Would they have been on 12% with Vince?
September 18th, 2008
Why oh why is this man not the Lib Dem leader?
The screen shot is of Vince Cable smiling during yesterday’s leader’s speech by Nick Clegg at the end of the Lib Dem conference in Bournemouth. He got a great ovation from the audience when Clegg singled him out for special praise. But shouldn’t it have been the party’s shadow chancellor who was on the stage not the young ex-MEP who screwed up his whole conference by suggesting that the state pension is £30 a week?
Clegg’s speech was reasonably OK but why try to ape Cameron by appearing to do it without notes when you have massive autocue monitors round the hall? It just appeared staged and contrived. Cameron really does remember every word.
So yet again a question mark hangs over the Lib Dem leadership. Clegg has improved but in that vital first few months at the start of the year he failed to make the impact that he should. He just didn’t convince. When his first big political test came on the Lisbon treaty vote he came up with a convoluted solution which even several of his MPs were not prepared to go along with.
Clegg’s position is made much worse by presence of Vince Cable - one of the few politicians of any party who is able to combine gravitas, humour and the ability to make a compelling case time and time again.
I’m told that last October after Ming resigned that Cable was advised not to put his hat into the ring because the party could not cope with replacing one man in his mid-60s with another who was not that much younger.
At the time the party hierarchy had got it into its head that if the Tories were doing well with an Oxbridge-educated former public school boy in his early 40s then they should do the same. How wrong they were.
A Lib Dem leader has to be able to command attention in a media world that finds a third party hard to deal with. It requires someone with special qualities and appeal. Cable has those - sadly Clegg hasn’t.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
After the first few PMQ’s he looked out of his depth. He stuttered, rambled and asked really poor questions. When not on economic matters he also looks off, like he’s no longer on sure ground. He would be better than Clegg, but who wouldn’t?
The Lib Dems are in a classic squeeze. They just don’t have any issues with traction with the public at the moment, as they did with the Iraq war. And the Conservatives in England and the nationalists in Scotland and Wales are now the natural home for those annoyed by the current shower.
What exactly is their point, no matter who is leader?
Does Vince have any other story than “told yer so!”? How would he make an irrelevent party relevent? It’s not the party leader; it’s the party’s position.
Now, if he had taken a pro-active role in joining with the Tories to squash the Lisbon Treaty…
I agree with almost every word of this. The bit I disagree with is the suggestion that Nick Clegg has improved. The speech yesterday was profoundly mediocre, full of David Brent inspired cliches - “people-shaped”, pah - and the state pension gaffe is just jaw-droppingly poor.
Vince Cable has a strong political presence and would have had a clear strategy for the Lib Dems (I suspect I would not have agreed with it, but at least he would have had one). Right now, the Lib Dems deserve to be on 12%. They can’t replace Nick Clegg this side of an election, but I’ve seen nothing in him so far to suggest that they should stick with him for the long haul.
I feel sorry for the British public, who look as though they’re could end up after the next election with a democratic one party state. We deserve better than that.
repost from end of last thread
Yes, the pendulum just swung decisively to Obama, but no it’s nothing to do with the excellent choice of Palin!
This is one of those spectactular game-changing “events” that are unforeseeable, and yes, will likely hand the election to Obama for the reasons GIN states at 1. It has nothing to do with the Palin pick, though - right after Mike put up his “has he blown it with the Palin pick” the polls ran away for McCain. There is simply no question that she is an asset and changed the polling tremendously for McCain at both national and state levels.
Nate, the Dem analyst who runs fivethirtyeight.com wrote recently that “even a Palinophobe like me” had to admit that the polling stated she was a very savvy pick politically.
Prior to yesterday’s Gallup and CNN state polls, the day had been good for McCain. He gained a point in the Hotline tracker and was steady in Ras and Kos meaning the prior day’s polling had been better than the night before. The ARG state polls were terrific for him. However Gallup is the gold standard (Ras is silver) and no McCainiac can dismiss the big jump to Obama.
If the banking system collapses, the party in power will lose around the world. I think that’s a given. Not even Palin magic can change that. However, looking for consolation as a Republican now facing defeat, I will say that this may be the Democrats “1992″ victory; the winner will get tagged with the blame for years of financial misery which may set up a Palin victory in 2012 and for years to come.
Meanwhile, as the great Jack W would say, I am relieved that UK politics is suddenly getting interesting again so I need not focus on the US out of default. And anyway, I’m a little more focussed on the possible collapse of our banking system - protecting our family savings, splitting it between banks etc. All quite scary stuff and does tend to take the mind off foreign elections altogether, which is just as well if you support the GOP right now.
1, Ed Davey.
In response to the thread, no they wouldn’t. Cable didn’t go for leadership presumably because of his age, or, more accurately, because he thought Ming left because of his. The truth is Ming was in his 60s but acted 20 years older. Cable doesn’t exactly come across as a part-time marathon runner but he seems perfectly fit and able, and age is an irrelevence unless it impacts political ability.
The Lib Dems went for Clegg for an array of exciting reasons:
1) the postal strike meant delays that prevented Huhne winning
2) the vacuous “He’s got good PR skills” were repeated so often people started to believe it
3) as stated above, they didn’t think “We someone with talent” but went for someone similar (they thought) to Cameron. Cameron isn’t a good leader because of his school or age, but because of his personal qualities. It’s like having women-only shortlists and then discovering all your women MPs are rubbish. You’ve got to select on merit, otherwise you rely on blind luck.
Being charitable to the Lib Dems, I think they set out a very good platform at their Conference. A platform as a centre-left alternative to the Conservatives and Labour. The only problem is that they need to wean themselves off of the concept of fighting two fights at the same time. If they set out to smash Labour then I suspect that the platform that they have would give them the opportunity to do it. They could then be a party like the Democrats in the US. The problem is I suspect that they will miss the bus.
The Lib Dems are being hit by the same thing as Labour - for something like 30 years, Death-To-The-Tories was the accepted, fashionable, non-conservative position. Now that doesn’t resonate with much of the country any more.
How many times have we heard the pleading cry that they can’t have changed, that they are still the Tories and we *must* still hate them? Blair binned socialism in the Labour Party - tried to make it a social democratic party in the European sense. When he did that, the Tories lost the Crazy-Commie attack - which meant they were no longer un-electable.
British politics was based for decades on the idea that the Tories were first unpopular outside their core and then unelectable. Careers were built on this. Then Cameron swept it all away in a matter of months.
The Labour party is the Not-The-Tories-Party - it is their only remaining core belief. The Lib Dems are largely the Not-The-Tories-Not-Labour party (in that order). That is no longer relevant - what are they *for*?
Every time I think of last year’s Lib Dem leadership election I weep softly for what might have been.
The only reason why Nick Clegg won was because the media told us that he was “the favourite”. I’m sick of the media deciding leadership elections. Of course, more fool the ordinary members for falling for the spin, but it’s pretty poor for a party of supposedly contrary members who don’t like being told what to do.
It seems they do now under Clegg, anyway.
And now on-topic for this thread….
I do feel sorry for LibDem activists and voters who deserve better than this. Mike has been warning of Clegg forever and he was just spectactularly proven right. Thirty quid a week? Our local councillors are warming up to deliver a leaflet on this to some LibDem wards. Pensioners are furious. Somebody said on PB that that was a career-ending error and I think that is correct. The man is not a PPC, he is the party leader.
And you don’t even mention the illegal robocalls Mike!
Tory candidates in LibDem held seats must be fancying their chances today. Jason Sugerman in Lewes might well win!
I am intrigued that you call for Cable though. Have you transferred your attentions from Huhne? IMO, Cable is now tainted by his call for NR nationalisation and the disaster that has been, we can see what moral hazard is doing to the markets right now.
There are millions of working class people who have effectively been dienfranchised by Labour’s shift to the centre-right. The 10p debacle removed any doubt as to Labour’s commitment to It’s core voters. so Clegg moves his Party to the already overcrowded center right. If the Lib Dem leadership had any connection with the real world, they could have come up with a manifesto which appealed to those deserted by Labour. Vince Cable would have been the ideal man to front the LibDems at this time, making them the natural party of opposition, which would be a giant step forward from being the natural party of inconsequence.
So in the first 11 posts we have James Burdett telling us that the Lib Dems’ platform at conference was a centre-left alternative to the Conservatives and Labour and grumpy old man telling us that Nick Clegg has moved his Party to the already overcrowded centre right.
I couldn’t ask for a better illustration of my view, as posted on the last thread, Nick Clegg is addicted to tactics but has no clear strategy.
Is he equidistant between Labour and Conservative? Is he seeking to take the Lib Dems to the left to replace Labour or to the right to benefit from the rise in Conservative popularity? After 9 months of his leadership, I haven’t a clue what direction the Lib Dems are heading in - in fact, they seem becalmed. In seeking to appeal to both sides simultaneously, I expect that he will appeal to neither.
As I said a couple of days ago, I think there is a danger of Cable becoming overated. He produced 1 good joke at PMQ’s but I’ve not heard anything funny since (not delibately anyway). Having seen his speech it was full of jokes that didn’t really work and I wonder if as leader, he would have the same trouble as Ming when away from the comfort zone of his brief. As for being this great forceaster, well it was obvious to anyone with a modicum of economics knowledge that 20% house inflation and massive debt to incomes ratios, that something was going to go wrong.
Would the Lib Dems being doing better with him as leaders?, possibly. Trouble is they’re so closely wedded to Labour and the idea of higher taxes that it takes a long time to change the publics view, especially when no one is listening.
10 What are you talking about - you think this week demonstrates that letting banks fail is a better option?
O/T combined central bank action across the globe to flood mkt with short term $ liquidity. expect a bounce in markets if this works.
10, the problem for the government is that it dithered (shockingly) for so long that Cable can say “If only they’d done it quickly…” and we can’t tell what the financial fallout would’ve been.
Maybe Goldsworthy should be leader? She certainly has a strong pb following.
It depends which banks and when. Suggest reading Anatole Kaletsky’s article in the Times today pointing out that the encouragement to short sellers offered by the moral hazard means that our entire UK banking system may now collapse.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article4776149.ece
“By rewarding short-sellers while wiping out investors who reckoned on a long-term recovery that would restore the mortgage giants to profitability, Mr Paulson sent the clearest possible message to financial markets around the world. Any investor who puts money into a US financial institution that might run short of capital would have it expropriated by the US Government. On the other hand, sellers of US bank and insurance shares would be richly rewarded if they could destabilise any financial institution sufficiently to force it to turn to the Government for help.”
“If the Lloyds-HBOS merger offers the enlarged bank some kind of firm government safety net - not just for depositors, but crucially also for shareholders - it will probably succeed and act as a firebreak against the financial crisis on this side of the Atlantic. If, however, the merger is presented as a “pure private sector solution”, with no government support for shareholders, market attacks against HBOS will soon be revived and redirected against the merged bank.
This will leave only one solution - nationalisation of the entire British banking system. The impossible will suddenly become inevitable.”
Under Vince Cable’s plan, NR shareholders were NOT protected.
Clegg just looks like he’s doing a poor imitation of David Cameron. it looks fake and insincere.
Not sure how Cable would do on the economy. he’s just the “i told you so” man - no solutions offered.
