallen nearly 10% against the US $ in under 2 months so the Chancellor’s comments just helped the fall.
We’re all sick to death of Gordon Brown and would like to see the back of him and his wretched rabble of a government. However, no Prime Minister would ever call an election in these circumstances. If there’s no chance of winning, you hang on to the bitter end. The long term interests of the party aren’t even a consideration: posterity can look after itself.
Yes, but he won’t.
57- Maybe there should be a countdown on the front of the site. It’s only about 1 year and 9 months to go. Thank god Brown didn’t call the election and scrape through, otherwise it would be over 4 years!
The only advantage of their going early is for them to be put out of their misery.
58 and 6 are right.
O/T-To Jack W especially-you might want to read Chris Ayres’s article in today’s Times re Palin.Very balanced & might for a second prevent you showing how wonderful the “Messiah’s” ratings are.I do wonder if McCain is ever ahead in this race whether you would with such alacrity show the figures as you do with the Dems.
46. I agree with you regarding the flexibility needed in constitutions, and the American one provides some particularly good example of that, though it has to be said, it’s pretty impressive that what is basically still the same arrangement put in place two and a quarter centuries ago works as well as it does despite changes on the magnitude of the enlargement of the country and population, industrialisation, the development of electronic media, or the establishment of a universal franchise.
Even so, the Supreme Court is pretty adept at bending the rules to be what is necessary (the fact that there are so many dissenting opinions shows how possible alternative solutions could be arrived at). The Constitution isn’t completely rigid.
In this case, ‘natural-born citizen’ could be interpreted as being ‘a person who was a natural-born citizen at the time of their birth’ OR ‘a person who is now regarded as having been a citizen at birth, irrespective of what the legal situation was at the time’.
Gordon Brown calling an immediate GE to minimise future Labour losses and to usher a new mandate to tackle UK’s present economic troubles sounds plausible and would certainly be of benefit to the country.
Unfortunately, Gordon’s ego (legacy) comes before the Country, his party and a long way above other Labour MPs.
He’s staying put and we’re all post-coital.
62. What do you have against the objective reporting of opinion poll ratings (if they show Obama leading)? You had a go at me yesterday and are having a go at Jack today for simply mentioning that Obama is currently leading - which he is.
Anybody else seen the government’s latest cunning plan?
Not officially announced, by the poison dwarf was on Breakfast, and stated £200m would be spent on helping those in mortgage difficulty and £100m on helping those unable to put together a deposit.
The BBC’s e-mails seemed unanimously against the idea of putting taxpayers’ money into the market. Also, £300m is peanuts for the housing market. Bloody daft, although I suppose it’s better than a second Rock with £40bn on the line.
If Gordon were to call a snap poll now, it would certainly prove his earlier contention that his decision on the timing of a General Elecion is not influenced by the polls!!!
65-because the mechanics of US polling can appear slanted towards the Dems,as indeed in our country the same can apply to for example Labours lead/deficit.In 2004 Kerry was shown to be in front then lost suggesting polls were skewed.You also missed part of my point to Jack in as much being a Dem.as he is obviously is, showing with speed a Dem. lead would he in a reverse situation show a Rep.lead so quick.Apart from myself I also feel from the threads previously that a few others are slightly irritated by Jack’s obsession with the numbers when we are all capable of checking for ourselves.
62 david l. If you’d like me to read an article why not link to it ??
On polls - I’ve posted every poll, tracker, state and national that I’ve come across. Over the months in many state polls McCain leads and in a few national and tracker polls. It’s hardly my fault if McCain isn’t polling well presently in the later two catergories.
Why’s Blears doing the annoucements and not Flint?
68 As I recall, Jack W was quite sprightly (for his age) in putting up the one poll a couple of weeks back that showed McCain with a one point lead.
Apart from myself I also feel from the threads previously that a few others are slightly irritated by McCain’s inability to dislodge that “uppity” Obama from his poll lead….
66 Yes, no clear idea from the squirrels warblings how this exactly will help first time buyers - sure it might get them on the ladder but will this tax free loan be a charge on the property? In which case how are they supposed to pay it off in just five years? What will the charges be after that - will the repayment be spread over the likely 20 years remaining on the mortgage? With banks not offering more than 85-90% will the 1st timers not be reliant on potentially unlikely growth to be able to move on to rung 2 which just postpones the crippling of the market?
Will the uncharged interest be recouped if the loan is not cleared in full within the five years?
Idiots - the banks are criticised for overlending and have contracted their maximum lends to ensure a reasonable deposit is on hand before lending so the government say ‘oh no worries, we will lend you that interest free for five years’ - sickening vote-buying crap
simon9999 @ 59. The latest possible date for the GE is 3rd June 2010, so there are still a maximum of 639 days to go.
On a brighter note, the European Elections (already fixed for 11th June 2009) are a mere 282 days away now - 40 weeks from next Thursday.
Bring it on!
73 “there are still a maximum of 639 days to go”
That seems barely distinguishable from a life sentence…
Perhaps Mike could put up a countdown clock?
66. I normally translate such government sums into what it adds up to an average constituency. So £200m helping those in mortgage difficulties equates to around £300k per constituency. Say assistance of £1,000 per household for a year or £20 per week means 300 then benefit. This is around 1% of the households in each constituency. May be a greater % with a lower monetary help or a smaller % with a greater monetary value.
£100m for help with a deposit equates to £150k per constituency. Say average house for a first time buyer is around £100k (in some parts of the country) and deposit of 15% required, or £15K. If the Government helps to the tune of one third or £5k, this means ~ 30 people will get help in each constituency.
Irrespective of a “moral hazard” in the moves, they are not going to solve any deep seated problems in the housing market.
70, amusing you mention Flint. Not so long ago, Labour wanted to throw people onto the streets if they lived in council houses and didn’t look for work. Now, they want to spend taxpayers’ money to keep people in their homes!
I think Blears is Communities Secretary, or some equally awful title.
72, as you say, it will be interest free on the loan, but it sounded like there would be a charge at the end of the five year period.
72. It’s a couple of hundred meillion pounds. Won’t go anywhere in the market. It’s all New Labour spin with nothing behind it and in a years time, I bet none of us will know anyone who’s benefitted from it. Why is Blears and not Flint doing the announcement, probably because Flint knows this means nothing and can’t be relied to spin it.
70….and to think that Blears is a member of the Cabinet. God preserve us!
76 yes, she seemed reluctant to go into details of the five year kneecap clause
The Next Tuesday gang just get better and better
69-Jack-because if i’am honest I do not know how to do it.Again you miss the point re polls because as a Dem supporter you’re ever so keen to rub salt in the wound when we are all capable of checking the “Messiah’s” lead on our own.
O/T - Nick Clegg expecting another child.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7593230.stm
79, Next Tuesday? A reference to Brown’s political life expectancy?
81. Is this obligatory for every serving political leader now. Perhaps that’s where Ming went wrong. Should have got a younger woman up the duff.
82 no, a referene to ’see you next tuesday’ - applicable to the Labour posse en masse - hence the Next Tuesday gang
81 - Glad you only mentioned the baby news when it was confirmed, and didn’t speculate on all those internet rumours. Nick Clegg will surely come under pressure to marry his wife now, and the Lib Dems standing on family issues will be weakened, although the socially conservative wing will be pleased that they are keeping the baby…
And on-topic I agree with the ‘he should but he wont’ train of thought. The ego, and the perks of office will be just too strong to let go of by choice.
84 The See You Next Tuesday Squad would really tell it how it is….!
80 david l. On linking do this :
1. Click the link you want at the top of your screen. It will turn black.
2. Right click. Box pops up. Click “cut”. The link will disappear.
3. In the PB comment box right click. Box pops up. Click paste.
4. Bingo !!
On polls we’ll have to agree to disagree.
81. Has Clegg been to Alaska recently?
@80:
Shush you. JackW may be unashamedly probama, but he can’t be *blamed* that Obama keeps polling better than Mac.
He provides his ARSE (BUTT) free of charge out of the kindness of his own Jacobite heart. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.
86 yes thats true! Bunch of SYNTS! lolololol
88 He’s certainly been out in the cold these last nine months!
SkyNews: PM to tackle housing crisis.
No wonder the Footsie and Sterling are heading South…!
Hahaha. Just checked on Labour Home. Apparently the Tories are proposing an unfunded tax cut pledge. Oh noes!
*cough*£2.7bn*cough*
Glass houses, eh, Labour?
92 “PM to tackle housing crisis”
He start by making Number 10 vacant….
94 MM.
80. I for one welcome Jack’s posting’s of the latest polls. They’re pretty easy to pick out so if you don’t like them, skip over them. For people who bet, they’re helpful information (out of interest, do you bet?).
As for whether they’re accurate predictors, as with any opinion poll, they can only tell you what the situation was a couple of days ago, they can’t project a result two months into the future (or even for the same day they’re released); to get a prediction, you need to add in a judgement call about how opinion might move between when the poll was taken and the election taking place. IIRC, it wasn’t just the opinion polls that predicted a Kerry win in 2004 - on election day itself, Kerry looked the likely winner and his odds came in to about 1/3 at one point. Does that prove that the polls are / were useless? That depends on what you use them for.
92, just checked the site. Apparently the government may be giving a stamp duty holiday after all. Sky also has the price of Labour’s housing package as £1bn, though no details of how it reached that sum.
96 “Does that prove that the polls are / were useless?”
No - just that the voting machines were hacked….
94 - The voting public will reposess in due course!
On topic - no, though I’m tempted by Marquee Mark’s argument at 67!
On the eligibility thing, I’m not usually a fan of Martin Coxall, but I did enjoy his post the other day, hoping that *every* rumour is true - neither candidate is eligible, Joe Biden is a lizard… But of all the areas on which to attack McCain, questioning his Americanism must rank absolutely bottom.
Morus made a good point that at the top the election has been unusually civil. It’s probably helped that McCain, Obama and Clinton are all Senators - it’s difficult to be really nasty about someone you’ve worked with reasonably amicably for years.
97 So the Govt is going to solve the housing crisis - and all by spending about a third of the bribe it gave to the voters of Crewe?
Sheeesh……..
@98:
Just an aberration of the electoral college, isn’t it.
O/T In tonight’s tennis match between Muller and Davydenko I am recommending Gilles Muller with a +7 game handicap at 5/4 with bet365.com. Muller has been playing superbly and his serving and groundstrokes are the best I’ve seen from the Luxembourgian.
Muller has beaten Tommy Haas and Nicolas Almagro in 5 sets in the last two matches - both of whom are classy players with big groundstrokes like Davydenko’s. His style of play is very efficient and rallies are short, so these matches shouldn’t have caused much fatigue.
Muller’s excellent serving (38 aces in last match) will make every set a tight affair. Davydenko will be hard to beat and Muller has yet to take a set off him, but this is a different Muller at Flushing Meadows and I can certainly see him running him very close. The crowd in New York respond well to Muller’s expressive style and he’ll have their wholehearted support against his Russian opponent later today.
100 Nick, Is that why you are so nice about Gordon?
To call an election you are likely to lose two years before it’s necessary would be the actions of someone insane.
I looked at one of my posts from last autumn, urging GB to go then, and pointing out what would happen if he didn’t, I was pretty much spot on.
The tactic now should change! When in this situation do something totally different and unexpected. Use the party conference, too announce the date of the next GE, first Thursday in October 2009, there’s nothing like knowing the date of your hanging to concentrate the mind.
The GE should also be declared as ‘Year Zero’ the first day of the, ‘Politics of the 21st century’ on that same day three referendums, a nationwide one, on the EU in-or-out, with an extra referendum in Scotland and Wales on independence.
Win or lose, the incoming government would have a lot on its plate.
On Palin, well they live in Alaska! can’t imagine there’s much else to do, it’ll only be a scandal if the father of the child is her brother: or perhaps not!.
I presume Blears did the interview because she’s the cabinet minister, and Flint is only a Minister of State albeit one who attends cabinet. It would look even less like a “relaunch” if you put up a junior minister to propose it.
105. Or someone with the best interests of the country at heart.
100.
Of course you’d say “no”, Nick: you’re biased!
The oldest cliche relevant to this post is still the wisest: Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas. That is, after all, why Brown is still Prime Minister. There’s always an incredibly slim chance that something will turn up to change the political situation, for instance, in ascending order of improbability:
- Cameron may fall flat on his face in some way
- the economy may just start to recover in time, and the voters may give Brown some credit
- Brown may develop some charisma.
On thread, the PLP would drag Brown to the mental asylum if he threatened to call a general election this autumn. It’s not like a football match where you can dust yourself off, receive a pep talk and start again next time round. As it stands we’re heading for a such a big defeat that would lose so many of the key MPs we’d be relying on to get us out of opposition in the future. It’d be like Man Utd having lost to Zenit St. Petersburg being denied Ronaldo, Rooney, Vidic and Nani for the rest of the season.