Will be interesting to see how next few days in the banking crisis works out and what the government response is. I predict a run on Bradford and Bingley as they are hugely exposed on BTL mortgage debt. Will govt nationalise it, or HSBC take it over?
whatever happens,we can say with certaintly there will be hundreds of thousands of job losses in the next months and years. A challenge for any government.
15 - Kas - yes, it will work this time. Just like it did last time! And the time before that!
One good joke and does not a leader make.
20 I agree with you. Half the problem is that govts wont let these banks go bust and insist on using the ‘Greenspan Put’ time and time again.
Sadly a missed opportunity. Vince would have realised from the start that the Libdems should target Labour seats and provided a coherent policy platform to allow this.
20 - I doubt it, I think the market is too spooked. Looking flat from what I’m seeing, and that probably indicates a breather before resumed selling.
6/16 The LibDems went narrowly for Clegg ( as I did personally ) because a majority of us thought he was the slightly better of the 2 good candidates . For myself I took into account the performance of both candidates at the hustings here in Worthing . I disagree with Mike as to the potential for prospects with Vince as leader but I do regret as I said at the time that Julia Goldsworthy was not a candidate .
Apart from the pension fauxpas , I think Clegg has had a good conference and his speech yesterday was well received at least by LibDems .
Also, Cable f*cked up by being pro-nationalisation of Northern Rock.
24 - And the FTSE is now in negative territory.
Cable? not yet! I’ve got him pencilled in as leader of a National Unity government, when everything turns to s**t six months after Cameron and chums take over.
19
Clegg just looks like he’s doing a poor imitation of David Cameron. it looks fake and insincere.
Well as the origional is fake and insincere, obviously any imitation would be.
13
‘As for being this great forceaster, well it was obvious to anyone with a modicum of economics knowledge that 20% house inflation and massive debt to incomes ratios, that something was going to go wrong.’
Indeed it is obvious but very few politicians know it / have the guts to say it. Everybody (even Cameron) talks about sustaining (printing and pouring money down the drain) these bubbles.
Almost certainly yes. The only certainty at the moment is that Labour are unpopular. If approached by a pollster and you wish to register your discontent you tell them you’d vote Tory (or SNP in Scotland). A good part of the Lib Dem vote is a tactical one and that doesn’t apply at the moment.
If the question is would VC be better long term….. then after yesterday’s lack lustre performance probably yes
At least with Vince Cable the Lib Dems had credibility.
Clegg just comes across as a complete sham,the pretence yesterday of his speech without notes,the concern for the poor but total ignorance of state pension levels,tax switching proposals dressed up as tax cutting,the crap about feeling the economic pain with his taxpayer funded mortgage and expense accouts,not to mention the Lisbon treaty.
So changing leader is not a panacea then?
Biggest loser (by the BBC, so 15 min delay) is Lloyds TSB, down 8%.
33, oh, I just saw HBOS is the biggest winner, up 23%. So swings and roundabouts then.
Plus Barclays are doing well.
We were all but promised a year ago that the Government would increase the level of compensation for deposits in the event of a bank failure from £35k to £50k or even £100k. In the meantime, we were recommended to spread our savings around the various financial institutions.
So far this month, the Nationwide has hoovered up the Derbyshire and the Cheshire adding to the Portman sometime ago. Now LloydsTSB has acquired HBOS. Who knows what will happen to other High Street financial institutions in the coming months.
So the number of separate companies where we can invest onshore is contracting. Until yesterday we had our savings spread around in the event of a bank failure. Today they are very much more concentrated.
What has the Government done to increase protection. So far sweet FA. The whole scheme will now have to be reviewed - more delays - whilst consumer protection decays. I am surprised anyone can still support this excuse for a Government.
28 - “everything turns to s**t six months after Cameron and chums take over”
Much unlike now…
@32:
No, just a soothing balm.
Test at 2. Yesterday I was walking past a newsagent and saw a US magazine (the name escapes me) which said on it’s cover ’seven reasons why Palin is a disaster’ and then listed several things-troopergate, lying, bad TV performance, economically illiterate etc- that I wasn’t aware of. From that cover it seems she is infact becoming a major liability.
@36:
In any case, Coldstone’s terrified precisely because he fears that exactly the opposite will happen: that Cameron will take over just as things start to recover, affording Dave two, perhaps three, terms of uninterrupted growth.
35
Just think! when the Tories come to power there’ll only be one Bank and one insurance company left, so much easier to nationalize then.
Privatize the profits, nationalize the losses, (socialism for the rich) after all if its good enough for the USSA, the United Socialist States of America its good enough for us.
Miised the Clegg faux pas on pensions.but he seems to have a problem with the number 30…..
rogerh
39. It’s the same line over and over again ‘well, after Cameron’s government is a massive failure a few months into his first term’ etc etc. It’s like they have nothing else to cling on to apart from the hope that Cameron will be a failure.
38 Roger and you see that every day on UK websites, but actually, the US polling says no.
in swing states and at national level and including post her Gibson interview she was boosting the ticket - again, read recent, as in a day or so ago, posts by the Democratic number-crunchers on 538.com if you doubt that.
The McCain-Palin bounce has been derailed by the financial crisis. Simple as that really. And nobody can withstand that. It’s just the event.
42, a la Boris.
@40:
George Osborne will unveil “Osbornomics”, an entirely new economic system based on New Math, and unveil an emergency currency based by The Queen’s eggs.
12 - I agree with that. I saw Clegg’s speech in full last night and it was ok. It had its good moments and its good lines, but the speech as a whole was directionless and without any clear message - other than the fatuous statement that the Lib Dems are the only party of social justice (which all three parties have claimed) and the only party to commit to specific tax cuts to help the poor (when all three parties have claimed to be able to help the poor). Overall, the speech suffered from being a poor imitation of Cameron’s from last year.
As for the Lib Dems in general, Clegg’s speech summed up their problem. He was attacking Labour and the Conservatives at the same time, while trying to sound appealing to both camps - tax cuts and small state, small-c liberal conservatism to try and halt the Conservative tide, whilst going all lefty with talk about how evil bankers are and how there would be no nuclear power under a Lib Dem government.
Strange tactics. What is the strategy exactly?
Morgan Stanley running into the arms of Wachovia doesnt exactly inspire - they’re in a poor financial position too. oops.
I do like it when you write about the Lib Dems Mike - there’s some real anger there!
I agree with almost everything you say but I think in retrospect the big mistake occurred not at the last leadership contest but at the one before that. Looking back at how Cable’s political profile and public appeal have grown over the course of this Parliament, it is now crystal clear they should have gone for him when Kennedy quit. Instead they went for Ming, and the subsequent issues around Ming’s age made it moreorless inevitable in my view that when he went they would go for Clegg.
The psychology of all this is interesting in my view, and also has echoes of what happened when the Labour Party changed its leaders. Just as there was a feeling that it was Gordon’s “turn” when Blair went, in large part because he had stood aside in 1994, so there was a feeling that it was Ming’s “turn” in 2006 because he had stood aside in 1999. As it turned out, both parties learned the hard way that sentiment is not a particularly good reason to make someone a party leader.
31. ‘not to mention the Lisbon Treaty’ Well why should he? Whatever he is he doesn’t strike me as an obsessive! Seems to think that the current difficulties are the fault of greedy bankers and speculators; no doubt you will tell us it’s all the fault of Giscard & Delors?
Away from banking, there are rumours that one of the big commercial property consultancies is about to go to the wall. Being a commercial surveyor this is ominous news.
48 - and Labour were hoping against hope that Brown would be popular because he was boring and dependable (i.e. not like Blair). Didn’t work for them either.
50 Chris M which one?
44 - building a political strategy on the hope that your opponents will screw up is lousy politics. However, the Conservatives are in such a commanding position that may be Labour’s best option.
39
Dream on! We’re in for a long period of both economic and political turbulence. There have been two consecutive long term governments, I think its unlikely there will be a third.
The Cameron government will be beset by not just economic problems, but a major political upheaval caused by the desire of Scotland to leave the UK. A Tory government in London will soon move the majority of Scots in that direction.
On the economic front, open warfare will soon break out between the ‘Wets and ‘Drys.’
54 - Mystic Coldstone I see!
@48/51:
You know that Spin Doctors have started to believe their own bullshit when they find themselves seriously claiming that “unpopularity” is a saleable character trait.
Not Flash, Just Shit.
51, if he were boring and dependable it would’ve worked (as it did for 3 months).
The start of Gord’s fightback but,as ever,too little too late.
Windfall tax and fuel poverty set to be debated at Labour conference
Reliable sources have informed us that over 45 Labour affiliates including CLPs and unions have prioritised a debate on a windfall tax at next week’s Labour conference - with more submissions than any other issue. The debate on ‘Record energy prices, windfall profits, fuel poverty & government intervention’ is now set to be one of the main political flashpoints at conference. This debate is crucially about real people’s lives in the real world - thanks to everyone who helped make this happen! If your CLP made a submission please inform us immediately and let us know the contact details of your delegate.
The cult of Vince Cable gathers strength, however, Cables strengths are significantly over-rated IMO. Jeremy Paxman always treats him like some sort of venerable guru on Newsnight but that’s because Paxman doesn’t know his @rse from his elbow when it comes to economic matters.
Cable clearly understands the damaging extent of the problems facing the world economy and the particularly devastating plight of the debtor nations like the US and UK. To his credit he is one of the few mainstream politicians prepared to publicly tell it like it is particularly in the case of the bursting UK house price bubble.
Where Cable goes way off track IMO is in his proposed solutions to these problems. His taxpayer funded bailouts differ in little respect to Browns madcap, and highly expensive, schemes to keep himself in office for a few more months. Privatised profits and socialised losses lead to the eventual destruction of living standards for the majority and is the road to bankruptcy and stagnation.
Listening to Darling this morning on Radio 4 I think there is another financial institution set to go to the wall today. Not too sure which, there is not an obvious bank such as HBoS left. However, the problem is (again) that Darling hints at a problem without putting forward any convincing arguments that solutions are in hand. I don’t see the point of this approach, either say nothing or explain fully the problem and solutions planned. He did say that they had known of problems at HBoS for several weeks; if this was the case, why were no announcements made to the stock exchange? Either Darling didn’t know or the stock exchange rules have been broken.
@54:
And lo, did Coldstone join Rogerdamus in the hallowed halls of those confusing prophecy with desperate wank fantasy.
52. Not sure but there is a rumour that *somebody* is in trouble. It will inevitably be one with too much weight in transactional work. Colliers CRE is one that sticks in my mind but I haven’t heard any names.
Either way, we are expecting a raft of redundancies through the profession over the next week or so. Many firms are already in consultation.
Not sure what purpose this thread serves, speculating on what ‘might have been’ strikes me as self indulgent naval gazing. Let’s face it, Cable didn’t stand for the leadership, says it all really and Chris Huhne lost out again for what ever reason? The Lib Dems went for an imitation Cameron as the safe option; he’s posh, articulate and photogenic but is as dynamic as a Sinclair C5.
The problem is the Lib Dems hitched their ride to Labour’s coat tail for ten years, now that Labour is heading for the precipice, Clegg is dithering whether to let go or not.
The latest polls would suggest that the decision to elect Clegg and continuing a policy of Tory decapitation may not have been the best option in the present Tory re-assurgency. So what’s Clegg the ‘leader’ going to do about it to improve on this derisory 12% poll, because he’s running out of time, fast?
No. They may have reached 10%, but not 12.
Good Morning PBers the world over !!
…. Two polls to muse over the mueseli :
New Selzer/Indy Star poll for Indiana :
McCain 44% .. Obama 47%
………………….
New SUSA poll for New Mexico :
McCain 44% .. Obama 52%
………………….
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080917/NEWS0502/80917076/-1/ARCHIVE
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=edc4d070-fb0f-43a8-b19c-6b32c3ad36f7
47 - a Wachovia Morgan Stanley merger would be absolute madness. The weak merging with the very weak. I’m surprised that Wachovia haven’t collapsed already, they’re filled up to the gills with toxic waste. This merger if it occurs would be the quickest merged company to file for bankruptcy - absolute madness.
In this extract from Bloomberg one could easily substitute our Gordon Brown “the invisible man” for George Bush.
Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — This week, President George W. Bush held a state dinner for Ghana’s president, surveyed Texas hurricane damage, posed with Youth of the Year award finalists, and met with Army General David Petraeus.
During that time, Bush has publicly uttered 160 words about the worst Wall Street crisis since the Great Depression, saying the government is working to “reduce disruptions” in U.S. financial markets.
42
I’m not clinging on to any hope, I’ve been around for long enough to know, that everything turns to s**t eventually.
One has only to look at the political situation of the 19th century and compare that to the politics of the 20th, (the Parties the franchise etc) consider the dramatic differences that took place. Then if the politics of the 19th and 20th were so different, the politics of the 21st century will see even more dramatic changes.
p.s.
I did suggest that you should enquire about adult education classes, skills etc, to improve your employability as being in the Civil Service under the next Tory government won’t be too secure. I do hope you’ve taken my advice?
It such a shame for the LDs, but I think you’re spot on Mike. Cable would have got people to take the LDs seriously. The only person who takes Nick Clegg seriously is Nick Clegg (and boy does he take himself seriously).
BTW Interesting to see that Milburn has reared his ugly head. I pointed out a while back that he was a bit too quiet.
18 HBOS came under sustained attack from short sellers because their highly flawed business model had finally caught up with them just like it did earlier with Northern Rock ie HBOS had a pile of loans coming up which they had to roll over but they couldn’t borrow in the interbank market unless they paid a prohibitively high 3% above bank rate. It was effectively, their fellow banks who finished off HBOS not a bunch of demonised speculators.
62 interesting. Colliers share price has indeed tanked massively recently. they have already recently lost their CFO. we shall see.
UNIVERSAL TRANSLATOR ALERT
UNIVERSAL TRANSLATOR ALERT
Did anyone hear Prezza on R4 this morning. I have never heard so much garbage in all my life.
40 coldstone
‘Privatise the profits,nationalize the losses (socialism for the rich)’
But that’s exactly what your leader Gordon Brown has been championing for the past 11 years and yet we don’t hear any criticism from you?
PPI,Metronet to give a specific example ring any bells?????
Vince Cable always strikes me as being very smug. Sure he was right about the financial situation but then so were a lot of us.
@68:
Yes, the big change in 21st Century politics will be the extinction of the Labour movement as a political force, and the final eradication of left wing ideas.
In truth, the ideas died in the late 20th Century, and the world is just waiting for the remaining socialists themselves to die.
35: If the banking system properly fails, the deposit protection scheme will be near worthless. There is £3.5bn in it, or about £60 each.
If only Lloyds goes down, we might get a little bit more. They “only” have 20 million-odd customers
It’s pretty terrifying.
The good news for Conservatives about Clegg is that he is unable to re-focus the party on Labour seats. The LDs as a consequence face a two party squeeze because their message of “vote for us to get rid of Labour” is diluted when they waste limited media space on attacking the Conservatives. Their guns are not pointed in a single direction.
30 seats after the GE now looks a more likely outcome for the LDs. Clegg is throwing away that “once in 20 years opportunity” to replace Labour as the party of the left. Labour have not been as weak as this in 20 years yet the LDs are only polling 12%! It is so bad he should resign. The LDs are facing losses in MEPs and County councillors next year, just like London 2008.
63 - “The problem is the Lib Dems hitched their ride to Labour’s coat tail for ten years …”
That could never have a pleasant outcome!
Sorry, but I just don’t see it myself. The guy is good, but he is not John McCain, crusty old war horse.
Clegg has is problems, but he is eye-catching in a Cameroon kinda way..
Remember these are the Lib Dems - they are susceptible to a Third-Party-Squeeze whoever is in charge.
Maybe if they had the guts to make a woman leader, they would get noticed. Certainly no one can ignore Lynne Featherstone, but I’m not entirely sure that is a sure-fire vote winner..
Er yeah right. And we’re experience the free markets finest hour right now. The banks took all our money, shoved it on a horse to may a quick buck and lost. I suppose Cameron’s embracing of the NHS, minimum wage etc etc is a classic right wing ploy too. Good work Martin! To have a right you need a left and vice versa.
75
Really! which is why nationalization is back in such a big way.
I would have thought it is the ‘free market’ that is in the dock.
Anway you’ll need us ‘ol Lefties around to defend you from the likes of Prez Palin when she blames all this on the ‘Gays’ right wing religious loonies always do y’know.
p.s.
It isn’t your fault is it?
71. It is interesting, there have been several takeover rumours as well (notably Atisreal acquiring DTZ) and the reality is that there are very fews firms which are not on extremely shaky ground. Only those with a stronger base in consultancy work look secure right now.
Even if nobody folds the job losses coming are going to be bloody. I’m fortunate that I have no responsibilities and could take a sustained period of unemployment but for many others the idea of a couple of years out of work in an industry that has shut down recruitment must be terrifying.
76
I’m pretty bearish on the medium-term prospects for the UK economy, propped up for so long as it has been on rising house prices which are now heading south, however, all this talk of the ‘whole banking system failing’ is hysterical nonsense IMO. The like of HSBC, Barclays, and Lloyds are not going to fail and will come out of the next few years downturn stronger and, in Barclays case particularly, with a bigger global presence after cherry picking from Lehmans.
Badly run banks like HBOS will be swallowed up by the others or propped up and gradually unwound by the government. I suspect a lot of the scare mongering about the so-called threat of systemic bank failure is to panic that terrified clown Brown into coming up with more of the tax-payer funded readies.
Morning all, if Cable had any sense he would have private talks with David Cameron and then at the start of the Tory conference announce his defection to the Tory Party. Cameron could promise him some important role in the Lords. Result bye bye 50 LibDem MPs.
Incidentally in the absense of Stuart Dickson, the Scottish TV this morning has been wall to wall coverage of the demise of the Bank of Scotland. for once I think Brown actually has done the only thing possible by agreeing to the merger but alex Salmond’s claim that the oldest bank has been pulled down by spivs and speculators will resonate with the Scots voters. BBC Scotland reporting every half hour that Salmond has cancelled his trip to the Ryder Cup in order to get close to the decision makers in Lloyds TSB to try and save thousands of Scottish jobs. Even if he fails, he will be seen to have fought for Scottish jobs.
Does anyone outside the LibDem party believe they ahve anything to offer the country? I thought Nick Clegg spoke reasonably well yesterday, what little of his speech I watched but he is a pale shadow of Cameron. He gives the impression of being “forced” and that humour and a commanding presence does not come naturally. Very surprising for an old boy of Westminster or whichever public school he attended.
80 - What we are seeing is the down side of regulation, in that it is human nature to try to subvert barriers and cross lines in the sand. The further danger is that if we try to close down the current subversions then new ones will only be found.
71 i know peopole at the big agencies - none have announced big job losses yet but it can only be a matter of time as the transactional work volumes heve been down 50%+ for over a year.
The article about the Lib Dems is totally biased. Nick Clegg gave an excellent speech and is a really good presenter. Vince Cable is of course a great figure but he isn’t leader and the majority of Lib Dems are happy with a younger leader like Clegg who will be there for the duration. The Tory line is that Clegg is rubbish because that suits them….!
85 Regulations and laws are a good thing. It’s important to define boundaries and make certain practices illegal. This should evolve over time and because people break or get round them is no argument to get rid of them. No-one would argue that because people still commit murder we should get rid of homocide laws.
83 “all this talk of the ‘whole banking system failing’ is hysterical nonsense”
i would have said so too, a week ago. Now i couldnt say that with any confidence at all. I think there’s at least a 30% chance of this happening, sad to say.
Mike,
Yes, I’m afraid so. It’s called squeeze. What difference would Cable have made? He would have tightened the Lib Dem media presence from 2 people, to one person.
Kaletsky article is BS. why should “investors who reckoned on a long-term recovery that would restore the mortgage giants to profitability” (in other words, economically illiterate imbeciles) profit from their “investments”?
the short sellers got it spot on, they noticed that the emperor’s outfit was looking a bit threadbare and got on.
88, on the plus side, those that own cave networks can look forward to an influx of new tenants providing an important new stream of revenue.
@81:
But, Coldstone, that’s not because anybody’s started believing in Socialism again. It’s just a utilitarian measure because the US government allowed Fannie and Freddie to become too big.
In any case, it’s now clear that the nationalisation of Northern Rock was a bloody stupid idea. Funny how risking the entire UK economy to shore up a few Labour marginals hasn’t turned out so good.
84
Brown allowed it? I think sponsored it might be a better term.
Lloyds TSB and HBOS are to merge, the Chancellor said, “I wanted to make sure that we facilitated the coming together of two banks to create a secure institution.”
“I think it was absolutely necessary - we are going through a truly exceptional time - for some time we have been aware that there has been some problems with HBOS.
“With HBOS and Lloyds coming together it creates a secure financial institution - financial stability must trump competition - we will make sure this deal goes through,” he said.
He said there had been no bribery and that this decision would not be revisited, “the competition requirement will be wavered in this circumstance - financial stability is more important.
“We do need to take this opportunity to take a look at how our regulatory system works - it is an area where we need to do more work,” the Chancellor said.
“We are determined that we will do everything we possibly can to stabilise this situation - financial stability is of utmost importance.”
If I thought Scottish Independence was a strong possibility before this, I now think it’s a certainty.
87 - No but in terms of activity that we merely wish to monitor and curb the excesses of then we should be more wary of a rush to regulate. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with short selling, the reason it has appeared to cause issues is because the only realistic money making chances are on the short side of the market and also that the shorters were pushing against an open door. If confidence had held up in HBOS so would the share price regardless of the level of shorting as there would have been enough balancing traders on the long side.
Mike, your post is steeped in the benefit of hindsight and heavily tinged with a dose of ‘told-you-so’ (from someone who voted Huhne and never liked Clegg from the beginning).
Being Lib Dem leader is a poisoned chalice - whoever takes the role will be probed for weaknesses by the media and cruelly lampooned. Cable knew what he would have faced and wisely chose not to endure it. Clegg has withstood the media scrutiny quite well and has not even caved despite his occasional tendency to self-destruct by inappropriate citing of the number ‘30′.
Because Clegg is fallible, he has to bring forward people like Cable and Huhne to show the party is more than a one-man band so perhaps the net effect is helpful. Certainly the LDs have a stronger front bench team than Cameron’s lot.