87-thanks Jack-re polls accepted-but plse read said article if so inclined.
89-Point taken.
96-No I don’t bet-points noted-by the way I cannot see from previous threads where I took a “pop” at you.
108 Like the saintly John Major did.
108. Stickyfingers. Handing over the governance of this country to the Tories and the Prime Ministership to David Cameron when there is a possibility it can be avoided would be a crime of such proportion that it would make the actions of Vidkun Quisling look noble.
I think Michael Palin would go down well at the RNC as well as Sarah - is it possible he got “vetted” and became Sarah?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQOMxz-O7Sc&feature=related
I don’t think government’s should involve themselves in the housing market at all.
The government has just announced (I think) a one year stamp duty holiday.
116 - Indeed for properties under 175k.. so any house currently on the market for say 190k will be deluged with offers of 174,995 etc..
#116
Ah, but Northern Rock makes the Government involved.
Must say a lot about the mentality of Rusty Brown. Gives independence to an efficient Bank of England (a good thing) then wastes multi-billions to nationalise a failed bank [sic].
What’s the word that summarises such logic…? Ah yes - tw*t!
O/T - Virgin Airport? Please god no…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7593310.stm
Oh dear - anyone with a £190k house for sale has been shafted.
#119
Virgin airport? A Mecca to wannabe Jihadist perchance…?
118
They shouldn’t have done that either. The only duty government’s have when dealing with the free market, is to warn people of the consequences of irresponsible behaviour.
Northern Rock was the result of greed and stupidity, brought about by the folly of de-mutualisation. Building Societies they were and Building Societies they they should have remained.
‘To call an election you are likely to lose two years before it’s necessary would be the actions of someone insane.’
We’re in with a chance then!!
I thought - yes, I do have some sensible ones once-and-awhile - about the stamp-duty holiday…. How many houses of under £175,000 exist in Southern England?
My guess is not many. More pork-barrel politics to the Northern clans and khanates…!
112 david l. The Ayres article on Palin is a perfectly decent piece but we’ll just have to wait and see if she comes out of the media vetting unscathed.
Link to article below …. you failed to do it …. naughty lad !!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4656243.ece
Brown is as likely to call an October election as he is to stick heated needles in his own eyes. As for ’should’, should we relish the option of these experienced no-brainers being replaced by inexperienced bears of equally little brain and no obvious alternative agenda? Take the housing crisis - What WOULD the Chameleon crew do?
Morning all
Mike puts forward a compelling argument at least for those interested in the long-term future of the Labour party (and those interested in the future of democracy since I’ve seen little to suggest that long periods of one-party Government really work to the country’s best interests).
I’ve argued here before that the distinction between voting against Labour and voting against Gordon Brown is crucial. It was the case in 1997 that John Major (undeservedly) came to embody all the resentments, anger and plain hatred that had built up against the Conservative Party. By taking that and vesting it on himself, I suspect Major thought the Conservative party would achieve the decontamination that it actually took the election of David Cameron to bring about.
IF Brown wants the “sins” of the Labour party to be vested on him, fine. His defeat may be the start of the revival of Labour though it will take time. Mike’s argument is that it’s better to start this process now than leave it until 2010.
It’s more difficult when you’re in office, I think. That kind of perspective may not be anything like so clear. I don’t know whether Brown, deep down, believes he can still turn it round. He may argue (with some justification) that Labour was elected to serve a full term and that’s what they should do.
It’s also about the trappings of power and the ability to influence and shape events. If you go into politics on the basis of wanting to be able to do that (for the greater good), it’s incredibly hard to voluntarily surrender that power or to accept that you’ve failed.
Yes Brown should call time on this government, but he won’t.
But will his colleagues in the cabinet call time on his premiership?
Another thought on the stamp duty announcement, it actually only impacts houses currently values between 125,001-175,000. It is a gesture only. It is going to save people at most £500.
126. Hopefully let the market settle where it wants, rather than trying to kickstart a property market that is hopelessly over-inflated anyway.
125 david l. Further …. here’s a piece in this mornings “LA Times” on the Palin pick. It seems many in the GOP have a fingers cross attitude presently :
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-palinassess2-2008sep02,0,3826591.story
Thsi stamp duty thing is beyond parody. Now all houses up for £180-210K will not sell for a penny more than £175K.
Save £1750 on stamp duty today… or wait 2 weeks and save it on the asking price given the 2% per month falls we are seeing anyway.
Pathetic, risible and costly - yet more tax revenue lost.
On topic, the election can’t come soon enough, this lot are an absolute joke.
Blears was on the radio this morning bleating about her concern for “decent familes”. Where was she and her disatrous government when house prices were shooitng up for years, putting the cost of owning a home up precipitously? They didn’t seem to mind at the time, and did precisely nothing to stop rampant insane house price inflation which is the biggest cause of the current bust. Her alleged concern is years too late. I’m so angry with these idiots.
125-Sorry.
The policies which seem to be oozing out of Whitehall today show how pointless this government is.
Stamp Duty holiday - we know this doesn’t work. History has shown it. They ensured it will fail this time by leaking it ahead of time - thus causing the market to completely stagnate. We are in for at least a couple of years of stasis within the housing market.
The other parts of the scheme sort-of-announced by Hazel Blears do not amount to anything that will really get things moving. As the FT point out, it is just storing up trouble for the future - and making the state responsible for even more debt. If, as she is claiming, this is all money set aside in the budget - why is it only being announced now? Surely it is better to intervene before things get really rough than to wait until you are sinking before sending out a couple of life boats to rescue thousands of drowning people.
I really do not want to think it - but the evidence is mounting that Brown is ensuring that whoever follows him will have to spend years paying for his scorched-Britain spending policies. Has there ever been a politician who appears so spiteful?
I don’t like stamp duty - in a capitalist society there shouldn’t be a tax on buying or selling. There should be a tax on profit, so I would prefer to be see capital gains tax instead. The change could be revenue-neutral, so it wouldn’t be a tax increase, just arguably fairer.
However that might be a bit radical for some, so why not reform stamp duty properly? It is currently a stupid tax which introduces blocks in the market, as has been noted.
At the moment if I buy a house for £174,000 I pay nothing. If I buy a house for £175,000 I pay 1%, £1,750. I then pay 1% up to £249,000 so I pay £7,500. If I then buy a house for £250,000 I pay £7,500.
So why not make stamp duty properly progressive so I pay nothing on the first £175,000, 1% on the next £100,000, 3% on the next £250,000 etc? It would remove all these sticking points at particular price levels.
Littlejohn is as acid as ever…..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1051576/Richard-Littlejohn-Mayday-Mayday-Brown-Hawk-Down.html
135 Oops that should be
I then pay 1% up to £249,000 so I pay *£2,500*
So with regard to Browns planned ‘help’ for first time buyers, let me get this straight: Brown, in alliance with certain property developers, intends to offer young, first time buyers 5 year interest free loans, upto 30% LTV, in an attempt to sucker them into buying certain new build property which nobody else would touch with a bargepole, many of which remain unsold after some considerable time on the market, and whose prices are dropping through the floor and will only continue to fall for months/years ahead.
Well, if that’s Browns idea of ‘helping’ first time buyers I would hate to see what he would do if he had it in for them!
One other thing that only really struck me yesterday…
I vaguely recall that when it was announced just before Crewe & Nantwich went to the polls, the increase in personal allowance was being presented as giving everyone £120 by way of a tax rebate in September. Now, the devil always being in the detail with GB, it is £60 in September and then £10 a month for 6 months.
They simply cannot tell the truth.
I agree with Mike Smithson that the smart move for Labour would be to call a GE (or replace Brown) and minimise the scale of the defeat.
But Labour seem incapable of making the right political decisions and Brown lacks the courage to put his party before himself.
Today we have an announcement on stamp duty to overcome the damage that their rumour of ending all stamp duty has done to the market in recent weeks. Duh.
124. Yes, the whole package looks like a rather feeble attempt to bolster the crumbling core support base. A few measures which might prevent a few hundred repossessions and a tax holiday that will only be meaningful for low value properties.
This isn’t going to have any impact against the tidal forces of credit restriction, rising unemployment and collapsed consumer confidence - it’s just p*ssing in the wind. And the government klnows this - as usual with New Labour, it’s just a cynical attempt to appear to be doing something. I doubt many people will taken in.
Interestingly on Newsnight last night there was mention of some Labour ministers pushing for a higher top rate of income tax - now that would really be economic suicide in the current environment. But the fact it’s even being considered suggests core vote/scorched earth strategies are now the order of the day within the Fuhrerbunker.
138 - Indeed and the ‘fee’ at the end of 5 years is gloriously opaque. Are there going to be government mafioso types arriving at these homes saying ‘now we can do this the easy way or the hard way’?
130
Here is Mrs Thatcher showing the, ‘Tory Way of non-interference.
1974 Oct 9 We
Margaret Thatcher
Written Statement on housing and rates
Document type: public statement
Document kind: Written Statement
Venue: Conservative Central Office, Smith Square, Westminster
Source: Conservative Party Archive: CCOPR GE 235/74
Journalist: -
Editorial comments: Embargoed until 1030.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 263
Themes: General Elections, Housing, Monetary policy, Local government, Local government finance
HOMES AND RATES
Our five pledges are:
1. To reduce the maximum mortgage interest rate to 9½ per cent by Christmas and see that it goes no higher. This will not affect the rate of interest paid to depositors. Those handful of people who have very large loans will only get the benefit of the 3½ per cent ceiling on the first £25,000.
2. To help first-time home buyers save for the deposit with a £1 grant for every £2 saved regularly, up to a maximum of £5 weekly, over two years.
3. To give council tenants of at least three years’ standing the legal right to buy their house or flat at two-thirds of the market price.
4. To give immediate help to all ratepayers by transferring the cost of teachers’ salaries and more of the cost of the police and fire services from the rates to the Exchequer as from next April.
5. To abolish the unfair system of household rates altogether over the normal 4–5 year period of a Parliament and replace it by a fairer and more broadly based system of taxes.[fo 1]
These are five firm pledges which a Conservative Government will carry out.
Mr. Harold Wilson has accused us of making “irresponsible promises” and of bringing the electorate. This is precisely the sort of language Mr. Wilson used during the 1951 General Election when he described the Conservative pledge to build 300,000 houses a year as “an electoral trick” and “a cruel deception”. We kept our promise then and we will keep our promise now.
138. On another note, I would be royally annoyed had I purchased a property on a development and the rest of it was bought up by government for ’social housing’.
138 voxpop. Is that a buy now and lose 10% of your investment over the next year in return for a 1% saving?
141, aye, I heard that. Surely it invites comparisons with “until the pips squeak”?
120 - indeed. Why on earth stamp duty isn’t properly layered like income tax is beyond me - it would put a stop to all the b*llocks around the thresholds. If they got the thresholds right they could even present it as a saving for nearly all households yet still balance the books (though personally I wouldn’t; a tax on mobility isn’t imo a very good idea).
e.g. 0% on first £175,000
2% on next £125,000 [to £300,000]
4% on next £200,000 [to £500,000]
6% on next £500,000 [to £1m]
8% thereafter
131-Thanks-she needs a bold speech-i still think she potentially has the right credentials if channelled properly.
OT. Can’t link as on my phone, but the BBC website reports a state of emergency has been declared in Thailand.
I hope SeanT’s OK - we haven’t heard from him for a few days.
135 - ah, you seem to have anticipated my post at 149 nicely
144 ChrisM for more than a year that has already happening in many developments. Yes the private buyers are very annoyed that “key worker” property is now being used for social housing with the attendant feral kids etc. There has been a glut of flats with few private buyers in many areas which preceded the credit crunch.
143. The Tories’ platform in 1837 was far worse, I believe.
131. JackW. An interesting article about the choice of palin. By the sound of it McCains wife might be a bigger problem than his running mate. This made me laugh out loud:
“McCain’s wife, Cindy, told an interviewer over the weekend that Alaska’s proximity to Russia bolstered Palin’s credentials, and Palin has pointed to her leadership of the Alaska National Guard and her Army son’s imminent service in Iraq as evidence of expertise”.
145. No, it’s a loan with an interest rate that will be made up at some point in the future.
138 Yes it looks like more of an attempt to help developers. Most FTBs buy pre-owned property, in fact depending on where you live there might not be any suitable newbuild property so this will only operate on a random basis.
Why “help” people earning up to £60K? Last time I looked, even today that’s a pretty decent salary and you should be able to get a mortgage of £200K+ off your own bat. Why should I pay tax to help people better off than me? At the very least it should have been restricted to people on below average salaries.
Oh yes… this is aimed at making sure developers can sell their fancy newbuild apartments at something like they were hoping to, rather than at the market price.
If any company has put all of its eggs in one basket, ie housebuilding, surely it should suffer the consequences of a market correction? If developer wants to protect itself from the markets it should diversify.