As for positioning, I for one wish we would accentuate our civil liberties stance against the snooping state and whitehall-knows-best centralization a bit more. For that reason I certainly don’t like the robocall move. But overall I like the redistributive tax cuts (even though they may prove difficult to deliver if Labour and the financial community continue their joint campaign to flush the economy down the pan).
The 12% poll rating may be a rogue poll or perhaps a signal that the economic dislocation is pushing people to embrace familiar certainties. We’ll see. But change leader? Not a chance. There’s no time for looking back. LDs have to get on with the job with the team we’ve got.
@88:
The thing you’re not realising is that this is not capitalism failing, this is capitalism succeeding.
The weak are being swept away. This is what is periodically is supposed to happen. This is why dimwitted nationalisations are best avoided- because they reduce the cleansing effect of sudden market renormalisation.
2.The referendum on the Lisbon Treaty vote was a complete disaster, his handling of that not only reflected badly on him and the Libdems. It sent out the message that Clegg was like Gordon Brown when it came to avoiding a situation where the outcome was not already heavily stacked in their favour.
Clegg ran a very poor leadership campaign right from the start, but like Gordon Brown he was helped by the fact that he was the preordained favourite despite his campaign skills did not living up to his pre contest billing within the party or in the press.
The Conservative party finally got its act together last time, and both the Parliamentary party and the grass roots ended up choosing the best candidate to emerge in the contest to lead them and run a GE campaign.
I know that the happy couple in Downing St have said that they will legislate to ensure that the merger of HBOS and Lloyds TSB goes through without any problems from the point of view of the competition regulators.
But (and it is quite a big but) we cannot legislate here to over-ride EU competition regulation. The new bank/insitution will have an impact on the continent - that is inevitable. I wonder what the Eurocrats are planning to ensure that they retain supremacy
91
I think we are headed for stagflation, if the banks wont lend money, mortgages will be as rare as hens teeth, property prices will drop further, more negative equity, and that’s ignoring the business side of the equation
92
If Socialism is such a bad idea, why has Cameron been so eager to adopt it?
Martin you can call it anyname you want, you can dress it up any way you need, to make you feel better. Massive intervention by the state is socialism in my book, and I’ve noticed a lot of right-wing commentators agree with me.
In fact a couple of days ago, the DT’s editorial warned nasty lefties not to be so smug, a pretty pointless warning to me, as smug is my normal mode anyway, that’s when I’m not being a ‘Prig’ of course.
What is it George V said, ‘We’re all socialists now’
95 - “Certainly the LDs have a stronger front bench team than Cameron’s lot”
LOL
More delusion from the left. So who is Cameron’s equal in the Lib Dems?
Keep it up
88
With respect I think that “30% chance of system bank failure” even here in the profligate UK is hysterical. For sure the situation is dire, the worst for many years, though I was dismissed by many on here a week or two ago when I agreed with Darlings assessment that we have the worst conditions for 60 years.
There will be a severe recession in the UK particularly in the financial, construction, and retail sectors. Nominal house prices will fall at least 50% over the next two years and will take many more years before they show significant signs of rising gain. Job losses, bankruptcies, repossessions will rocket while living standards for many will plunge. But all this is a natural market reaction to the profligacy and reckless borrowing/spending of recent years. Life will still go on. Well capitalised, well run companies, including many banks will carry on trading and come out the other ned stronger. Weak, badly run companies, and governments, will go to the wall or be taken over.
I remember the stagflation of the seventies, the recession of the early nineties etc and the current situation is worse but the banking system will survive and eventually prosper again.
98, I think the EU will let it past. They’d be insane to stop it. If the UK banking sector gets into serious trouble, that’s got to affect Europe, not to mention that we’re already EU-sceptic. If they blocked this and it all goes pear-shaped we’ll be EU-hating.
Guido on Vince Cable
http://www.order-order.com/2008/09/cable-shows-his-ignorance-again.html
A spokesman for EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, asked on
Thursday whether the EU regulator would have to approve the deal, said: “It is
up to the parties to verify whether they need to notify to us or to the
authorities in the UK.”
The Commission has sole power to decide on mergers of a “European dimension”. However, if both companies have two-thirds of their turnover in a single member state, the competition authorities in that country are empowered
to authorise or block the deal.
101
The left? the Left? The LD’s have moved to the Right! Its David (Our NHS) Cameron whose on the left. The only politician in the UK whose further to the left than Cameron, is Boris!
96 No, No, No.
What is week about having £100k saved in a Northern Rock bank account. If the govt hadn’t helped they would have lost the lot. They would have done nothing wrong, nor been weak in any way.
This crisis is NOT capitalism working.
It is capitalism NOT working because capitalism lost track of the relationship between value, risk and money, because its language was far to complicated/abstract and people wanted to earn money without doing anything.
week=weak etc
83. Voxpop
Banking crises have a life all their own. Banks dont even need to be badly run to suffer catastrophic liquidity failures. I am amused by the idiot commentators who say stupid things like “the Fed could run out of money” (no, the US can print more dollars.), but we shouldnt be too dismissive. The authorities need to restore confidence swiftly or things could spiral out of control.
The deleveraging and the shock to the global financial markets means that the London property market now looks very vulnerable. Having started the year believing house would fall 10-12% this year and 20-23% overall was likely, I now think 15% this year and a fall of 35% is now my most probable scenario with a fall on the order of 45% now possible (note real prices, so in nominal terms that would be 30-35% over 3 years).
I am beginning to think that Labour should consider a swift election. The HBOS takeover is going to mean a lot of misery north of the border and I see a lot of jobs going, so the BCC forecast of an extra 300,000 job losses is now looking optimistic. 2009 is going to be really horrible. And I really dont think anyone is listening to the bunker’s claim that Gordon is the man for the job. Matters were not improved by the moronic John Prescott on R4 this morning, who reminded everyone of how stupid Labour sounds and is. It mattered so much less when things were rosy, but now his malapropisms just sound dumb.
Funny - I thought raising taxes on workers to support unemployed chavs was a left wing policy?
109, an election with Brown as leader, having just seen a poll with the Tories on 52% and a 28 point lead? [I do think that was a rogue, but it isn't miles out of line with recent polling].
Not a chance.
110
You name me one, ‘Right Wing’ policy economic or otherwise that DC has promised to implement on coming to power?
As a Tory, I’m disappointed with Clegg too, because we need an effective opposition party for obvious reasons. Labour is inherently morally unacceptable to me, so that leaves the LibDems as the only possibility. The LD leader should stamp his values and personality on his party sufficiently to ensure that after 2010 no Labour MPs are tempted to defect and take the LDs over as a less-contaminated brand than their own. Clegg shows no signs of doing this.
I can remember previous LD leaders back to Thorpe and they’ve all been utter buffoons. Wee Davey Steel, Paddy Pantsdown, Chat Show Charlie, Menses Campbell and now Nick “£30″ Clegg. every one has been a damn fool but at least none was transparently malicious in the way that Labour leaders always are.
107 - We are still living under the misapprehension that money in banks should be 100% safe. It shouldn’t be and isn’t. There is no such thing as a 100% safe investment. Anything that has a return has a risk. The higher the return the higher the risk. Bank accounts are low return, so low risk, not no risk.
109. After this week, a 30-35% fall in nominal house prices peak-to-trough over 3 years is looking hopelessly optimistic. They’re already down 12% and recent events must have kicked away whatever sentiment remained in the market so falls will accelerate. I think we’ll reach 30% down by next summer and then keep falling.
Economics is obviously Cable’s strength and if he was leader I can image him on TV and the radio opining sagely on the current situation. In the same way Ming was more prominent than the Tory spokesmen when Iraq was the main issue of the day.
However, these are uncertain times and voters want a united party with a team that looks like a potential government, not just a one-man band. And they don’t want the uncertainty of a hung Parliament. There is only one alternative to Labour: hence, the swing behind the Tories.
Also, I’m not sure Cable is a good strategist. He seems to be behind the move to become the party of lower taxation, a reversal of their position in recent elections. The Libdems were regarded as impotent but principled. They now seem impotent but opportunistic. At best the policy seems a cynical ploy to stave off the resurgent Tories, and at worst it looks a dangerous leap in the dark when government borrowing is zooming out of control.
Huhne could still become leader …
13.”As I said a couple of days ago, I think there is a danger of Cable becoming overated.”
I agree with that, at the end of the day Vince chose not to put himself forward as a candidate in the contest. The Libdems over looked the one candidate who did that twice, Huhne has the hunger and ambition and proved himself very media savvy street fighter in a campaign….
18: Kaletsky’s article is IMO mostly wrong. Short selling of shares in itself is a matter for the free market and I see no reason why governments (British or American) should have a view on whether a bank should be priced at X or Y. Nor is it in the national interest that taxpayers should prop up shareholders (who are also mostly taxpayers) who made a bad guess about the price. So I’m opposed to any kind of guarantee for the Lloyds-TSB share price, which Kaletsky is advocating. Similarly, I’m sorry for Northern Rock shareholders, but we shouldn’t pay them any more than the shares were worth (which appears to be nothing).
Where government intervention is justifiable is when the underlying structure of essentially healthy companies is undermined by short-term hitches in the way the system operates. The complex and non-transparent system of securitisation of debt has largely collapsed, making a number of business models non-viable until it’s sorted out. A major alternative source of funding is the deposits of companies and individuals, and governments can legitimately act to stop a panic flight of deposits. If this is done successfully - and a merger of banks if one is over-exposed to short-term interbank debt is one way to help - then people can speculate the share price up or down all they like without putting the system at risk.
even if the system doesnt fail i still believe the depths of our problems point to millions more unemployed - gives me no pleasure to say so - i may become one of them. this recession is going to be brutally severe & its just starting to hit home to many people. even without a systemic banking failure we are looking at the most severe recession since the war. It’s as plain as the nose on your face.
We’re having a major financial crisis restricting credit to all but the well above averagely wealthy, we have rocketing inflation and commmodity prices and a weakening currency. it is a perfect storm for people’s household budgets. with the financial and banking crisis even the “well off” professional can’t now assume 2 good pay packets will contine to come in each month.
Labour will be hopeless at finding solutions to all this. tax receipts will plunge & either borrowing will rise or huge cuts in services made.
93 Coldstone, I think for once you and I agree on something!! I will stand corrected but wasn’t the Bank of Scotland the country’s (i.e. Britain’s)oldest surviving bank having been created by the original Scottish Parliament in 1695.
The death of the Bank of Scotland will be as important to Scots as Manchester United being wound up to the English.
The short answer is yes because the poll is clearly a rogue.
So I hope when the next Mori poll shows the inevitable correction you’ll do a piece that says ‘the Lib Dems were right to choose Clegg’ - but however I sadly suspect you won’t…
I’m having my say on the Lib Dems… I can’t hold it in any longer and it’ll make me feel better.
How can anyone seriously still believe that they are the warm, fuzzy, ‘our fight is not with the other two parties’ community campaigners anymore when Clegg says things like this:-
” Once you strip out the offensive parts of the Conservative Party there isn’t much left ”
(nothing like annoying / insulting over 50% of voters while making yourself look offensive and nasty).
Calling ministers complacent about the growing hardship many face after stating the state pension was about ‘about £30 quid’.
Rules out coal and nuclear and wants to bring in vicious green taxes that a majority of families would probably struggle to offset against a reduction in other taxes.
Want to bring in half-cocked health boards/police to bribe/force people to prove they are healthy before a tax break.
Bring in road pricing + hikes in fuel duty and god knows what else to fleece anyone who actually has to live in the real world to support their family / have a decent life.
Promise huge / unfunded and vague tax cuts PURELY to try and save their Southern seats and Middle-England marginal’s knowing full well they can say what they like because it’ll never have to be followed through.
‘Make noises’ to back off from their rampant pro-EU stance, re the above.
Dare to call the Conservatives ‘Blue Labour’ while being exactly that themselves (being whatever they need to be or saying whatever they need to say to gain votes depending on the territory).
I could go on…
In closing, Clegg is an angry bum-fluffed knock-off copy wannabe Cameron with heaps of hypocrisy but without the credibility.
I have never ever heard something so absurd when he told the delegates that they were ‘headed for government’. Keep saying it Nick, but it’ll never sound any less ridiculous. It’s not going to happen.
I expect the Lib Dems to knife Clegg at some point in the medium term once it’s clear his tactics are not working.
12% flatters them and they would be best served being honest on what they stand for (if they actually know themselves anymore).
112 -
Schools - “reintroduce teaching that stretches the strongest”
Employment - “every out of work benefit claimant capable of doing so will be expected to work or prepare for work”
Prisons - “make community sentences tough and effective, and withdraw benefits for those who don’t attend”
Health - “Introducing payment-by-results within the system”
Don’t want to bore you. I’ve shown you mine, now show me a coherent Labour or Lib Dem policy over the last year which has been implemented and has worked.
I won’t hold my breath.
115 Matt a 30-35% fall brings you down to the long-term trend line. The market always over-reacts, down as well as up. Thus, a drop of 40-45% is nor unrealistic.
As predicted by yours truly this morning, major rally, ftse back to 5000, shorts are screaming. LLOY back to last night close.
Central banks back on the pump!!!
122
Rules out coal and nuclear and wants to bring in vicious green taxes that a majority of families would probably struggle to offset against a reduction in other taxes.
Whats the point of having Coal and Nuclear power stations, Zac Goldsmith and his ‘Green terrorists’ would only sabotage them.
When will Cameron condemn Goldsmith for his defence of attacks on private property?
Huhne has exactly the economic credibility needed for the moment, authority, and more range than Cable.
128 i guess we can all relax now then…..
if only life was so simple. .
Good to read some sensible comment about short selling for once. Listening to the media you’d think these poeple are out there bringing down otherwise happy companies at will and on a whim.
109 Ken – “the US can print more dollars”: they can only print so much without risking higher inflation
106.
“The only politician in the UK whose further to the left than Cameron, is Boris!”
Reuters reports that confidence in Political Parties throughout the UK overnight has led to their shares being suspended. Fly-by-night operators such as Tony Blair and John Major are being accused by commentators at having milked the system for decades with speculative speeches built on sub-prime electoral support, leaving the system in he present mess. MMC rules about monopoly of unprincipled drivel are being suspended to allow the merger of NewLabour and Conservative Parties despite their current joint market share. The Chairman of the merged group will be Boris Johnson and the Chief Executive John Cruddas. Massive redundancies among young suits on cocaine are expected following the merger - this has led to a series of wild parties in Palace of Westminster toilets where piles of debit cards have been abandoned because their edges are now too blunt to let them fit into cash mashines. Gordon Brown is leaving the organisation with an undisclosed sum to become the biggest merchant banker in Scotland.
126. Yes that’s what I was saying. In fact the long-term trend line has been distorted by the unprecedentedly long boom so I’d say we need a fall of more than 30-35% to hit the trend and then we’ll see an overshoot.
As has been pointed out, even if prices fall 50% they will still be more expensive than in 1997 as a multiple of average salaries.
113.
“You name me one, ‘Right Wing’ policy economic or otherwise that DC has promised to implement on coming to power?”
Other than those of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair of course.
8: um, without conceding all your points about the LDs and Labour, what do you think the Tories are *for*? Cameron will let us know in due course? Perhaps. Sadly, because of general public cynicism, all British parties have found they succeed best when they’re campaigning against someone else, and of course that feeds the cynicism - “if they all say the others are rubbish, perhaps they’re all correct”.
Interesting to see test refer to himself as ‘a Republican’. I’m pretty sure he’s British, but I know what he means - lots of us feel we have so much of a stake in the US that we identify with a party in a way that we wouldn’t in, say, Germany. It’s a compliment to the central position of the US in recent years, and I hope our US readers don’t mind. Incidentally, we’ve not heard much from SSI lately - are you OK out there in frozen Oregon?
Can anyone confirm, have the BBC reported on any news channel since midnight the current poll putting the tories on 52%. I certainly haven’t and if they have not then surely someone should be lodging a formal complaint with the Broadcasting Authorities?
Hearing Jacqui Smith saying Labour will be chosen ahead of the Tories because of their SOUND record in Government is just fantasy. I reckon the Tory PPC in Redditch must be looing at a majority of at least 10,000.
Interesting that some more big names in other sectors might go pop. I run a very small online recruitment company and I have had more new enquiries from potential clients in the past week than in the past month. Clearly my much lower fees and far more flexible structure may be a deciding factor for hard pressed HR directors told to slash their recruitment budgets.
116. Wow, pessimist. But you are calling for an acceleration in falls, and this is the fastest rate of decline in history. As a long term bear on house prices, I agree a larger fall is possible, but then we are talking about a serious multi quarter recession a la early 80s or early 90s. Gordon and Labour would be a mere smear on the ground in that case.
Tory donor threatens to defect over Europe
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23557114-details/Tory+donor+threatens+to+defect+over+Europe/article.do
127 - There is still sentiment drag though, market has been up and down all morning. This looks like a pause for breath to me, especially considering the Central Bank effort. Tomorrow will probably see a rise as well but Monday will be a critical day and personally I wouldn’t rule out a major plunge.
no - the poll hasnt featured anywhere yet.
68. your continued interest in my future employment is nice, however it is also unnecessary. My section is understaffed at the minute, plus we do a job that the tories have said needs to stay.
135 - see 125. Perhaps you could help Coldstone with an example of a coherent Labour policy which has worked over the last 12 months. He seems to be struggling to come up with one.
122: “The death of the Bank of Scotland will be as important to Scots as Manchester United being wound up to the English.”
Hey, I could live with that!
135 - Nick, I think you’ll find that test is a she…
The property market crash is here now, today. One bed flat in N. London sold at auction yesterday for 60k. Sanity at last.
Weak banks are failing which is good and UK insurers will pick the eyes out of AIG hence PRU and AVI share price up today.
London has crushed Wall Street and there is more to come.
136. I was listening to BBC Breakfast News and they reported a poll which showed the Conservatives as popular as they had been “under Margaret Thatcher”. It didn’t give the 52 per centage figure.
I thought this was poor reporting as Thatcher’s popularity waxed and waned and I felt the report should have given a benchmark date.
138 good stuff. Cameron must eventually tackle the cancer that is the EU. He wil get elected regardless of what he says about Europe but when in power he must deal with the problem. I’m not holding my breath though.
145. I hope you snapped that up!
145 which are the best websites to view these property trades?
145 glad you are so confident. i wish i could be.
Sporting Index back up on the UK general election result, the big shift is that the Lib Dems are now 43-46 when yesterday they were 46-49. Labour are 223-229 and the Conservatives are 352-358. That implies a Conservative majority of 60, if my counting on fingers and thumbs is correct.
123.And if you are proved wrong, will you do the same?
Big move on the US election too on Sporting Index, John McCain is now 254-260, when previously he was 259-265 (and corresponding changes for Barack Obama).
110. Actually comments like that are suddenly going to become very unpopular: Everybody else who is unemployed is a Chav and parasite until it happens to them!
146, I recall when the BBC last showed a poll, they got the figures for Brown and Cameron ‘accidentally’ mixed up on the graphic, showing the Supreme Leader ahead.
see if this link works.
http://www.willmotts.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=175
“Why oh why is this man not the Lib Dem leader?”
Possibly because he didn’t stand?
I see a bunch of Labour has-beens have launched a new campaign entitled “Go Fourth”.
As in Henley?
136 it was on the midnight news on R4
Have to have some sympathy with this. Picking leaders isn’t easy. We should know!
As for Cable, he is overrated. He was he got a good press from Andrew Neill because of an old teaching connection, he was wrong about NR and he made one good joke which wasn’t even his and he always sits back with that smirk on his face when its refered to never giving credit to its true author. Very annoying.
Mind you, for the most part, he gets away with it, so maybe Mike is right.
Nationally the Lib Dems have built their….careers[?] on ‘getting away with it’.
158, I thought they were fifth in Henley, behind the Greens and BNP?
138.Rod, check back to find the last time Wheeler actually gave any money to the Conservative party. This is beginning to be a regular media slot at Conference time.
113 I strongly disagree about Kennedy.
I’ve always felt that the LDs woes started the day they knifed him.
Whatever his faults, he had charisma/character and most important of all to the third party,got air time.
Their current predicament serves them right. He deserved better.
Lib Dems > Losing Everywhere.
By the by, Clegg is finished for at least the next few cycles.
That £ 30 gaffe was his baseball cap moment, his 15 pints of bitter.
His scruffy coat on Remembrance Sunday. His Rinka. His (ironically) Sheffield Rally.
It will hunt him forever and is the stuff a million ‘In Touch’ and ‘Labour Rose’ leaflets will ridicule him for.
Defection through despair must surely be in the minds of thousands of rightward leaning LD activists and hundreds of their Councillors looking down the electoral barrel of their next brush with the electorate.
158
they should go forth and multipy.
156 thanks
162.Iain Dale has more on this. Stuart Wheeler’s Really Helpful Intervention
142: Sure. The introduction of community policing teams. We were discussing the impact at last night’s non-partisan meeting with local police officers. Everyone present who spoke welcomed it, and sceptics in the audience seemed largely won over by the end.
You want coherence? Every ward in England has an identifiable team of local officers, tied to the ward, with individual contacts details and regular public meetings to discuss what their priorities should be for the next 3 months and give feedback on the previous 3 months.
You want results? Every officer at the meeting agreed it had reduced crime.
You could reasonably argue that it’s a pity it wasn’t done before, but you asked for a specific example for the last 12 months.
As for your examples of Tory policy, they range from restatements of current policy (we can argue about whether current policy works well in each case, but “making claimants work or prepare for work” is exactly the current policy) to vague slogans. What, precisely, would they do or not do to “reintroduce teaching that stretches the strongest”?
Clegg follows from Blair, or maybe Thatcher. Personality-led politics: the great unwashed will vote mindlessly for the prettiest, strongest and most charismatic leader.
But really it’s about issues. Labour is unpopular because of soaring inflation in the things real people spend most money on. It is not about Brown’s speech or hand gestures, it is that Asda and Tesco now charge a lot more than they did last year. Erstwhile Labour supporters are skint.
Some of this is Brown’s fault: the 10p tax band fiasco for a start. But with a couple of honourable exceptions, his Labour critics are not talking about policy but personality.