The idea that Brown will call an ealry GE is a nonsense.
All losing MPS would lose the salaries they would be paid until the next GE plus their expenses, plus pension entitlments.
All this talk of good for the party or country is flimflam. It would be BAD for Labour’s MPs, Ministers and other MPs who lose their seats..
No-one in private industry would do it.
I am delighted if they continue: their scope for fiscal movement is limited, and they will destroy the Labour Party’s reputation for fiscal competence for 2 generations: and hopefully its nonsensical attitudes to wealth generation.
As for the new housing stuff, it’s like putting a bandage on a wound with a bleeding artery. And about as effective.
155. There’s a very unpleasant whiff about that part of these proposals, I agree. No connection with Labour’s own funding problems, I’m sure.
Is Sarah Palin the secret lovechild of Michael Palin and Sarah Greene (of Blue Peter fame)?
As Sarah Palin’s husband said, here’s a Veep I made earlier…
This idea of restrating the housing market prematurely, is barmly, IMO. What we are seeing is a natural and much needed correction. For Brown to interfere and try to get things going before the market has finished its correction is very risky. The greatest risk, surely, is that people are indeed encouraged to go out and buy property this autumn, and then face the prospect of the housing market continuing to fall through the next six to 12 months, thus bringing more people in negative equity?
Brown just can’t help himself, can he? He has to interfere.
This idea of restrating the housing market prematurely, is barmly, IMO. What we are seeing is a natural and much needed correction. For Brown to interfere and try to get things going before the market has finished its correction is very risky. The greatest risk, surely, is that people are indeed encouraged to go out and buy property this autumn, and then face the prospect of the housing market continuing to fall through the next six to 12 months, thus bringing more people in negative equity?
Brown just can’t help himself, can he? He has to interfere.
150 We were probably typing away simultaneously.
153 Roger. Good to have you back.
The jury is still out on Palin. However McCain has lost control of the media narrative on her and both the MSM and blogs are all over Palin like a rash and this is not what the GOP wanted in convention week.
Laters.
Plenty of not unsurprisingly negative comment on the stamp duty “holiday”.
Two thoughts: - first, £175k is meaningless in much of the south, including London. You can’t even get a studio flat in some parts of London for that so the impact in many parts of the country is going to be negligible.
Second, the stamp duty anomaly has existed for a long time. It has acted as a ceiling to some extent though not when the market was overheating. Ultimately, as a seller, it depends how badly you want to sell and as a buyer how badly you want to buy. Houses are still selling but not at the unrealistic values that some sellers thought they could get away with.
We’re back to the basic argument - should there be any form of stamp duty taxation at all ? SDLT, as we should call it, is the last vestige of a much wider form of taxation relating to the transfer of assets. It’s perfectly possible to argue that with different and more flexible forms of asset ownership and more frequent churn of these assets that this form of taxation is obsolete.
By the by, my take on the US election and Veep choices here:
http://aloadofoldstodge.blogspot.com/2008/08/palin-into-significance.html
152
Don’t even get me started on 1837!
The truth is, that politicians of any party can’t stay away from things they know they shouldn’t touch with a bargepole.
163. Yes there’s a very good case for total abolition both from long-term and short-term perspectives. Long term, it’s inefficient, distortionary and hampers labour mobility.
Short-term it’s worth remembering that in it’s current form, SDLT was just a money making wheeze thought up to take advantage of a booming market. Now it’s a deadweight, especially at the middle range of prices.
Every disaster visited upon us in long term; collapsed currency, enormous debts, crippled markets, Northern Rock.
All the ’solutions’ are short term.
The changes on stamp duty are one year, the ‘compensation’ for the 10p tax disaster will last one year, the freeze on the fuel escalator is one year, Blears Bundle for Building Bad Debts will be active for one year and be a disaster for five.
What happens when all these short term measures end? The income tax mess is the worst one to solve. But we are constantly assured that Brown is hard at work making tough decisions for the long term.
But they haven’t even got the wit to make things last until after an election - although perhaps on that logic there will be an election next year.
138, 155 Agree, the moves announced today are aimed at shifting new-builds at the cheap end of the market. The stamp-duty holiday being restricted to £175k doesn’t help in any way to build chains which includes people who want to trade up. The market above £200k is going to stagnate even further.
166. problem is that SDLT is politically quite an easy tax - if people complain, the comeback is “you don’t have to buy the house if you don’t want to”
My daughter completed the sale of her house on Friday and is not buying just yet. The person who bought had to pay some £1.5k stamp duty whereas tomorrow it would be nothing. However, there have been leaks about changes which have affected the market.
Should the change not be retrospective from when the leaks were first made? Secondly should those making the leaks not then be surcharged for the difference in the stamp duty collected between the two dates?
Phil C. “I don’t like stamp duty - in a capitalist society there shouldn’t be a tax on buying or selling. There should be a tax on profit”
In France the taxes involved in buying a property are much higher than they are here and it’s proved effective in preventing the wild gyrations in house prices we get here. When you pay so much tax on buying only those who need a house enter the market. Surely preferable to the inflation caused by those buying to get rich quick?
169. Yes - ideal for the good times. But disastrous for the bad times, as it is intensifying the death spiral the market is now in.
163 £175K isn’t that unrealistic, I’m in NE Hants, about 35 miles from London on a good commuter line to Waterloo, and 2 bed flats near the station have been selling at c £150K, down from £175K a year ago. Property is cheaper in less salubrious parts of the area (eg a Victorian terrace in Aldershot for about the same price).
Mind you the housing crisis has buggered up my plans to look for a job in West Dorset and move down there: it’s not the prices per se (if selling and buying it shouldn’t make much difference) but the fact that the market is quiet - the right properties aren’t coming on at the moment. All those nice little portland stone cottages seem to have disappeared from the estate agents’ websites, only the estate family houses are left
159 - Yes the housing market needs to correct. It would have done so in 2005, and been a lot less painful, if Gordon hadn’t nobbled the BOE.
I hope those affected by all of this never forget the damage done to them and the lives of others by the actions of those self serving politicians who have lead us into this financial abyss.
On a side note, can anyone of the economists on pb.com make a ‘guess-timate’ as to the financial cost to the UK of Darling’s Guardian comments with regard to the effect on Sterling in the currency markets?
If you’ve just bought a house (and 33,000 mortgages were granted last month) for £170,000 and paid Gordon’s henchmen £1,700 for the privilege, doesn’t it make you feel good that your £1,700 is going towards helping someone earning less than £60,000 a year to do what you’ve just done, only cheaper?
Isn’t that what socialism is all about?
Re: 166 - Rare to see us in agreement, Runnymede, but I’m entirely with you on this and while there are some aspects of Osborne’s economic policies I struggle with, the abolition of SDLT isn’t one of them.
From my own experience, I wanted to buy a flat in October 1996 during the last housing slump. It was on the market at £61,000 - back then, stamp duty came in at £60k. I offered £58,500 because I didn’t want to pay the stamp duty and the offer was accepted. Now, while the Treasury might have lost some revenue, I doubt either the vendor or I were that bothered.
The stamp duty holiday is pretty meaningless for first time buyers facing a choice between buying today and buying next year. The question is, will the price of the property they have in mind be cheaper next year than this (even with the stamp duty holiday)? Of course it will. So rent and wait is the only sensible position.
The whole idea of slowing the decline in the housing market is wrongheaded in any event. House prices will fall 25-30%. Best that it happens as quickly as possible so everyone can get on with their lives. The real harm of a prolonged decline is not loss of value in your property (it feels nasty but actually anywhere you might want to buy is falling just as much) but that people wanting to move for work or family reasons literally cannot do so as everyone is sat on their hands.
McCain campaign swimming in money:
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzI0MjEwM2YwYjM0MzcxYjk0OWYxMzAyMTNlNTI5NzA=
Obama’s conference bounce less than others
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13068.html
“On Saturday, Gallup reported Obama was ahead by 8 percentage points. By Monday, that lead had shrunk to 5 points. Rasmussen pegs Obama’s standing as relatively stable in recent days, with a 49 percent to 46 percent lead over McCain when “leaners” are included, a small but statistically insignificant improvement for McCain of 1 percentage point since Saturday.
CBS News reported Monday that Obama is now ahead in its poll, 48 to 40 percent, a 3-point uptick in Obama’s standing compared to its poll prior to the Democratic convention. Obama’s 3-point bounce exceeds that of John F. Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004 who did not rise in the polls following his convention. But Obama’s bounce is less than a third of what Al Gore received in 2000 and Bill Clinton received in 1992. Even Bob Dole, following the 1996 Republican convention, received a 4-point bounce in the polls, 1 point more than Obama.”
112. Post 22 yesterday morning: “a tad arrogant to assume the “messiah” is done& dusted as if he has a divine right to succeed-I am of the opinion Mr McCain will surprise everybody. Have you not considered the possibility of that happening or are you totally blinded. In which case I suggest you go to Specsavers”
All I did was suggest that Obama is currently beating McCain - which the polls show he is. I didn’t say that it would necessarily remain that way, though given the funding gap and Obama’s resiliance through the primaries, I think he will. Only he he self-destructs by becoming too complacent or arrogant - which is possible, though the convention should have provided enough of a warning to keep him from doing that - is it likely that McCain would triumph in November.
For what it’s worth, I’m not aligned in US terms. Had I had the chance, I’d have probably voted Bush in ‘92, Clinton in ‘96, Bush in ‘00 (and then regretted it), Kerry in ‘04 and would be favouring Obama via Hillary this year.
The revenue lost by doing this, will have to be made up by increasing taxation elsewhere or by borrowing.
Why should people who don’t have mortgages who are not interested in buying or selling a house, be penalised?
The market was grossly over inflated, its now adjusting, its happened before it’ll happen again: thats all folks!
171 “In France the taxes involved in buying a property are much higher than they are here and it’s proved effective in preventing the wild gyrations in house prices we get here. When you pay so much tax on buying only those who need a house enter the market. Surely preferable to the inflation caused by those buying to get rich quick?”
Roger, I can’t comment specifically on the housing market in France - I don’t know anything about it - but I can’t say I’m enthused by the idea of levying high taxes to prevent normal market fluctuation through supply and demand. Besides which, surely taxing people who have to move house is not exactly fair? A capital-gains type tax would tax those who make a quick buck from “developing” the property they live in, where currently they pay nothing, whereas someone who has to move house twice in succession due to reasons beyond their control (eg losing a job) probably wouldn’t pay any tax.
Morning all, reading the irst 30 or so postings was surreal. Who gives a flying f**k whether McCain and Obama are true Americans or not. They are competing to become head of a foreign state in an election almost all of us have no role in.
Well we now have the Labour fight back. 300 million to be squandered on people who shouldnt have bought houses or shouldnt be buying houses. It’s about time Hazel Blears and her friends in Government realised 1/3 of all households in this country are single person and most of us are fed up with this Government squandering money on so called hard-working families. If they cannot afford to have the kids they should keep their legs closed or use condoms until they can! I dont have kids because I cannot afford to so why should I pay more tax for those who just keep hoovering up public funds because they cannot keep their legs closed!
The stamp duty holiday is a joke. £175000 is the cost of the average ex-council house. I approve of the stamp duty holiday but stamp duty should be layered as others suggest.
All those people facing repossession should ask themselves why they have bought £2000 plasma TVs, surround sound music systems, take several foreign holidays a year or waste thousands on expensive cars. They have only themselves to blame.
Why should we be giving 30% interest free loans to housebuyers? No-one paid my deposit in 1987.
OECD just announced UK to be in recession in second half of 2008.
Lets just get rid of this hopeless government.
Expect confusion in house price surveys from now on. The government’s stamp duty intervention is limited, and given tbat the main price surveys are done in different ways, you will see different effect on those within and just above the new nil rate.
There are four main price surveys - Halifax, N’wide, RICS and government. Some use asking prices rather than selling prices, some use a basket of properties whereas some just use a crude average unweigted for the types of property.
Does anybody know more on this?
66,75. housing figures
let’s try this with some facts:
CML stats for H1′08 suggest that there are around 155,600 people in arrears (3months+) on their mortgage*, up from a low of 97,900 in H1′04.
so taking out people who are in arrears all the time, there were only around 58,000 people who could be said to be seriously affected by the housing downturn in H1 ‘08.
so £100m rescue package for these people (which it won’t of course go to) would be closer to £20,000 each - not as insignficant as you conclude.
source: http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/statistics
* as it happens this figure is very low compared with the 1990s (the H2′95 figure was 389,800) and 1980s, when the figures were similar but there were only half the number of mortgages around.
177. Yes, but the problem is, even without misguided interference of this sort, the housing market generally takes several years to adjust anyway due to the illiquid nature of housing as an asset. The bottom of the market could be as much as 3-4 years away based on past experience.
178 - You can’t really judge convention bounce very easily this year as the first act of the Republican convention (Palin’s appointment) coincided with the last act of the Democrat convention (Obama’s speech). Hence Obama’s bounce includes part of McCain’s bounce. Normally there is a gap between conventions.
The best we can really do is look in a week from now at both bounces and assess who had the better convention on that basis.
181 Not to mention the loss of mobility in labour markets.
OECD now saying we will be in recession. Guess they must be Tories for talking down the economy according to shome peeps on ere? Just like Darling.
172. i don’t really believe that. if you want to flog a £150k house, you try selling it for £145k, then £140k, £135k etc. £1.5k stamp duty makes FA difference.
if the market is stagnant, it isn’t really fundamentally because of SDLT.
Re: 179 - I’m not a Conservative but listening to Obama’s speech I thought there was scarcely a word of it that a Conservative in Britain could disagree with and had that speech been given by David Cameron, it would have earned plaudits.
Yet on here it seems many Conservative activists have decided they have to support John McCain. Now, is this a knee-jerk response based on the idea that Conservative=Republican, Democrat=Labour or some other disdain for Obama ?
174. changes in exchange rates don’t ‘cost’ anything - they help some at the expense of others (in this case, British exporters at the cost of importers)
185 - It could be. The best form of intervention, frankly, is clearly announced non-intervention. It isn’t politically popular because of the pressure to “do something” but the quicker the adjustment occurs the better in fact.
David Cameron has just arrived in Afghanistan for his 3rd visit to British troops. I wonder which the media will cover tomorrow? DC supporting the boys overseas or GB spouting tractor figures as the economy collapses around him
147.
Aaaron you have just been appointed leader of the official Opposition. Whatever the weaknesses of ordon Brown and the ridiculous Biker Mouse from Salford, they are at least trying to dog something about the housing market. What policies have the blue powder hounds come up with to deal with these problems?
How much will the Blears Bundle help the bankers maintain their bonuses rather than genuine families in trouble through no fault of their own?
191 devaluation is highly inflationary isnt it?
190 - yes, it’s strange, particularly when you recall the Tories and the Republicans were definitely not friends when Howard was leader.
196 - was not in 1992.
re 73 3/6/2010 is often stated as the last day for a general election, but it is wrong. Parliament’s term will expire at midnight on 10/5/2010 meaning that the earliest practicable time for the issuing of the new writs would be Tuesday 11/5/2010. That would normally mean a general election 4 Thursday’s thereafter apart from the fact that 31/5/2010 is a bank holiday so doesn’t count in the timetable. This means that the last possible day is Friday, 4th June 2010.
182 - “They have only themselves to blame.”
In fairness, repossessions are normally due to the interaction of unemployment and interest rates rather than splurging on TVs and holidays. I think you are being a bit callous.
ed if you have any evidence about a collapsing pound is helping exports over the last year or so I would like to see it.
193.
You surely mean DC’s visit which will give support and succour to the corrupt nepotistic government, bolstered by vicious drug-producing warlords which make Saddam Hussein seem like a Swedish Social Democrat?
What right have politicians of any hue (I include the government) to make PR capital out of visits which must surely detract/distract from the war effort? Isn’t the Queen the commander in chief?
I think you miss the point. If the taxes on property are high and not recoverable those simply interested in profit are put off leaving cheaper houses for all those who need them. I think it would be a good thing to get rid of the speculators from what is a necessity for almost everyone.
196. uncontrolled devaluation can cause all sorts of problems (cf. black wednesday), but what we are seeing is just a normal slide in sterling. $1.80 is still pretty high by recent standards, we have been over £2 quite a bit recently but it wasn’t long ago it was closer to $1.40. none of that caused any problems.
196 - It does cause inflationary pressure but commodity prices have eased, inflation is probably at the top of the curve and (as in 1992) recessions put downward pressure on inflation.
Inflation should not have been allowed to get where it has but is not near the top of the list of concerns over the next 18 months.
201 - thngs may have been worse without the collapse
re 117 indeed when I bought my house for £62k in 1999 I paid them £59,995 for the house and £2,005 for the very rudimentary fixtures and fittings which they left behind.
179-Guilty as charged but I can’t recant simply because you came across as extremely arrogant possibly not helped by immediate previous entries slagging off Palin as well but you took the “hit”.
189. But what about houses priced at, say £300k-£600k? For those, there is a huge up-front deadweight loss for purchasers in a falling market.
In a rising market, you might feel confident of getting the tax paid back out of increased equity due to capital appreciation, but in a falling market it’s simply money down the drain. So you will only move and incur that big loss if you are absolutely desperate. Many people will wait and wait until they think the market has bottomed - which will of course delay the bottoming-out process…
199 - I can wait an extra day.
BTW, has anyone actually seen Brown, Darling or the Milkiband Kid today or are they all bunkered?
194 - not speaking politicianese (and speaking as a first time buyer in May 2007) - there’s not really much to be done, to be honest. It may be unfashionable to say so but you can’t keep re-inflating a bubble and those who can’t afford their commitments are going be in a fair bit of trouble and may need to “downsize”, to euphemise. It’s not their house unless they’ve actually paid for it.
Worth reading on property,commodities and markets.
http://www.arpllp.com/core_files/The%20Absolute%20Return%20Letter%200908.pdf
200 “In fairness, repossessions are normally due to the interaction of unemployment and interest rates rather than splurging on TVs and holidays. I think you are being a bit callous.”
Do you have any figures to back up that sweeping statement? Personally I think its variations on several factors: interest rates, unemployment, separation/divorce, reckless profligacy in spending and taking on too much debt, etc
208. David Herdson arrogant? Must be mistaken identity.
Couple of stories from the 80’s
Two collegues of mine, 1. Took out a mortgage on a house in Epsom of about £150,000. Actually went into the personnel dept. and pinched some of their notepaper and typed out his own salary details. When rates shot up, his payments were about £1200,00 a month. Then started approaching his workmates and asking if they would go sick so he could get the overtime, they would get a percentage, told too f**k off. Divorce and repossession.
2. Fancied a new house in Croydon, his own house was slow to sell, was persuaded, (really) to take out a bridging loan, to buy the other property, the premise being he would sell, then pay off the loan. For reasons I can’t understand, he thought the interest was 8% per annum, it was per month! result repossession.
201. the pound hasn’t been collapsing for the past year, it has been ludicrously strong against the dollar!?
my gainful employment involves selling stuff to yanks (in dollars) but we are all paid in pounds - the strength of the pound over the last 2-3 years has been the difference between the mediocre profits we had and bumper years we could have had based on record sales. everyone is breathing a sigh of relief as we get a little bit of breathing space.
SkyNews: OECD report:
UK will be in a recession in second half of 2008. Where is Joan Armatrading when youse need her…?
[Mr Jack Straw]Drop the pilot…!
re 139 and of course next April when this bribe is removed, all our taxes are going up.
210 I think Brown is giving a speech on why his government is better than all the others and displying a league table to prove it.
Darling is mired in despair as he has the worst breakfast for 60 years.
Milkiband has Double Maths this morning
If this stamp duty/free loan business had been anything more than a token gesture than Brown would have been announcing it and basking in the glory not fishwife Blears.
190-I only caught snippets but there seemed to be a lot in there about spending more. All to be paid for by closing the mythical “tax loopholes” and cutting “waste”.
213 - Yes. Repossessions tend to rise markedly when unemployment rises and when interest rates rise. It is not a particularly novel observation and I would suggest you do a web search.
174 - That’s nonsense - it isn’t a zero sum game. The costs of raw materials, and fuel (most of which are imported) sky rocket as Sterling plummets. There is no way these rises can be offset by the increase in the value of exports.
213. of the factors you mention, and looking at historical figures:
* interest rates are relatively low and quite stable
* unemployment is relatively low and quite stable, possibly starting to show early signs of increase
* (separation/)divorce is relatively high and quite stable
leaving only reckless profligacy in spending and taking on too much debt - which i definitely agree is a factor.
190-I’m Conservative-also support McCain-Obama is an empty vessel with no real executive experience plus being both too slimy & supported by people who think soaring rhetoric is the be all of everything.There IS no real substance to the man & I hope & pray this will be spotted before it is too late.
@190:
Stodge, I have said before that I like John McCain in spite of his bloody mess of a party, not because of it. If I were entitled to vote in November, I’d split my ticket Democrat/McCain.
That said, I don’t have much vested interest in the outcome one way or another, and won’t be devastated by Obama’s expected win, even if I would prefer McCain.
203. I’m not sure owning a property is “a necessity for almost everyone”.
Details of OECD report: bad time for an election:
http: //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7592660.stm
216 - pounds was very strong against dollar. It is now at its lowest for a year, possibly 18 months.
198. Devaluation wasn’t inflationary in 1992 because the economy had masses of spare capacity after enduring a couple of years of recession. As such, it was 100% the correct policy for the time and indeed should have been enacted earlier but wasn’t due to ignorance and a bone-headed desire to appear ‘good Europeans’.
Currently, we have moved toward the edge of recession but spare capacity is much less than in 1992, so depreciation will have a bigger inflationary impact than then. It’s still probably the correct policy, however, as domestic demand has hit the buffers and the margin of spare capacity is going to increase sharply over the next several quarters.
Final note - adjustment via net trade can come from the import side as well as increased exports. And that is already happening - in the first half of the year, imports fell sharply while exports were broadly flat. Without sterling depreciation, growth would have been even lower.
What would be the effect of abolishing Stamp Duty and replacing it with VAT on house sales set to raise about the same amount of money overall?
Economies, currencies, commodities,house prices and political power all move in cycles.. As do stock markets and share prices.
Some cycles are days, some months or years or some are claimed half centuries (Kondratieff).
Once something goes into a down wave, you may get rallies but the trend is down. And no matter how hard you try, you cannot reverse it.
Time is the healer. See the Japanese property market with a 20 year decline.
224 - in times of higher interest rates, inflation / wage inflation was higher. Over time, your salary would have increased and your burden of debt gone down when compared to your income.
Different ball game now to the last 3 decades.
223. think about how that would work for a minute!
SkyNews: Some bint selling Browns public-debt to save “first-time” buyers and construction workers. [Most Brit's obviously fail the first-time test...!]
Economic forecast suggest house-prices will rise in the long-term. Rusty and Badger forecast never-ending growth. Bint (Helen Williams), go see a psychiatrist, then a dentist…!
I’m amazed that no-one has yet mentioned how McCain’s acceptance speech might be derailed by Hurricane Hanna which has a good chance of attacking Florida on Wednesday, and Georgia and South Carolina on THursday.
224 Presumably low levels of savings are also an issue. Say your mortgage deal ends and you can’t get a new one at a price you can afford… if you have some savings you can probably fund the repayments for a year or two until market conditions stabilise and you can either remortgage, or move house without making a loss. Too many people have no savings and debt that up to 6 months ago they were relying to be able to recycle cheaply.
203
Owning a house is not a necessity, in fact for many people it becomes a burden.
Owning your own home, can be a very expensive solution to keeping a roof over your head. It may be a remarkable investment, (or has been) but it isn’t for everyone. Viable alternatives, so that people have decent homes, while not being held to ransome by sudden market changes, should be on offer.
Governments should be honest and explain to people, that those who suffer during economic downturns may not ever have the economic strenght to survive in the housing market.
Selling off council properties, advantaged the few, but disadvantaged many more, and brought into the market, people who still need state support to survive.
Just a thought, but did not Rusty offer £830 million to the governments of India and China last year. Puts the effort into the UK housing market into context…!
184. When I went to school £100m spread over 58,000 was circa £1,724 per person not nearly £20,000. In addition 58,000 people works out at an average of about 90 per constituency.
238. i don’t know about needing state support, but definitely there are too many people out there who think that owning a house is a necessity at any cost in terms of debt.
anyone who is genuinely struggling to make ends meet on their house now has made reckless commitments financially. the most basic check before buying a house (or, in fact, anything on credit) should have revealed that repayments were going to be a major problem the minute things stopped going perfectly in their favour (i.e. rising prices, cheap and easy credit).
we haven’t hit any of the sort of conditions that put sensible people in trouble in the ’80s, like 15% interest rates and mass unemployment.
Just out of interest - why is Cameron visiting Afghanistan today?
Is it because he wants to draw attention away from some mouth-watering Government policies?
Or because he wants to further enhance his “foreign relations” standing and this is a perfect time for such a jaunt?
240. oops! what’s a factor of ten between friends, eh?
point was, 90 per constituency really is not all that many - if 30 per constituency really can be helped, as you suggested, that would be a decent hit rate.
241. But the Government has deliberately built the whole economy on credit. Part of the same picture is the low savings ratio which now means that when the hard times come there are fewer nest eggs to help people through. If the economic conditions continue to deteriorate for another year, then we will see a hugh increase in Government borrowings which wil make individual problems that much more severe.