Nick Clegg’s a nice looking boy with plenty of charisma, and he’s a good deal younger than Ming, so what has gone wrong? Well, perhaps it is that chat show Charlie’s clear and unequivocal opposition to unpopular government policies has been replaced by naval gazing about positioning and tax rates. Newsflash: no-one cares whether LibDems want income tax 1p up or 2p down. Newsflash: everyone knows the LibDems won’t get near Downing Street and won’t decide tax rates.
Ishoos, not personality. What about Big Brother? Our broken constitution? Does a party with both Liberal and Democrat in its name really have nothing to say about these matters? Apparently yes.
The pretty boy is not working for the LibDems and replacing Brown won’t work for Labour.
Getting rid of people like Wheeler is a good thing for the Tory party.
It will mark another step towards people not being able to dictate policy direction by giving money.
That, to my mind (fuzzy as it is) is a good thing
144: test hasn’t disclosed his or her gender - it’s one of seanT’s wind-ups to claim that test is a delicate female flower.
Actually I appreciate the thread (The bit at the tops) candour as it is realistic!
I do think the LD’s are going to have a really rough election next time round as the shifting resources from Tory/LD marginals to Labour/LD marginals just does not make sense when you think many LD incumabnts are not moving seat with the strategy. Realisically you are looking at a cull of LD mP’s maybe to Ashdown levels.
My hope is Clegg will get culled in Sheffield Hallam, Huhne in Eastleigh and Cable in Twickers! Maybe CK will come back then! At least he only made m,istakes when he had a bad hangover - Clegg makes them all the time!!!
143. What a crass comment. Now I know you’re a total plonker.
145. can’t wait to share the proceeds of all this good news.
The reason Clegg was earmarked for the leadership was that people knew he had the confidence, guts and powers of persuasion to give the party a far stronger liberal underpinning and vision. This he is doing admirably - in fact, he’s succeeding far better than I’d hoped.
So far so good for that type of communication skill, then. Where he’s falling down, in my opinion, is that he and his press team don’t seem to be taking into account his limits. Is it really worth doing 11 back-to-back interviews in a row if you’re going to be so tired you fluff up on the pension?
Maybe some politicians can do 15 interviews in a row and never make a mistake. Great. But people are different, and think it’s a question of knowing and working within your limits.
Not only must the LD’s be ruing the day they ousted Kennedy, but Labour must be ruing the day he defected to the SDP! He could well have become PM by now if he hadn’t.
138 I’ve been telling everyone who cares to listen that the wallpaper is only barely concealing the cracks on this issue within the party.
I would estimate that at least three quarters of Conservative activists I know regard the issue as being of high importance and want ’something’ (in varying degrees ranging downwards from BOO)
done about it.
173. Weren’t you encouraging people to buy property last autumn? A good time to buy and all that?
re 170. There is no greater expert on “delicate female flowers” than SeanT. He makes his living from writing about them - poor things.
By the way, not sure if it’s been mentioned, but several central banks (us, the Yankee doodles, the ECB etc) have announced collaborative action to try and bolster liquidity conditions.
I’m not sure he is as good as he or some in the media think he is. His lack of grasp of the detail of how global markets work has been cruelly exposed recently. He’s just as populist and shallow as the worst of them.
178 So what’s next for the Lib Dems then Mike, since you’re stuck with Clegg till 2010-2014? Is there anything that can be done to turn them around.
I ask because, we’re all friends down in here in Sussex and if the LD’s do badly it will be hard to stop a total Tory hegemony.
BTW I noticed that Clegg calls the party the “Liberals”. There’s more to it than GB’s comments at PMQs. Will there be a name change?
re 174. I disagree completely. He comes over as a berk who doesn’t believe in anything.
From his election last December until today I have kept my views on Clegg almost entirely under wraps to give the guy a chance. The £30 slip was mega - bigger than his other “30″ comment. He’ll get attacked on this time and time again. To blame it on doing too many interviews is just limp. He’s a party leader after all.
We’ll have to live with him but it is so dispiriting when your party leader seems so inept.
174. Is it really worth doing 11 back-to-back interviews in a row if you’re going to be so tired you fluff up on the pension?
Come on that’s a poor excuse - He had NO idea! Clegg is crap on the telly! He has made one mistake after another: Miming to a kiddies nursrey rhyme, The paxo interview and the penion gaff! I suppose he was tired in all of those! I think the Peter principle applies to Clegg! CK was tired when he made his mistake! I think in a hard erection campaign Clegg would wilt and his recent performance shows he has not got staminia!
The “New York Times” reviews the swing state of Virginia :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/us/politics/18virginia.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
172. mirthios: What a crass comment.
In what way? Sounds to me like the reaction that probably the majority of non-ManYoo English football fans would have.
183 - Unfortunate typo in your piece!
181, the Liberal party still exists, so that could make a name change impossible.
182
£30gate,
that one will be played again and again, like the Redwood and the Welsh anthem.
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=RIwBvjoLyZc
120 I completely agree. There’s no reason at all why governments should compensate shareholders whose companies collapse. It’s bad luck, but sensible investors know that some of their investments will fail, and others will pay off extremely well. If compensation were offered, shareholders would have no incentive to ensure that companies were prudently run.
In answer to Mike’s question, yes, Vincent Cable would be a very good leader for the Lib Dems.
167 - Community policing *s*.
I can give you a personal example here. Drug dealers have been openly operating in the road I live in for the past year. After reporting it several times to the local police station, nothing was done. We received a letter saying that a community police team had been allocated to our area, and gave us a mobile number to ring to police crime. That very night, as the dealers were working again, I rang the number. The man I spoke to said he would make a report. The next week, rang the number again as another drug deal was going on, the man said he would make another report. He did offer to come round and speak to me, and arranged an appointment for two weeks time (he explained he was busy until then).
At the appointed date (2 hours late) the PCO turned up. He took all the details I had already given to the local police station. He explained that the local police station did not pass information to the local policing teams, so it was all new to him.
He told me to keep reporting each time it happened, as then the police could establish a pattern and would know what time to turn up. When I suggested I could ring when the deals were happening, he said this was not convenient as he didn’t have a car and the chances of him being in the nearby area were unlikely.
In my experience, this has increased crime. The drug dealers use cars and bikes; they know that PCOs are on foot and that squad cars do not attend reports of drug dealing. So they have become increasingly brazen about their activities.
Does this sound like it has worked for me?
“Reintroduce teaching that stretches the strongest”. Its called streaming Nick. My wife (who is a teacher) is not allowed to stream kids, she has to ensure classes have a mix of brighter and underachieving students. When I went to school (under a Tory government) we had streaming. This is what the policy is.
168. JohnL: …”perhaps it is that chat show Charlie’s clear and unequivocal opposition to unpopular government policies has been replaced by navel gazing about positioning and tax rates.”
It’s funny - what you call navel-gazing is what I would call an overdue spelling-out of clear liberal principles.
175 - Kennedy was never a Labour member so never defected. The SDP was the first party he joined.
140 - To be fair, the Ipsos-Mori poll has been mentioned by the BBC in their item on John Prescott’s call for unity:
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7622504.stm
120. I agree, I don’t know why Test thinks it’s Okay to bail out shareholders.
190. Streaming still happens in schools. When I went to school (under this Labour government) we had streaming. Try again, see if you can come up with a Right Wing policy Cameron has committed to other than “Tax Cuts for Dead Millionaires.”
The “LA Times” looks at McCain’s struggle with “the economy stupid” :
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaign18-2008sep18,0,2208769.story
194, you think if you own a house worth over £250k your kids should have to pay 40% on the amount above the threshold?
I think it was Mark Senior who first drew my attention to these BBC guidelines on citing opinion polls:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/edguide/politics/reportingopinio.shtml
They don’t always follow them, but seem to have done so today.
177 Hazel Blears was on Radio 4 just over a couple of weeks ago saying “my messge to young people wanting to buy is , yes GO FOR IT” as the government had relauch no 1001 and announced a stamp duty holiday. i see the buying frenzy hasnt started yet. Hazel Blears “advice” was particularly nasty and cruel to those she persuaded, hopefully not many - encouraging people to buy in a falling market which has barely dropped 10% from peak and clearly has a long long way to go.
In Scotland we still have streaming in secondary education.
194 - Streaming based on ability does not exist now. Find me a comprehensive teacher who says that it does and I will retract my remarks. Certainly in Birmingham LEA it is not allowed.
On the Scottish reaction to the HBoS take over.
Don’t at least some of the Scots realise that without this ‘foreign’ bank, there would be no bank, no jobs and no shares?
I live in Yorkshire. Not the most humble part of the UK when it comes to pride.
We grew up with the Halifax. I opened my first savings account there as a kid. Nearly everyone I know has something with them, in some cases its their employment.
But I for one am glad that Lloyds stepped in and saved what can be saved thereby restricting the damage both to the bank and the national economy, despite the fact that their registered office is in Glasgow!
It seems to me that this merger proves there is more safety in numbers/diverification and that means we are all better off together.
196. I’d be fine with 100% IHT.
Deal a humiliation, says Mugabe
One can only assume he is referring to HBOS/Lloyds TSB !!
198 Plenty of people have good reasons to buy houses, even in falling markets. It’s only a problem for them if they find that they have to sell suddenly.
199 - Scotland seems to have its education sorted out. No tuition fees either.
Many of you will be familiar with the constructive and friendly contributions which “SBS” has made to this site over the years. I am sorry to have to tell you that Sam has been diagnosed as having a brain tumour. He is currently in the Royal Berkshire Hospital in Reading, pending a transfer to the John Radcliffe in Oxford. I do not know much more than that at the moment, but if and when I get any news I will let you know. Of necessity, I am an infrequent contributor to pb.com these days (it is distinctly “interesting” in the City these days), but I will trawl through when I can.
200. umm… yes it does…
I did my GCSEs in 2005 and we were separated into different classes based on ability. I think it depends on the LEA.
Come up with a right wing policy, we’re all waiting…
Haven’t got time to read through the thread, I’m afraid, but you really are seriously overestimating Vince.
He’s not a hard worker, he’s not consistent, he’s not relaxed and, bless him, he’s not funny. TV has made him a bit of a star, but anyone who knows him, or has fought against him as I have, knows he ain’t the stuff that party leaders are made of… even for the LibDems.
The simple fact is that the LDs would have been better picking Chris Huhne, who maybe an exceptionally irritating character in a very marginal seat, but has the drive, energy and concentration required for a modern party leader.
204 disingenous for a first time buyer. they would be totally crazy to buy now and i say that as someone who has worked in the property industry for many years.
196 - To be honest, the unfairness of inheritance tax is that the rich can avoid it whereas those on middle incomes can’t really afford to.
You need to levy some taxes and I think in principle the idea of taxing estates, if done fairly, is not a bad one. Inheritances are basically a windfall (I would be glad to get one but am not counting on it and hope my parents live long enough to reduce it). I don’t really think taxing them is any worse (and probably much better) than taxing earned income, investment income or expenditure.
206 I’m very sorry to hear that.
202 But will you be once you’re a property owner?
@ 92: In any case, it’s now clear that the nationalisation of Northern Rock was a bloody stupid idea.
For me, what’s even worse about this government intervention was that the weakest, because it failed first, got rescued. Any that fail subsequently (because they have slightly better business models) will not, because the country has run out of money.
174 You are Nick Clegg’s mum and I claim my Euro Disney pass.
200.I have two children going through the secondary education system, and they are in classes streamed by ability.