241. We don’t need to, in order to generate similar degrees of economic distress and - more importantly - political distress for ‘New’ (doesn’t that seem a tarnished prefix, now?) Labour.
The impact of credit restriction, more reckless previous lending, and more aggressive bank foreclosures - combined with recession and a significant rise in unemployment - will mean repossessions this year will be around half the 1991 peak level, and will probably get close to the 1991 level next year.
242. Millsy, this is DC’s third trip to Afghanistan IIRC. That’s one each year since he took over as leader of HMO. Between now and next year, there is no other opportunity to visit (Conferences start next week, HoC returns immediately after, full session up to Christmas), so a patriotic politician is taking his one opportunity to show his support for men and women who are risking their lives for our foreign policy.
242. Year round tan
243. If such measures only help 30 “couples” in an average constituency, or 0.1% of the electorate, then they are not really going to do much to help the housing market and it all seems a lot of noise about very little.
‘it all seems a lot of noise about very little.’
That is indeed the conclusion any sensible observer would reach.
245. as detailed earlier, CML stats disagree with you completely. measuring the proportion of mortgages in arrears, which are a pretty good indicator of future repossessions, we are nowhere near the figures seen in the 80s or 90s.
The way this has been publicised is garbage. Granted, Parliament is in recess so the Government can’t make a statement in the Commons - but we still have no details on what a “household earning up to £60K” means, one person or two? Or what the carge will be, what a “free loan” means (is shared equity involved?). Should we assume that the paper hasn’t been written yet and the Government is rapidly scanning right wing blogs for them to point out the pitfalls? Really, the details should have been published on the Web at 8am this morning.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7593230.stm
But is it really Mr and Mrs Clegg’s child or is it an elaborate cover-up for the love child of Lord Thurso and Julia Goldsworthy?
The nation demands answers.
Talking of “details” (see 251) does anyone know where I can download yesterday’s Bank of England report about the record low number of new mortgages? I’d like to see what the figures look like for myself… only the BBC and Times websites don’t link to the report, and I can find no mention of it on the Bank of England website.
248. in which case you could argue that any talk of the 0.3% of the electorate who are struggling to pay their mortgage is equally over-the-top.
instead, we find it at the top of the agenda, and i for one think that if a third of those people could be given a helping hand, that would be a very positive move. whether that is what these measures will actually do is another matter.
179&208-revisited your thread-partial apology in order-still think you making assumptions the Reps.will lose-am probably getting totally pissed off with these anti-Palin threads-just hope “the Messiah”gets further scrutiny.
What these ‘measures’ show is that Labour remains unable to understand the market.
Piddling incentives and tax breaks will never make a difference, but then again, neither would bigger ones. The key is to create the right signals to the market, so that individual lenders and borrowers do something different.
What the government has to do is change the mood music. They could cut spending, freeze or reduce public sector employment, scrap some major capital programmes, maybe propose business tax cuts going forward. All these would indicate to the markets that the government was serious about getting its own house in order and could change the mood of doom and gloom.
Instead, we have Private Fraser bemoaning the worst economic conditions for 60 years, Captain Mainwaring blaming the verger and the ARP warden, and Private Pike pulling his scarf tighter around his neck and gossiping at the back with Private Walker about getting rid of Captain Mainwaring. Unfortunately, Labour does not have an Uncle Arthur who might bring some sense to this rabble, so they send out Godfrey to announce that sticking plasters will be cheaper for everyone earning less than 4/6 a week.
What a shower.
250. There were 19k repossessions in the first half of this year, compared to 37k in the first half of 1991, so as I said currently repos are running at around half the peak rate of 1991.
One of the disturbing trends is that repossessions are already running at a faster rate than might be expected given the reported level of arrears - banks seem to be being more aggressive, perhaps unsurprisingly given their balance sheet problems.
And we are only at the start of this process - the recession has only just begun, and unemployment has much further to rise. So repossessions are going to rise a lot further. Forecasts of 40-50k total this year and 60-80k next are quite mainstream.
Anyone know what Brown’s reaction was last time the Conservatives suspended Stamp Duty?
191: “changes in exchange rates don’t ‘cost’ anything - they help some at the expense of others ”
Utterly wrong. Have you seen our balance of trade figures? We import way more than we export, so the net effect on the UK is BAD.
Plus oil is priced in DOLLARS, so has just gone up 12% in a few weeks FOR UK USERS ONLY. A great competitive edge there
For the UK consumer and voter, it is worse still. Imported stuff costs more, but stuff made in Britain costs the SAME at best, or more if it is made using imported components or oil (i.e. almost anything)
How many British people buy stuff exported from Britain?! Only if you go abroad, in which case you have to change your pounds for less of whatever currency you need….
So clearly a lose-lose-lose situation, and manifestly not, as you stated, a situation without cost.
253. this might be what you mean
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/li/current/index.htm
253: I think this is it
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/ms/2008/Aug/index.htm
“Just weeks after praising the virtues of holidaying in Britain during the credit crunch, David Cameron has enjoyed a luxury holiday aboard a £21,000-a-week yacht in Turkey.
The Tory leader joined 74 friends and family for a week-long tour of the Turkish Riviera which ended yesterday.
The party lapped up the sun and drank wine on seven traditional ‘gulet’ boats with 20ft high white sales. Each boat had its own personal chef, captain and two crew.”
I think Cameron’s tan should be fine.
260: Don’t agree much do we
Just noticed the “..high white sales” - I pasted an ES journalist’s mistake.
254. I believe a much greater proportion of the electorate are for one reason or another finding it a struggle. The point is that these measures will only help a relatively small number of people overall and therefore, not withstanding any moral hazard, do little to address the problems in the market place.
The Govts housing idea seems to represent an attempt to enable developers to keep the price of houses high.
Quite - talking down the problem and talking up these pitiful measures are equally futile.
2600, 261 - thank you, I think it’s ed’s link.
All this guff from the government about ‘global problems’. Can anyone tell me a country likely to be worse hit by this crisis than Britain? The OECD doesn’t think there is. So does Brown believe they’re wrong? Or does he think we’re too ignorant to listen to what the OECD is saying?
Poor productivity, declining exports, inadequately skilled workforce and over-reliance on financial services. What did the government expect? Still there weren’t any warnings from the Tories who just grumbled on about ‘competitiveness’, despite all the signs that Britain remained a reasonably competitive place to do business. Of course once the bandwagon starts, the Tories get on………..
259 - No it is not clearly “lose, lose, lose” and a poor balance of trade requires a fall in the pound to help correct it. A fall in the pound will mean we’ll import less (since its more expensive) and export more (since its cheaper) which will close the gap somewhat in our balance of trade.
Its naturally self-correcting.
As for winners, well anyone working in an industry which gains by exporting more for starters.
269. the USA has been (and probably will continue to be) far worse hit.
259. so in this one-way-street economics of yours, the only thing that matters is bolstering the pound, right? that is apparently a win-win-win!
the key is in the phrase “_balance_ of trade”.
Re; 225 - The view you ascribe to Obama is almost the same as has been said of David Cameron on occasions since 2005 and which Conservatives like you have been at pains to refute.
Obama is a Senator and outside the Bush Administration. I suppose being a Governor offers a deal more “experience” and that of course was the path for Reagan, Carter, Clinton and George W.Bush but it wasn’t for Kennedy or Bush Senior so does it make a lot of difference ?
McCain has been a long-serving Senator but has not served in the Bush Administration to my knowledge.
The American system is quite different and the absence of Cabinet-style Government makes it difficult for elected Seantors, Congressmen etc to gain executive experience.
271 - On what basis do you assert that?
171 & 203
Is this tax on property in France fairly new,or do you mean a tax is levied when you sell the property?
I bought a property in 2001 and don’t remember paying any tax,maybe it was included in the Notaire’s fees if so it was insignificant.
The US entered the downturn first. We don’t yet know who will be worst affected, over the whole period of it. On the housing front, we are catching up very quickly indeed.
A falling pound is also bad news for all those Brits who’ve retired in mainland Europe. (I’m not one of those by the way, but do feel for those who are in those circumstances)
IIRC, in 2000/2001, Sterling was trading at around €1.70 to the Euro (or its FF/Peseta equivalent). Even as late as 12 months ago the rate was up at around €1.48. With the rate sinking below €1.23 it must be getting really tough for those on a fixed Sterling income. Of course it would suit the Treasury to have loads of people being forced to return to the UK bringing in cash from selling their overseas property (assuming they could actually sell in the current market).
What I find surprising is how little mention has been made by the BBC and the MSM on the Sterling/Euro collapse over the past 12 months. The really steep falls versus the Euro took place in just 6 months from Sep 07.
271 - That’s one of those phrases that you can always say in economics!!
I have a friend who regularly has some fun whenever he’s in a discussion with someone who thinks they know a great deal about something to cut in half way through their monologue with “but to a much lesser extent in the South, of course” to which the person inevitably agrees.
Try it out some time.
OT - Keegan has apparently resigned as Newcastle manager, so the first managerial casualty market is probably wrapped up.
http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/08/09/02/manual_110607.html
262
Who cares ?
Shouldn’t the Lib Dems be focussing on finding themselves another leader to replace calamity.
277 - Very good. Although he would get a very different response in Canada, of course.
270. If devaluation is such a good thing, then why not go for £2 to 1$? Like many other things in this life, it is a means of correcting past excesses. Well remember the “J” curve from the 1960’s which said postulated that matters got worse after a devaluation before they got better.
272: Quite so.
But our balance of trade is massively negative!
A falling pound is good for exporters in theory, but with weak demand from Europe where 50% of our exports go, then don’t expect a boom any time soon.
Car sales in Spain, for example, down 41% (forty-one) annually. Eek.
279 - Of course!
270: true in theory, but there are nowadays so many things which we cannot but import. Increasingly this includes fundamentals like oil and gas, but there is a long long list.
You cannot turn round a £7bn monthly deficit in a hurry, and by importing inflation via a weak currency you harm domestic demand and the economy in general suffers. Higher inflation means higher wage demands (or poorer citizens or both). In very very few cases will a 10% fall in the value of the pound translate to a 10% fall in the price of a good for export because of the increased price of energy, wages and of course imported components.
O/T.
Our host believes the LDs should lovebomb Cameron:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/smithsons-view-how-can-the-lib-dems-exploit-the-the-tory-thatcher-tendency-3417.html
An interesting counterpoint to discussion of Labour lovebombing Cameron.
I feel queasy at the thought of posting on LDV, so, if Mike will forgive, I’ll comment here.
Mike, you are making the same mistake that some on here were making yesterday in clinging to a fantasy that there are two Conservative Parties. One, the highly discipline and socially liberal Cameron Party, and two, the disgustingly right wing, racist and illiberal Tombstone Party, which would wield power over Cameron when he wins the next election.
I urged ed and others yesterday to get real and stop living in this fantasy world, and I do the same to you.
The influence of Tombstone in the HoC is there for all to see… 30 members, a bit of hot air, little more than a lunchtime moaning club.
Outside Westminster, it’s even clearer. The membership back Cameron, they are socially liberal and they live in a real world not a hang-em and flog-em return to the days of Empire, or if not that, hard-core Thatcherism.
Yes, they all admire Thatcher’s achievements, they are all patriotic and they are all conservative. But the Conservative Party has been the most successful in British political history because it is pragmatic and realistic. It remains so, its membership remains so, and its leader remains so. A few hotheads aside - and I hate to let you into a secret, Mike, but the LDs have some too - the party is united in backing Noughty Conservativm, not harking back to Eighties Conservatism.
280. Devaluation worsens a country’s terms of trade. But that may be offset over time by increased export volumes/reduced import volumes. The extent of these effects varies from place to place - and the global backdrop is important too, as it is much harder to get a good export response if external demand is weak.
But have a look at the US if you want evidence that devaluation can be pretty effective; the contribution of net exports to US growth has been massive in recent quarters and has saved the US from a deep recession.
Wasn’t it Thatcher and Lawson (and their progeny Major, Blair and Brown) who couldn’t give a stuff about the balance of payments.
270 - ‘A fall in the pound will mean we’ll import less (since its more expensive)’
I’m not sure we can cut back on that many imports, certainly not food and fuel. And these are the real financial killers.
We’re doomed, largely thanks to the Next Tuesday gang. Never mind, they’ll make nice lamp post decorations, when the seething masses finally catch up with them!
274,276. it is difficult to exactly compare the figures, but in the US somewhere in the 1% of all houses region are currently at some stage of foreclosure (repossession), and that figure keeps getting worse. house prices have fallen off a cliff. loads of banks have already gone bust. we have seen emergency interest rate cuts down to 2%, inflation is much higher than ours. they have already tried giving taxpayers rebate checks, and that made minimal difference. unemployment is going up rapidly.
in the UK, we are at 0.16% repossessions, and if runnymede’s forecasts are to be believed, we might even hit or exceed the 1991 peak of 0.4%. one bank has gone bust. house prices have fallen less than 10% (i.e. still in the region where one might keep the same offer price but accept a lower offer).