Mr Smithson, With respect, I think you are missing the point here about Clegg - Like McBroon, Clegg thought he was ‘Born To Lead’, in this case the Lib Dems. You point out that those who thought he was the right man bear some responsibility.
But Clegg just would not have taken no for an answer. Okay, he did not get a ‘coronation’ like McBroon, and had to fight for it. But if he had lost to Huhne, he would have been back for another crack when / if the Labour party ditched /switched leaders.
On a ‘resurgent leader for the resurgent Labour party’ or some such waffle. And I suspect that he will be harder to shift than even Gordon Brown - there certainly will be no shifting Mr Clegg before the next General Election.
209 They would be crazy to buy if they saw a house exclusively as an investment. If OTOH, they saw a house they’d enjoy living in, within their price range, and could afford the mortgage, why shouldn’t they buy? If they wait for prices to drop further, someone else might buy it.
182. “who doesn’t believe in anything.”
Mike - can you justify that? His views on decentralisation and a smaller state are pretty forthright.
(I guess I first got my picture of Clegg as reformer from the papers he wrote as an MEP on the need for EU reform and a more liberalised and decentralised model of education provision. So essentially I’ve always seen him as a - persuasive - policy wonk).
206. I’m very sorry to hear that, can you pass along my best wishes to SBS.
211. Yes. I’m not a hyppocrite on this, in fact I have form. I made my parents leave their estate entirely to my brother.
213 Ditto. I have two children in secondary school in London and streaming by ability is universal in their school and in all the other local secondaries that I am aware of.
207 - Reposted from up thread (right wing policies).
Schools - “reintroduce teaching that stretches the strongest”
Employment - “every out of work benefit claimant capable of doing so will be expected to work or prepare for work”
Prisons - “make community sentences tough and effective, and withdraw benefits for those who don’t attend”
Health - “Introducing payment-by-results within the system”
I must admit, it is hard to talk right wing policy when Darling has just trumped anything Cameron could introduce by removing competition laws in banking.
Observe how in a crisis the lefties introduce pure capitalism to resolve their problems. By restraining competition all these years, they have created inefficient private sector organisations which are now starting to fail. Perhaps if they had adopted a laissez-faire policy earlier we wouldnt have fire sales now. Just a thought.
215 - you don’t do conveyancing work, by any chance, do you, Mr Fear?
219. Yes but they’re all nonsense. Empty platitudes are not policies.
How does removing competition laws introduce pure capitalism?
@ 117 I never bought this twaddle about Minge Campbell being an “expert” on foreign affairs. In what way can the leader of an insignificant party be an expert on foreign affairs? What is his party’s influence over / experience in the practice of foreign policy?
Minge was an expert on foreign affairs like the Pope is an expert on fellati0.
35 Nick, where have you been for the last 12 months? Most of the policies your Government has tried to announce apart from the barmy recent ones were stolen from either David Cameron or George Osborne. For example the hike in inheritance levels!
As a fairly sane intelligent person are you not truly embarrased by the way your party is being dragged into the dirt by the incompetent noentities. It is now in times of trouble, the fact that your Prime Minister has never had a real job is showing. How can the country be safe in the hands of a man whose life experience before politics consisted of a short time as a university lecturer and then as a journalist, both honourable professions but with absolutely no responsibility for profit an loss or the economic survival of the institution. The same criticism will apply to many Tories too.
135 Nick, more important than policies is sound administration. This government has had no shortage of policies, but they have not been carried out effectively. The list is long: tax credits, immigration controls, handling of confidential data, no link between sentencing policy and provision of prison places, the stats fiasco, numerous re-organisations of the NHS structure which seems to have gone full circle, and massive increases in government spending, on and off balance sheet, without a proportionate increase in levels of service. Compound this with stealth taxes and this administration look incompetent and deceitful.
You need to address this. Trying to attack Cameron for a lack of policies is a smokescreen.
207, 213, 218 - It does appear to be dependant on the LEA. Statement retracted.
re 167 and Nick did anyone ask whether the money currently being wasted on ID cards could be more usefully spent on extra policing?
206 Augustus - SBS was posting on here last week with this very concerning news. Our hopes and prayers are with him for a full recovery.
200: my younger brother is at a comprehensive school in Cambridgeshire, where they definitely have the pupils in sets by ability.
In some areas they don’t do this, but that is down to the decisions of the local authorities. Personally, I would say that each school should be given the freedom to choose how to arrange their pupils into classes, whether by streaming, mixed ability, or a compromise (where you have overlapping streams). A friend of mine who teaches in the state sector is very fond on the last one - he says it gives you a beneficial level of inequality in each class, and he feels pupils benefit from this, but that there would be too much inequality with no streaming at all.
225. So in fact, Cameron wants to centralise a decision taken at local level? What a Socialist.
221 - Pure capitalism involves free-markets, unfetterred by outside constraints (e.g. competition laws).
212 makes a good point - Labour encourages survival of the most incompetent (Northern Rock, HBoS) at the expense of “fitter” organisations (e.g. Barclays).
206. That’s terrible news. Stunned by that.
re 194 that dead millionaire has already paid quite a lot of tax during his lifetime. Inheritance tax is wrong full stop. if you want to raise money from people do it while they’re alive, and in a fair manner like income tax.
221 - “How does removing competition laws introduce pure capitalism?”
There is a Chicago School type argument that the competition law is simply anti-success and a stick for losers to hit winners, whereas winners should be richly rewarded and losers should buck their ideas up. I don’t really buy it, but it is the capitalism, red in tooth and claw line.
229 - I know. Fancy introducing equal opportunities for all, not just those within certain LEA’s. What a T****er.
225 Streaming would be a decision taken by schools. LEAs now have virtually no influence over that kind of decision. The SATS regime makes streaming inevitable and in my children’s experience it begins around year 4 of primary. It starts in just maths and english but by year 8 or 9 children are streamed in all subjects.
206.I am very shocked to hear that news, please tell SBS we are all thinking off him.
230. I don’t think you know how capitalism works. There’s no such thing as a free market, just freer markets. Without competition laws we would not have competition and capitalism but utter dominance by the biggest companies.
233. I don’t buy that argument either.
234. Cameron places Equality above Individuality and Liberty? Aren’t you trying to convince me he’s right wing?
232 - But the main beneficiaries of inheritances are the surviving relatives who have really done nothing to earn the money (except behave just well enough not to be disinherited). The person making the will does get some peace of mind knowing his wishes will be respected, but that is essentially secondary.
Take two people, one with quite rich parents, one without, doing similar jobs. Is it obviously right that the first should get a tax free lump sum at the expense of raising the income tax of both? I don’t think so. There has to be balance.
206. My thoughts are with him & his family. SBS is one of our best.
222. John, I don’t think I said he was an expert, just that he seemed the first port of call whenever there was a TV or radio programme about Iraq. To be fair, the Libdems did have a distinctive position and appeared to be correct about the reasons for the invasion.
@ 217: why didn’t you make them leave it all to the Inland Revenue?
Remember, tax cuts are all voluntary. If you think you don’t pay enough tax, just write a cheque for all that money you’re wasting and send it to the government, who’ll do a much better job of spending it than you ever could.
Oh, sorry, what’s that? You think other people should be the ones who pay more tax? Ah. I see.
229. the contradiction between desire to centralise and localise does appear to be one of the biggest gaping holes between Cameron and his party at the moment
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/18/labour.economy#start-of-comments
Jon Cruddas
The political high ground is Labour’s
The future demands an active state redistributing wealth to balance a dysfunctional economy – our party’s founding principle
to all these experts saying that first time buyers would be mad to sell now because the market is going to do x,y,z, have you ever considered that the price of an asset might be discounting this conventional wisdom already?
@237:
Conservatives do not believe in equality of outcomes, including Dave.
We believe in equality of opportunity. The freedom to succeed, if it is to mean anything, must also mean the freedom to fail.
230 - Utter dominance by the biggest companies - sounds like capitalism to me. I would be astonished if I had managed to not know how capitalism works given an A level and a degree in economics, a spell in the city and now a spell running my own business. Perhaps you are better qualified than my university lecturers and you could explain what it is.
As for your reference to 233, you don’t have to “buy it”. It is a reality. Communism is a reality, just because I don’t “buy it” doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
And yes. Equality of opportunity is fundamental for Individuality and Liberty. Spoon feeding the feckless to try and keep everyone equal all of their lives is not.
243 - Cruddas needs to be a lot more concrete in his thinking than that article
237 - “Without competition laws we would not have competition and capitalism but utter dominance by the biggest companies”
Not strictly true. Competition law is a relatively modern invention. In many industries, smaller or medium sized firms are simply more efficient. In others, you shouldn’t equate size with the ability to do what you like - business empires do fall and you need to keep on top of your game.
Competition law can be a good thing, but we don’t have healthy competition merely (or even mainly) because of well intentioned regulators.
@ 238: the main beneficiaries of inheritances are the surviving relatives who have really done nothing to earn the money
What has the state done to earn the money?
@246:
Mr Albion, I’m not sure, after the last few days, if anybody accepts ‘working in the city’ as a proof of knowing *anything*…
242. Oh god, we’re not going to start the gulf between Cameron and his party schtick again are we?
245 Spot on.
242 - As opposed to the total harmony in the Labour party eh? At least the Conservatives can have an adult debate about matters, not just be jackbooted into towing the party line.
@249:
Clearly, the fair and correct solution after death would be to burn the estate to the ground and then salt the land.
206 - Sad news and my thoughts are with SBS.
OT
Would be more than happy to see the back of him.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/18/southafrica
South Africa: ANC may oust Thabo Mbeki, reports say
Party leaders believe president’s position is untenable after court rules he influenced prosecutors against rival
Benedict Brogan on National interest or Labour interest?
”
Martin Wolf makes a telling point in his column today. He says:
Gordon Brown may not be prime minister after the next election. Let him vow to himself now to be in a position to claim that he dealt with this crisis in as calm and decisive a manner as possible, while also leaving as good a legacy as he could behind him. That may not be the success he once hoped for. It would be an achievement, all the same.
This raises a theme that is emerging from the mayhem engulfing the markets and the Labour party: will the Prime Minister put his or the national interest first? He presents himself as a statesman committed to the good of the country, but his record is that of a sectarian politician whose actions are usually always coloured by selfish considerations. The public finances are getting worse by the minute as borrowing soars and tax revenues dry up, and someone will have to take some unpopular decisions to sort out the mess. In 1997 Mr Brown took over the Treasury after Norman Lamont had done the dirty work of putting up taxes. Will the Prime Minister be as helpful to George Osborne?”
It still amazes me that some journalists continue to peddle the myth of this Labour *statesman* when his behavior has been anything but statesman in reality.
250 - Yes………I never worked in the City. Honestly. *s*
138. Let him go. Camerons in a position now where he doesn’t need to rely on fruitcakes like Wheeler holding him to ransom.
On Topic, Mike, if you’ve had enough of the Liberal Losers, I[’m sure there would always be a place for you in the Camerons Conservatives. As far as Vince goes, I think he would be better than Clegg, but its too late now. The Liberals are stuck with Clegg until he loses his seat at the next election I’m afraid.