283. sounds to me like you have a list of economic phrases you think are ‘bad’ and a list you think are ‘good’.
in fact, all these data are balanced and largely self-correcting by the action of market forces.
There’s a lion on the loose in Belfast
http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp-documentid=9410515
Not from the zoo, as all their big cats are accounted for.
I once remember seeing a programme on the crazy pets kept in Northern Ireland, given that British laws on dangerous animals in domestic settings don’t apply. One guy had tigers, another had full size alligators. Amazing.
273-a natural Conservative who is not totally convinced by Cameron but nevertheless considers Obama to be an opportunist playing on an electorate who might consider voting for a mixed-race individual to be an exotic choice.
289. stick to political hyperbole, leave the economics to those who understand words like “supply” and “demand”.
Greetings from Bangkok, peebles, and thanks to those expressing concern at my absence, during these roiled and violent times of Siamese insurrection.
Sadly for the europhiles, I haven’t been run over by a royalist tank, or even CS gassed by Thaksin supporters - as far as I can tell the “state of emergency” in Bangkok mainly consists of armed soldiers in black helmets standing around looking bored, while the strumpets lower their prices by maybe 200 baht to encourage business during hard times.
A bit like the government’s stamp duty holiday only with washee-washee and rather than surveyors.
No, my silence has been mainly down to a nasty bout of hard work. Yes! Ugh! I’ve been frenziedly finishing the rewrite of the thriller to keep the American and British publishers happy, and hopefully secure a film deal thereby. I’m nearly done, faintly exhausted, but hope to be posting again regularly quite soon, when I have recovered.
As for this laughable government - what was that Blairite apparatchik’s comment during the Jo Mooore scandal:
“We’re all f*cked. I’m f*cked. You’re f*cked. The whole department’s f*cked. It’s the biggest cock-up ever and we’re all completely f*cked.”
Replace the word “department” with the word “economy” or “government” and I imagine you have the well-advised sentiments of most Labour MPs. They are utterly doomed.
Hasta la V!
ON TOPIC - Mike is right to say that governments are judged retrospectively by the end of their tenure. I don’t know if the last six months are how Labour wants to be remembered, but it is only going to get worse, so I think an election sooner rather than later would be favourable - frustration that they just won’t go away will only grow.
I don’t think going early will limit the scale of the defeat, though, as Cameron is still untarnished in the eyes of the public. The only way to diminish the scale of the defeat is to change leader and call a snap election.
So there are two factors: the degree of anger (scale of defeat) and the electorate’s preparedness to forgive (time to recover). These are linked, but not the same. In May 2010, Labour could lose in a way that is not as bad as it would be now (by number of seats), but have left such a bad feeling that they cannot recover for three or four terms. Conversely, they could go now, with a massive defeat, but the resentment would be less lingering, and they could have two elections where they made significant gains on a very low base.
Going early suggests the second path - I’m not sure whether the electorate forgives 11 years of government easily whatever you do. I’d play to minimise, which means going long, or a new leader. A new leader and an immediate election is the best bet to hit the best of both (which still isn’t great).
294. Your impersonations of Ed Balls get better and better.
289 - Hmm, I sense a touch of arrogance. Is your surname ‘Balls’?
Stodge,
I’m a Tory who’s a fan of Obama.
68 “In 2004 Kerry was shown to be in front then lost suggesting polls were skewed.”
That is absolutely and completely untrue, you haven’t got much of an argument if it’s based on such an untruth. Bush led in nearly all national polls in the lead up to the 2004 election.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html
So the polls were accurate.
290
” inflation is much higher than ours”
Facts: US CPI 5%, UK CPI 4.4%.
” they have already tried giving taxpayers rebate checks, and that made minimal difference”
US GDP growing 3%.. UK nil
I’m sorry but you are making yourself look a liar. If you are going to quote comparisons quote the facts. And not what you appear to want to believe.
I can’t wait for Bob Worcester to call it for ‘President Obama’…
292. “There’s a lion on the loose in Belfast”
‘Loose lion’ turns out to be dog
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7591210.stm
Is there an official date that silly season ends?
The historical graph, Bush was in a clear lead all the way from teh beginning of September.
Whoops, here’s the link.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/chart3way.html
Simple question. Should the bbc refer to Obama as being black. In my opinion they shouldn’t and I’m a bit uneasy as to why a mixed-race man is always being referred to as black.
299 - I never understand people who can rave about Cameron, but not Obama. I find them very similar (good and bad aspects).
Neither is hugely experienced, both came to leadership of their party over more experienced candidates through a killer speech or two, both are fantastic managers of the personal and party brand, both favour the free market with a degree of social conscience, both believe healthcare should be universal though recognise the flaws in too statist an approach, both are ’small c conservative’ in their general politics but socially very liberal, both are clever and exude optimism, both profess to be Green (but won’t take it too far), and for the differences in rhetoric I can’t see them straying too far apart on foreign policy if they are both in government.
If you find this insulting to one or the other, I would question what you think really marks one out for your love and the other for your disdain. Backgrounds apart, they are very similar candidates, just in very different circumstances.
300-One of the most satisfying comments ever!!!
Almost like seeing that great big iron Simon Schama recalling how he went to sleep overjoyed and woke up with a hang over the day after the election.
255. Thanks. You’re right - I am (at the moment) assuming Obama will win but it’s not based on blind faith. In fact, until this week, my betting was very much loaded towards McCain but I switched it after he announced Palin as his running-mate (which has been justified as the odds have moved in Obama’s favour since then), so that now I get a nice three-figure sum if Obama wins and only a single-figure amount if it’s McCain. If I see something that makes me change my mind on that assessment, I’ll change my betting position. I’m not an Obamaniac by any means and do have reservations about his candidacy - as I said at [179], I’d have preferred Hillary, who I think would have made a better president.
303 - I’m slightly concerned that just because they found a sandy coloured dog that they are no longer looking for the lion.
Strikes me as not exactly erring on the side of caution.
307, Morus,
Well put.
(By the way, haven’t said yet how much I appreciated your Denver reports - excellent and professional, IMHO)
311 - Cheers Andy, much appreciated.
309. Given McCain already knew about Palin’s ‘difficulty’, doesn’t it make her selection as VP candidate all the more strange. Like one last desperate attempt at winning despite being level in the polls.
If Obama’s extra fund-raising is so significant, why hasn’t it told so far?
190 - “Yet on here it seems many Conservative activists have decided they have to support John McCain. ”
Stodge, many of these people may be right wingers but they are not Conservatives.
Cant stay to chat, but must tell you this:
Our Great Leader has appeared on TV today and he look’s like Death-Warmed-Up. My wife (an ex medic) say’s he lookes like he is on drugs for depression. Could that be true.
296 - I don’t believe this early-election idea. It looks to me like the worst of all worlds for Labour (albeit best for the country). It would look like panic; the Conservatives would win massively; the economic problems are going to get worse and Labour will be blamed for years to come, so there’s no long-term advantage; and Labour MPs and ministers lose their cushy jobs and perks nearly two years earlier than they need to.
They have two other options, either of which look more sensible from their point of view:
- Change leader next year, hold an election in Autumn 2009, and hope to take advantage of better sentiment caused by the new leader (and who knows, maybe something to their advantage will happen in the meantime)
- Carry with Brown to the bitter end in 2010, which at least has the advantage (for them) of keeping their jobs as long as possible.
315. Shhhh !
” LONDON (Thomson Financial) - The UK’s trade in goods deficit widened slightly during June, as the shortfall in trade with non-EU countries increased to the highest level since comparable records began in 1998, official figures showed.
The Office for National Statistics said the UK’s trade in goods balance with the rest of the world was in deficit of 7.7 billion pounds, compared to 7.4 billion pounds in May - revised down from the previous estimate of 7.5 billion pounds.
The figure was larger than analyst expectations for a shortfall of 7.5 billion pounds.
The rise in the deficit was caused by imports increasing by 1.2 billion pounds to 29.7 billion pounds, outstripping the 0.9 billion rise in exports.
Of particular note was the balance of trade in goods deficit with non-EU countries, which widened to a record 4.7 billion pounds compared to 4.0 billion in May.
However the UK’s trade in goods deficit with the 25 members of the EU narrowed to 2.9 billion pounds from 3.4 billion in June, the smallest reading since December 2006. This was due to a higher rise in exports of chemicals to its European trading partners.
Meanwhile the UK’s trade surplus in services - its strongest suit - was steady at 3.3 billion pounds, unchanged from June.
This took the total trade in goods and services to a deficit of 4.4 billion pounds from a 4.1 billion pound gap the previous month.”
315. was she struck off? drugs for depression don’t change the way you look
314. Personally I was delighted Obama defeated Clinton, who I think is thoroughly unfit for high office.
With regard to November, I prefer McCain as a choice largely because I think he will handle better the increasingly dangerous international situation. If the international situation were more benign, I would be fairly indifferent as to who won the Presidency.
319. Want to bet?
301. GDP comparison does not say anything about the effect of rebate checks.
on my actual points i think we are in agreement.
307 Morus “they are very similar candidates”
You can’t be serious! Cameron and Obama have one thing in common, namely that they are both good speakers. Even then, they are very different in style; Obama is more an inspirational orator, Cameron more a very clear and persuasive speaker, and superbly skilled at handling difficult questions. Other than that, there is nothing much in common that I can see. OK, you point to general policy similarities, but those are true of almost any centre-left or centre-right politician today. You might as well include Angela Merkel in your list.
307 - Morus, there are many on the tory right who are still not enthused by Cameron and his ‘liberalism’ but who may vote for him grudgingly as the alternatives are worse. I would imagine it is more likely that Cameron-sceptics dislike Obama.
294 - Eddie, stop winding up the good folks of pb.com. You told me earlier that you still hadn’t sorted out the marking fiasco - shouldn’t that be todays priority?
Just a reminder that I’m late home tonight so you’ll have to sort out tea for the kids. I’m going to be held up at No 11 - another late night plotting and undermining Darling.
321. bet on what? he may well be on medication for anything, i don’t know. what i do know is that he doesn’t “look like” he is.
Well, ubiquitous psychologist Oliver James would agree about Brown re medication.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20080104/ai_n21186694
Without wanting to open twelve cans of worms, but I thought this was a very interesting article (hat-tip Drudge)
http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century/article12823.htm
324. the core vote from last time for example - “is Cameron thinking what they’re thinking?” must be a question on their minds.
323 - Ok I’ll turn it round. Waht is the biggest policy difference between them (recognising that they are running in different countries)? On what would they disagree?
Icarus 262. No doubt Cameron paid for his one week holiday, more than Blair did.Must look for your sneers, when Blair was on one of his freebies - to save time, you could, of course, repeat them here.If this is the level of childish criticism to be expected, Cameron has little to worry about.
330. interesting…
i could have sworn he didn’t mention Blair
326. Didn’t Doctor Barry from Bedford also suggest Brown might be showing symptoms of heart disease?
re 258 Brown didn’t say anything about the stamp duty moratorium on 19th December 1991, but Mrs Beckett (was she Labour economic spokesman then?) said
Is it not the case that, although the stamp duty measures will, as the Chancellor said, ease the housing market, they will do absolutely nothing to assist those people already in danger of losing their homes? Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the Government have made no net contribution to that scheme–bearing in mind the savings that the Government will make on mortgage interest ; bed-and-breakfast costs for the homeless, which I understand are currently running at £1 billion ; and, as the Chancellor said, because the postponement of TAURUS will only in a certain proportion be committed to the scheme? How many more families could have been helped if the Government had been prepared to commit even all the savings from TAURUS?
If we contrast the Government’s coyness in slipping out a press statement three days ago which revealed cuts in real terms in the provision of public sector house-building next year with the Chancellor’s willingness to come to the House to make a statement on a scheme to which the Government are contributing so little the day before the House adjourns for Christmas, the concern that the Chancellor claims to feel can be described in one word– humbug.
309-Cheers-agree with you about Hillary- meanwhile will see how this plays out.
300/4/5-calm down- that evidence seems irrefutable-but from memory the commentators on the day appeared to think from exit polls that it could be closer.
Icarus 262 - Fair play to Cameron, £21K a for 74 people - that’s what £283 a head for a week? Looks like a pretty good deal to me - at least he’s financially astute.
I bet Grim Gordon doesn’t have that many friends or family who’d spend some holiday time with him - I can just about picture him and Balls bravely rowing a leaky 2 man dinghy in a stormy North Sea.
Is this why Gordo was told to lose weight?? No 10 is sinking…
http://blogs.news.sky.com/boultonandco/Post:e14a87e6-2570-4eb6-b5a2-6fb8343a3847
@329:
Obama seemed to strike an alarmingly apologist tone towards Russia’s recent incursions; Dave was less forgiving.
“323 - Ok I’ll turn it round. Waht is the biggest policy difference between them (recognising that they are running in different countries)? On what would they disagree?”
Obama agrees with the death penalty and Cameron doesn’t.
329 - Well, the differences between the US and UK are massive, so it’s not really a realistic question. For example, the US hasn’t got the same problems with education and healthcare that the UK has (I’m not saying it hasn’t got big problems, just that the problems are different).
But if your main point is that Conservative supporters should have no real reasons for strongly disliking Obama, then I would agree with you. Some might prefer McCain, but then there are some aspects of the US Right which would be anathema. Overall, I’m sure a future Conservative government would be quite comfortable working with either McCain or Obama.
338. what about “natural affinity” for the white candidate?
Catching up with the thread, may have missed a few points, but:
- James Burdett - no, although stamp duty only kicks in from £125K, it is then 1% on the full amount. The suspension of duty up to £175K therefore saves up to £1750, not £500 as you thought. As Aaron says, it’d be better if it was layered like income tax, as you implicitly assumed, but it’s not.
- Somone (Simon?): no, your recollection is mistaken: the tax rebate was announced as £60 in September, then £10 a month for 6 months.
- The references to 5-year repayable loans on the thread are a mystery to me - there’s nothing about this that I can see in the package.
- The package includes support for shared equity schemes, both for first-time buyers and for people who can’t keep up payments: instead of losing their homes, they can potentially (depending on how far it makes sense for all concerned) sell part of the equity to the local authority or housing association. For the reasons coldstone’s outlined, I think this is a good idea - the obsession with everyon owning their own home by the time they’re 30 is part of the problem, and a middle option between unaffordable purchase and renting is desirable.
- It’s not a magic wand to reshape and heal the housing market: it’s a moderate package to help people particularly badly affected and get it moving again.
- What would Cameron do? Er, maybe something on stamp duty and something on repossessions. Here’s what he told Humphries last month:
JH: The average person listening to this programme cannot get a mortgage. I’m asking you what you would do to help them get that mortgage.
DC: I think there are real difficulties of trying to re-open the mortgage market.
JH: The answer is not very much or nothing.
DC: Well … stamp duty would help.
JH: No, no, it wouldn’t help. You’ve got to get a mortgage before you pay stamp duty.
DC: Obviously if you’re a first time buyer, remember if you’re a first time buyer, you’re trying to get together that deposit so that you can go and get the mortgage.
JH: What would you do to help?
DC: Well, the stamp duty is a really big part of that problem and so that would actually help. I also think it’s quite right as the government is doing to look at how you can stop unnecessary repossessions. Repossessions of people who, with a little bit of help, would be able to stay in their homes.
@329:
I don’t think there’s much about Obama to make the average Tory quiver with fear. I know he’s been a bit soft when it comes to foreign affairs, but we know that’ll disappear once he’s a little less wet round the ears.
I guess I’m just deeply suspicious of all that startlingly good oratory that doesn’t seem to be backed up by anything tangible.
307/323. Interesting comparison between Obama and Cameron. Has Obama ever delivered a speech from memory like Cameron did last year at conference? I read somewhere he has a teleprompter with key talking points even for his townhalls.
His constant “uh” ing when talking off the cuff seems to have got worse recently and is now up their with McCain’s “My friends” as a pet hate of mine.
A recent example is about 17 “uh”s in just 5 sentences here.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/02/obamas-answer-on-experience-but-im-such-a-great-campaigner/
338 - That was my main point. Any criticism that can be laid at Obama can be laid at Cameron, and the same for strengths.
Playing out the hypothetical, I’m trying to imagine that if Cameron had received the Dem nomination, what would be the effect on the party platform. I can’t think of any, or vice versa. To a lesser extent, Sarko? Whereas compare Obama to Brown or Merkel or Burlesconi…
It’s not a perfect comparison by any means, but I think Obama/Cameron are about as ‘on the same page’ as any two leaders since Thatcher/Reagan, and I can think of a similar example prior to that.
337 - Good example. Is Cameron completely against in any circumstances? Obama only agrees with it in the cases of rape and murder of a child and so forth.
340
No 10 e mail is working I see, even if its sinking.
342 - I made two suggestions to improve the speech in the stadium:
a) Come out to a blacked out stadium, play Fanfare to the Common Man by American composer Aaron Copland with a spotlight coming on about 90 seconds in, and
b) Shock the Networks by taking off jacket, rolling up sleeves, and doing the speech from memory.
The former would have been magic. The latter would have been a risk, but would have fitted with the regular American stories and the voices that preceded him.
341 - “I guess I’m just deeply suspicious of all that startlingly good oratory that doesn’t seem to be backed up by anything tangible.”
Yep, that’s my view on Cameron. Except Obama is a better orator,
BBC 1pm News - 16,000 people will benefit from all of the shared equity scheme announced today.
ie 25 people per constituency.
341. surely you’ve got used to the latter now?
@348:
Cameron is not an Obamaesque orator. Cameron’s at his best when facing an aggressive interviewer, in circumstances when Obama often shrivels. Also, unlike with Obama, we have been allowed *occasional* glimpses of the true heart that beats beneath. Not often, but to my mind just often enough to be reassured that it’s there.
If Obama’s shell of vacuity is a mask, then he hasn’t let it slip even once. Yet, sometimes you need to, just for a second.
Nick Palmer stamp duty should be abolished for first time buyers but your proposals are for one year only and that is more than useless it is deceptive.
Make it a proper holiday for an extended period or change the banding permanently, but don’t pretend this is the answer to anything but the need for spin fodder.
343. Morus, your points are all valid, but Obama and Cameron are in politics for entirely different reasons.
Obama has spent his adult life fighting for working-class families in Chicago (not something anyone can see DC doing… even if translated to Brixton), then pushing against the Daley Democratic machine to achieve first statewide and then national prominence. Once in office, his instinct will be to prioritize the needs of poor families - which means affordable health insurance, stronger social security, and higher taxes on the better-off. Cameron, by contrast, left Oxford to work in the media, and then found a safe Tory seat in the shires. On economic matters he is still largely a Thatcherite; on social matters, his concern for the education and welfare of the poor is paternalistic, and probably involves a large dose of political calculation.
The point is that being “on the same page” a la Thatcher and Reagan surely requires more than having common policy ground; it requires shared passions and purposes.
349. Well that at least puts a floor on Labour’s vote for the next GE
342. Nick P - the 5 year “free” loans are on the BBC website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7592852.stm
(see halfway down article).
342 The references to 5 year repayable loans are in relation to the 5 year loans of up to 30% of the property value available to first time buyers announced this morning and the lack of detail around them and what happens after 5 years.
The party machine not sent you your lines yet?
@353:
I fail to see why Dave’s coming from a privileged background automatically means that he cares less about helping the worse off.
Given the nature of upper class guilt in the UK, I’m inclined to believe quite the opposite.
353. ‘his concern for the education and welfare of the poor is paternalistic’
Perhaps so - but that is better than the fake concern masking callous indifference which we get from the middle-class snobs who run Labour and the Lib Dems in the UK.
357. his focus on IHT and stamp duty suggests that priorities lie elsewhere.
anyway, the original point is still valid; Obama does not appear to have much upper class guilt
353 - Another good point.
In that case let me revise: I can see why Obama supporters might not necessarily like David Cameron, but I simply cannot see in Obama anything that a Cameroonie might find offensive.
Anyway, time to go for some lunch.
359 as opposed to trying to fleece the worst off of extra tax and getting caught with your idiot savant pants down?
360. he went to a local school in Jakarta didn’t he?
last time i checked there weren’t any of those in the XI club
199: “That would normally mean a general election 4 Thursday’s thereafter apart from the fact that 31/5/2010 is a bank holiday so doesn’t count in the timetable. This means that the last possible day is Friday, 4th June 2010″
A splendid idea to have the next GE on a Friday. No need to book the next day off work in order to stay up all night getting merry as one Labour Minister, MP (and PM?) after another loses his or her seat.
And Nick Clegg going down too.
I’m sure millions of others would want to do likewise.
353-”higher taxes on the better-off”
We all know what this means!! Tax and spend. He should own up and say he will increase taxes. He can even coach it in semantics by adding “for those who can afford it”, or “for continued investment” or some such other BS. He can even ask the soon to be unemployed occpuant of No 10 and his predecessor for coaching help.
Er, just to clarify that when I talk of “staying up all night to watch Nick Clegg going down”, I was talking about watching him lose his seat…
Speaking as a perennial potential first time buyer (Pay off that Student loan first, or more accurately pay off the interest each year) It seems like Labour are trying to bring FTBs back into the market in order to pursue their policy of runaway house price inflation ad infinitum, rather than actually making accomodation more affordable. It’s still a loan, and it still has to be paid back
342. When the option of differential/layered stamp duty has arisen before in Parliament, why has it not been implemented? Surely it can be done in a broadly revenue-neutral way, and precisely helps those at the bottom end of the scale the most…
The numbering is very confusing today.
Jack Petersen (at 353 last time I looked), you dismiss Cameron’s concerns on poverty as ‘paternalistic’ but surely his motives are irrelevant, it is the outcomes that matter. DC has put fighting poverty, improving education for all and guaranteeing the future of the NHS at the top of his agenda.
You can argue that he will fail because his policies are wrong, but you cannot dismiss his efforts on the grounds of paternalism.
355/356: thanks - didn’t recognise the reference upthread. As I understand it, it’s a variant of shared equity. The loans are secured on a part of the equity, giving the option to leave it as shared equity or ’staircase up’ the purchase after 5 years to full ownership.
368. The ‘paternalist’ tag is just code for ‘he’s a toff’, standard class envy stuff.
368. if you remove the “CCHQ vs. the world” goggles for a minute you will see that he wasn’t dismissing anyone’s efforts. the claim was that Obama and Cameron are dissimilar politicians because of their background.
@370:
It’s based on the flawed assumption that those from upper class backgrounds are least likely to give a flying one, when as any fool knows, it’s Tories from working class backgrounds like me who are the most unashamedly callous.
367: Introducing layered stamp duty would produce winners and losers on a large scale if done in a revenue-neutral way, so none of the parties have (so far as I know) embraced it yet, since their opponents would stress the losers. For instance, given the normal threshold of £125K, the buyer there pays £1250. A revenue-neutral solution for that particular buyer would be to lower the threshold for paying nothing at all to say £62500, and then charge 2% on the next £62500. You can imagine what the press would do to that - “N million more homes to pay stamp duty”. Or you could make someone else pay more, but whatever model you choose, someone will end up footing the bill. It’s why tax systems are so rarely changed - e.g. everyone agrees council tax doesn’t work very well, but anyone who suggests a change (like the LibDems last time) gets hammered.
#349
BBC 1pm News - 16,000 people will benefit from all of the shared equity scheme announced today.
CORRECTION:
Sorry to be pedantic, but the “free” funny money is for only 5,000 people. The 16,000 refers to the shared equity scheme, and the repossesion scheme combined. The shared equity one is open to 5,000 buyers this year, and 5,000 next.
All these government proposals, the ‘compensation’ for the 10p losers and fuel duty escalators are short fixed term sops which will, if they do anything, simply defer the pain for later.
And that is exactly what the Labour government have been doing for ten years with PFI, loose money encouraging excessive borrowing, spending, spending, spending, borrowing, borrowing, borrowing. Brown’s bling.
And when all those ministers and MPs who supported it, who were complicit in it, are sitting back with their hard earned gold plated pension and we and our successors are still paying for this irresponsible behaviour the Labour party will be a myth that mothers frighten naughty children with.
373. rubbish isn’t it. i wish for once our politicians could agree on the best system using a ground-up approach, and then phase in the appropriate changes over time so that everyone knew where they stood.
Meanwhile …. as the destructive force of Gustav wanes so President Bush has changed his plans and will now speak at the GOP convention …. in politics it’s mighty handy to be lucky …. I wonder if Obama has bought a lottery ticket this week !!
Morus - Yes, Cameron is against in all circumstances.
“If someone murdered one of my children then emotionally, obviously I would want to kill them. How could you not? But there have been too many cases of things going wrong, of the wrong people being executed, of evidence coming to light after the execution, and sometimes there is just too much of an element of doubt. And I just don’t honestly think that in a civilised society like ours that you can have the death penalty any more.””
293. Nonsense. The idea that Obama’s race is an advantage shows a hopeless naiveity on your part I’m afraid. His race is a big disadvantage to him electoral, and if he is elected it will be the best electoral performance by any Western politician since the war. Amd with a black guy as the most powerful man in the world, the world will change overnight.
Regarding the Economy, if Blair was still PM, would he have been able to deflect blame onto Brown, or would he be in the same position as Brown is now. If so, why the hell didnt he stay as PM!
Regarding Conservatives love for McCain and the Republican Party in general, while I can understand the hardcore social conservatives supporting them, why people like Iain Dale, a man who recently got married *TO ANOTHER MAN* would be so enthusiastic about McCain beating Obama is beyond me. This Conservative voter thinks the religious right of the Republicans are just f***ing insane.
378
I concur, much as one would want retribution, the risk of convicting and executing the wrong person is too great.
@380:
John McCain is soft on gays, and soft on the causes of gays.
380. Yes, but the PC left of the Democrats are insane too.
369 so circumventing the rather (perhaps belatedly) sensible step taken by lenders to require a reasonable level of deposit before lending and in a falling market exposing the secured lend to being outside of a reasonable resale on repossession (which would realise perhaps 75% of the already falling value). Alternatively the charge needs to be secured first before the main lend in which case I am certain you do not have the agreement of lenders and would not get any who would be interested in lending behind your charge - except the usual 19.9%apr kneecap brigade.
Rather cavalier approach to the housing market and woider economy to secure a few dozen votes?
380. Great post.
Correct me if I am wrong:
The government says it will cost £600m to finance the stamp duty holiday…
The average stamp duty foregone is surely £1500 (1% of the middle of the range 125-175 = 150k house)…
Does that not imply the Treasury are calculating on the basis of 400,000 annual house sales in the 125k to 175k range?
Their calculation is that half of all transactions will now be stamp duty exempt, up from one third.
Surely, with mortgage approvals at 33,000 amonth in total, this is simply b*ll*cks and an attempt to spin almost total inaction as ‘helping those in trouble’?
Afternoon all
Re: 328 - If you’re interested, Morus, feel free to join the discussion over here (where I also post and lurk):
http://theweatheroutlook.com/twocommunity/
There are interesting and well-informed contributions about the role of sunspot activity on Earth’s climate in the Science & Climate Forum.
Back here, and good to see you again, Andy (311), my comment on Obama and Cameron was based on listening to Obama’s speech at Denver. I’m not comparing them in any sense any more than I would compare Cameron to NZ National Party leader John Key though I note that Key, Cameron and Obama were all born within about 18 months of each other.
I do accept that what has been turned “Noughties Conservatism” is a very different creature from either Thatcherism or post-war paternalist conservatism. My concern about it is while it claims to be socially liberal (and many of its adherents clearly are), the temptation, once in power, to use the power of legislation and the State to enforce changes in behaviour to meet public expectations of short-term improvements will be very strong.
I don’t believe legislation alone can turn round the yob culture. I also don’t believe that without coercion change will happen quickly though I do accept that cultural change and behavioural change is far better coming from individuals and communities than it is from the State and that’s liberal thinking as much as it is conservative thinking.
So the funding for this (except the stamp duty) is from money ‘already earmarked for housing’ from the future…….
If I spend next years wages I need to do one of the following things
1) Earn much much more next year
2) Cancel all of the things I had planned to do with that money next year
3) Borrow more
Which will Labour be doing? Will they be number 1 hoping the economy picks up against predictions, will they borrow or will they cut spending?
Darling to announce where the stamp duty money comes from in the PBR - plenty of time to make some snit up about growth forecasts
368.
“DC has put fighting poverty, improving education for all and guaranteeing the future of the NHS at the top of his agenda.”
The top of his ‘do nothing’ agenda?
what are the policies? Where’s the beef?
374. Thanks for that. Where did you see those numbers reported?
If correct, it’s even more Mickey Mouse than I thought. 5,000 “free” loans for shared equity = 8 properties per constituency.
What are the odds that in 6 months time less than 1,000 will have actually happened?
@389:
YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE BEEF.
OT - any recommendations for next “permanent” Newcastle Utd manager?
O/T As of 2 minutes ago, Kevin Keegan was 0.15/1 with Betfair to be the first Premiership casualty of the new season, despite reports that he’s already left Newcastle.
Is this free money?
386 And don’t forget that the bulk (I believe c.70%?) of recent mortgage approvals have been refinacing and replacement of fixed term mortgages, rather than related to a property transaction in which Stamp Duty would be payable.
389. well for one, he used that row with David Davis to improve the educational pedigree of his shadow cabinet
387 stodge “the temptation, once in power, to use the power of legislation and the State to enforce changes in behaviour…”
I don’t think you realise quite how ironic that sounds. We’ve been waiting 11 years to rid ourselves of a government which tries to do exactly that.
395 - Quoi??
397, Grieve went to an upper class school in Westminster, unlike the Labour frontbench who are related only to poor people and had to educate themselves using cheese for chalk and the pavement for a blackboard.
Totally off topic…
Graeme Hick announced his retirement from cricket today. Although a disappointment at Test level, his record in the game is extraordinary.
Over 40,000 first class runs. Adding in all one days runs too, he is the highest ever scorer in the game - more than Jack Hobbs 60,000. Nobody will ever surpass him. A legend.
@397:
I’m unsure whether he thought was being witty, pompous or just spiteful.
394. The 33k mortgage approvals for July was the figure for house purchases only, not including remortgages.
Re: 396 - I wasn’t being ironic, Richard, I was merely stating that successive Labour and Conservative Governments have tried various forms of legislation and coercion against the yob culture and have utterly failed.
If that is recognised by the Cameronites and they are going to try different approaches, fine, but they will have to manage a public expectation that anti-social behaviour needs to be controlled.
Cameron’s commitment to scrapping ID cards will save the working class both money and hassle — I’m thinking of their larger-than-average number of offspring who’ll be forced to get them when they turn 16.
wage slave perhaps you can help me. What is the government’s housing policy today?
402. I’m confused - are you against coercion of yobs?
“why people like Iain Dale, a man who recently got married *TO ANOTHER MAN* would be so enthusiastic about McCain beating Obama is beyond me.”
Wonder what Dale thinks of Republican Rick Santorum, who believes that consensual, nonviolent gay sex in the privacy of your own home should be illegal?
Bank of England:
“The increase in total net lending to individuals in July (£4.3 billion) was above the increase in June, but below the previous six-month average (Table A). The twelve-month growth rate slowed further, to 6.9%, and the three-month annualised growth rate fell by 0.8 percentage points to 3.8%.
Within the total, the increase in net lending secured on dwellings (£3.2 billion) was above the increase in June, but below the previous six-month average (Table A). The twelve-month growth rate slowed further, to 6.9%. The three-month annualised growth rate fell by 1.0 percentage points to 3.4%. The numbers of loans approved for house purchase (33,000) and remortgaging (69,000) were lower than in June, but the number of approvals for other purposes (43,000) was the same as in June (Table B).
The increase in net consumer credit in July (£1.1 billion) was above that in June, but below the previous six‑month average (Table A). Net credit card lending rose by £0.3 billion, below the increase in June. Net other loans and advances increased by £0.8 billion, above the June increase. The annual growth rate of consumer credit slowed by 0.1 percentage points to 6.8%; the three-month annualised growth rate rose by 0.1 percentage points to 6.1%.”
Latest Rasmussen Tracker :
McCain 45% .. Obama 51%
Note - 3 point Obama bounce since yesterday. Palin remorse or stat noise ??
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
390. figures from Reuters:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL152496120080902?rpc=401&
“A new mortgage rescue scheme to help 9,000 families …”
“A new shared equity scheme to help up to 10,000 first-time buyers earning less than 60,000 pounds buy new homes over the next two years”
As usual, it’s simply a re-launch of a re-hashed existing shared equity scheme which only 200 “Key Workers” took up.
In March 2008 Budget, they relaunched their old failing shared equity scheme as the Open Market HomeBuy one:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/housing/buyingselling/ownershipschemes/homebuy/openmarkethomebuy/
Very similar, except this version is called HomeBuy Direct, and is to be run together with “large-scale” property firms [erm Labour donors]
403. but think of the jobsworth non-careers they could be starting out on that will be ideal magnets for bribery and corruption from organised crime
409. Good stuff.
This latest ‘relaunch’ is once again rather a ‘relapse’. It just confirms Mike’s comment at the top of this thread - Labour is completely burnt out, with no new ideas and no new tactics. Even the efforts at spin and deceit look increasingly half-hearted.
But sadly it seems very likely that Mike’s suggestion of an early election is incorrect.
408 Rasmussen reports that:
“This is the highest level of support enjoyed by Obama at any point in Election 2008″
Could this be the moment to load back onto Obama?
393 Sky Sports News understands Newcastle manager Kevin Keegan has left his position at St James’ Park.
406-There is nothing “far right” about not subscribing to gay marriage.
As for Santorum? So what? If bestiality is illegal, why not homosexuality? There are more important issues out there than pandering to the gay agenda.
414.
Yawn - crazy bigot
415
Yawn - militant puff
Have I strayed into an episode of ‘Till Death Us Do Part’?
New thread, by the way.
416
Less of the militant! - I’m a Conservative
This is why McCain has made perhaps a fatal error of judgement in picking Palin:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/bal-te.reimer01sep01,0,3951691.column
New Hotline poll has Obama up 48-39.
Was conducted from 29 Aug to 31 Aug but only came out today.
Same report says full GOP convention schedule today. Bush to speak via satellite.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline/wakeupcall.php
More bad news for McCain-Palin:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5702697&page=1
I think Senator Hollis will be doing his best to ensure the “Troopergate” report will be coming out on time on 31 October.
256.”Instead, we have Private Fraser bemoaning the worst economic conditions for 60 years, Captain Mainwaring blaming the verger and the ARP warden, and Private Pike pulling his scarf tighter around his neck and gossiping at the back with Private Walker about getting rid of Captain Mainwaring. Unfortunately, Labour does not have an Uncle Arthur who might bring some sense to this rabble, so they send out Godfrey to announce that sticking plasters will be cheaper for everyone earning less than 4/6 a week.
What a shower.”
I wonder about what would have happened if, not only Brown had disappeared for a month, but so had the Brownite briefing corp.
We had briefings about reshuffles, a relaunch to save Brown’s premiership, what now appears to be a very over hyped emergency rescue package.
Reshuffles, relaunches and emergency rescue packages outside of the Budget and the HoC looks and smells like sheer desperation and will be seen as such by the voters.
Gordon Brown guarded his fiefdom in the Treasury and not even Blair dared very often to step in and interfere, remember him begging for a clue at a meeting before one budget.
A calm, measured and more realistic response from Darling with a sensible package to help address the economic times ahead at delivered at the Despatch box was needed without the interference from his neighbour next door.
We have tough times ahead, where is a Ken Clarke type figure when you need one? Tough, confident and able to present his case without sounding like the harbinger of doom might have helped.
Darling has copied many of his predecessors traits when it comes to avoiding the media, and therefore he sucks in front of the camera.
Sadly for him, he has a Brown and not a Blair next door to help balance things up.
47. ‘Which would be true if the word used was “or”, but it’s “and”.’
Sorry I went to bed, before responding.
I think your Boolean logic is at fault here.
“outside the limits and jurisdiction of the US” means within neither of those things. The Zone was within the second, so the 1855 law could not apply. That is precisely why Congress tidied up the status of those born in the Zone in 1937. It was previously “no-man’s land.”, covered neither by the 14th Amendment nor the 1855 law. Unfortunately there is no evidence that the 1937 law was intended to operate retroactively, meaning that McCain only became a citizen in 1937, aged 11 months, and is not therefore a “natural-born citizen” [whatever that really means], since he was not a citizen at birth.
I think Professor Chin’s reasoning is impeccable.
337.MTF, Neil Patterson in fine form today.
“As Gordon Brown attempts to kick some life into the housing market it would appear that the PM has housing issues of his own.
Extensive building works in Downing Street are taking rather longer than expected – because, according to one source, of problems with subsidence.
Yes, Number 10 is sinking.
blog post photoRight-of-centre bloggers start your engines.
As an aside, we noticed this morning that the door to Number 11 has been blocked off with hazard tape.
Well, the position of Chancellor does require a risk assessment these days”
351.
Martin Coxall, your perception is so grossly-warped that one must ask where your supply of low-cost mind-alterers come from.
Obama grew up in poverty, with a mum on food stamps. He has spent a big chunk of his adult life trying to legislate for a better existence for ordinary people. Hew clearly knows how he wants to change society and why, and anyone who cannot see his sincerity is probably suffering from a delayed reaction to Tory cuts in NHS eye services. Cameron grew up with a silver spoon wedged so far down his gullet that it must be wedged in his appendix. He played around as Norman Lamont’s credit card carrier then through political patronage became head teaboy at Carlton. What his ‘true heart’ beats for, other than a wish to copy Tony Blair in every microcosm, heaven knows.
Is that the same NHS eye service cuts as the current Govt preventing Lucentis to be prescribed for macular degeneration which has led to thousands of people losing their eyesight uneccessarily over the years?