O/T-To Jack W- What makes you think the”EMPTY SUIT” as BHO is now affectionately known is more qualified than McCain to run both the country & the economy.If you choose to answer plse give a balanced answer as I am becoming seriously weary of your “pop-ups” from various states showing your intransigent partisanship.
182. I think your hatred of Clegg is affecting your judgement Mike. You might not like him but there is a clear Liberal agenda in his policy proposals & beliefs. I too voted for Huhne but I don’t think we’d be doing much better with him in charge. Our policy ploatform is one of the most rigorously Liberal we’ve had for many years & it is thanks to the direction of Nick that we’ve got here.
As for the pension mistake, it won’t haunt him for long at all, it was wrong & he admitted it. Opponents might try to bring it up but it won’t resonate (certainly not in the medium to long term).
249 - Nothing. And in fairness, it isn’t the state that gets the money. We have simply decided as a society to fund things like health, education and national defence and you need to raise the money somehow.
All taxes are unfair (except arguably a very few, very limited polluter pays type things but they will never raise much). Inheritance tax is unfair because it frustrates the legitimate wishes of the testator. Income tax (for example) is unfair because it frustrates the will of the employer and employee who have made an honest deal. I am not convinced at all that the latter is less unfair than the former as a matter of principle and the obvious answer is to spread the burden across various forms of tax.
Cables economic pronouncements are in fact rubbish - see Guido.
His ‘claim to fame’ is to suggest nationalising Northern Rock, but now this has happened we see we are lumbered with toxic debts and may lose money. the right choice was administration.
As for leader - thats pure speculation. He only stood up and did a talking head act when acting leader, he did not have to ‘lead’ at all — ie create policy, get his party to follow and believe in it.
Gordon Brown was once touted as an economic genius and great leader - we do not need another BBC promoted politician to end up stuffing us.
138. If a party member publically advocates the voting for another party while we also have a candidate, according to membership rules, they should be expelled.
206. Sorry to hear this news. However, at least SBS is in great hands - The John Radcliffe has one of the worlds leading neuro surgery units. Its also one if this countries best hospitals - My life was saved between there and Harefield Hospital, when I was baby.
206: Thanks, Augustus - SBS posted directly from hospital the other day and lots of us sent him good wishes. We all hope the operation will be successful and he’ll be back with us soon.
Albion and others: there’s often confusion between setting (grouping kids from different year groups together for paerticular subjects) and streaming (separating kids for all subjects according to perceived ability).
The former is largely uncontroversial and widely-practiced: if you’re brilliant at maths, it makes sense that you should join kids a year older for that subject, while staying with your peer age group for other subjects where you don’t have any special ability.
The latter is controversial and rarely-practiced, because if you’re streamed ‘down’ because you have a bad day in an exam at a young age, it’s hard to recover. It is not, so far as I know, Conservative policy to reintroduce it - or is it?
202, that’s an absurd position, quite frankly. Upon death your worldly goods (and organs) shouldn’t become state property.
I’d also like to echo the sentiments of sympathy expressed for SBS.
I sincerely hope the one thing which comes out of all this doom and disaster is a return to reality politics and beliefs in this country and that all the politically correct bunch will be kicked into the long grass.
I am a One Nation Tory.
I believe all citizens should have an equality of opportunity. I do not accept that means you destroy competition, you rob the so called “haves” to give to the “have nots” and insist all children go through the same crap education system.
I was fortunate to attend one of Scotland’s best schools Allan Glen’s which straddled the private and state sectors, not dissimilar to an English grammer school though we operated entirely in the independent sector.
My school based entry on academic ability. Certainly because I grew up in the prosperous (Tory dominated)West End of Glasgow, no less than 9 boys from my class of 50 (yes we had a composite class) went to the same school. But we also took boys from Drumchapel, Easterhouse, Castlemilk and all the other so called blighted and deprived areas of Glasgow. That was true meritocracy but of course the Labour party in Glasgow Corporation hated it and in 1973 they destroyed every single non-Roman Catholic grant aided private school in Glasgow including The High School of Glasgow, the Girl’s High School of Glasgow and Hillhead High School. they couldn’t destroy Jordanhill School because it was attached to the College and of course they didn’t dare touch schools like St Aloysius College a wonderful school because it was Roman Catholic.
Kids are not all equally intelligent. Somea re academic. Some are sporty. Some have wonderful technical gifts. Some are artistic and gifted musicians or artists.
All of the present generation of Labour MPs benefited from free university education and that is how it should be. If Blair hadn’t decided for statistical reasons that half of all school leavers must be graduates, billions would not ahve been wasted on turning perfectly good colleges into universities so that academically ungifted youngsters are channelled into the higher education system to come out the other end with a worthless piece of paper saying they have nonsense degrees in irrelevant subjects. A degree in Coronation St studies must be the last straw.
If we return to restoring higher education to being what it was, a natural progession for the academically gifted then at a stroke in England you could abolish these insidious tuition fees. Equally non academic school leavers could be taught that they are not second class citizens because they want to do craft apprenticeships and become tradesmen. British tradesmen were once the envy of the world. Can we say that now?
I could go on and on pointing out how this irrelevant Labour Government has done its best to destroy the natural fabric of this country but those of you who agree with me know exactly where I am coming from and those of you trendy politically correct lefties will not see the truth until we need to have martial law to restore law and order on our streets.
215 They shouldn’t buy because they’ll probably get the house, or something similiar, for 30% less next year and possibly 40% less the year after. A sum not to be sniffed at, or to get yourself into debt for 25 years over.
As for someone else buying it, come off it, credit will be extremely tight for years ahead in the UK. Only those with a sizeable deposit and reasonably secure income will get a mortgage and then less than 90% LTV and salary multiple upto 3.5.
It’s going to be a buyers market for years to come so anyone who dives in now is being premature and would be better off considering other options like renting.
re 238 is it right - yes. I take it you think lottery winnings should be taxed too, as well as the extra income tax the winner will be paying. Or even a reintroduction of betting tax perhaps.
262 - “ables economic pronouncements are in fact rubbish - see Guido”
Hmmm, who do I trust more on economic questions, the former Chief Economist of Shell or Paul Staines… a tricky one.
Flippancy aside, on all these sorts of issue there are different arguments even amongst respected economists. What matters most is that Cable expressed his opinion clearly and eloquently from a position of significant expertise.
For what it’s worth, I think Cable would not have been a particularly amazing leader. Like Ming (and Clegg) prior to taking the job, Cable has never come under the cruel scrutiny that you get from the press and opponents as party leader. Cable would have done better than Ming as he is more comfortable with himself. But he is an intensely private, even introverted man who looks his age and would have come under a lot of pressure.
269 Chris A “Or even a reintroduction of betting tax perhaps.”
This is not the best site on which to make that suggestion!
238, is it right that upon death your property goes not to those you wish to possess it but is seized by the state?
And what about the family home worth more than the threshold. An inheritor would have the choice between selling it off or paying a hefty bill.
268 - as someone else mentioned it depends whether you see a house as an short-term investment or somewhere you want to live. If a 1st time buyer sees the dream home that they want to live in for 10 yrs then they should buy it. As long as they stay employed they can pay the mortgage, enjoy where they are living and in the fullness of time it will be worth more than they paid.
259 david l. You misunderstand my position. I have a rather strong betting position on Obama …. and indeed quite a comfy one on McCain, so I cheer financially for Obama, whilst not unduly concerned about a youngster such as McCain zimmering into the Presidency. ;-).
Politically the Jack W Committee for PB Safety would fit nicely into the old liberal Republican camp, however they are an endangered species in the GOP and the wealth of wingnuts in the party doesn’t inspire. However Obama also worries with his positions on free trade and big government.
On balance we’d probably pull the lever for the Democratic ticket on the entirely nonsensical political philosophy of buggins turn !!
re 271 well it was James who was arguing for a tax on windfalls, not me.
I’ve said before, I’m with G on this.
I’d exempt a single family homestead (break the link between IHT threshold to property prices) purchased x number of years before death, as no-one should be forced to move house or even sell a house just because a close relative has died.
I’d exempt a small amount of liquid assets - an amount commensurate with a gift. The rest to be taxed - the inheritors don’t *deserve* the money, and the state doesn’t deserve it either - however, the state will spend for the general good and the mere presence of a tax would encourage more efficient spending for the common good - deathbed philanthropy.
This is where conservatives lose me - I agree it is about equality of opportunity not equality of outcome, so why insist on the abolition of a tax that would result in undermining equality of opportunity so seriously? This is rights-language covering self-interested preservation of undeserved advantage.
On the subject of housing, what do people think will happen to the rental market in the medium term? Presumably the number of people going into buy-to-let now is practically nil, and anyone who can get out is doing so - presumably that, along with the increased demand for rented accomodation will start to seriously push rents up? Which will then tempt people back in to buy-to let?
On this logic, I see rents going up significantly over the next couple of years - maybe 10 - 20% or so - before reaching a new equilibrium. Less than the fall of house prices because people will be renting what they can afford because they need somewehere to live rather than buying more than what they can afford as an investment - but still significant. But this is the result of ten minutes thought and there may be other things I haven’t considered.
269 - But why? To emphasise again - no tax is fair. But given that, I genuinely don’t understand your position that taxing earned income is in some way fairer than taxing a windfall.
I would have no problem as a point of principle taxing lottery winning or betting to reduce income tax. Lottery stakes are, in fact, taxed. But you have to be pragmatic and look at internet gambling and take up of lottery tickets. The reason these things are not taxed is not because it is “less fair” than other forms of tax but because the practical impact would be significant. The truth is that inheritance tax doesn’t seriously disincentivise dying.
174
‘He’s succeeding far better than I’d hoped’
If this is success for Clegg together with the Lib Dems 12% share in the latest IPSOS poll,what would your measure of failure be?
260.”As for the pension mistake, it won’t haunt him for long at all, it was wrong & he admitted it. Opponents might try to bring it up but it won’t resonate (certainly not in the medium to long term).”
Very naive view IMHO. Credibility is the most vital trait for a successful leader or party.
265.NickP, I am at a loss to what you were trying to achieve with that post other than a lack of knowledge about the current education system throughout the UK.
“The latter is controversial and rarely-practiced, because if you’re streamed ‘down’ because you have a bad day in an exam at a young age, it’s hard to recover. It is not, so far as I know, Conservative policy to reintroduce it - or is it?”
You have not a clue how it works in practice if you can come to that conclusion.
273 “it depends whether you see a house as an short-term investment or somewhere you want to live. If a 1st time buyer sees the dream home that they want to live in for 10 yrs then they should buy it….”
Nothing personal Andy, but after reading that nonsense I can only conclude that you have a vested interest in the housing market. Why pay £200,000 for something now if you can get it for £150,000 or thereabouts in a years time? Why saddle yourself with another 50k of mortgage debt that you will be stuck with paying for the next 25 years at variable rates of interest? Why not wait a little longer and get the same place, or something similiar, for considerably less?
When the sales are due next month most sensible people don’t flock down the shops to pay full price now. Only the impulsive, the infantile, or those who have more money than sense deliberately pay way over the odds for something, be it a house, car, or anything else.
267 Hear Hear.
I too went to grammar school as it was identified by the eleven plus exam (no SATs required) that I had the academic ability to do well at a grammar school. My sister went to the local comp. I would say that over our lifetimes we have done equally well because (1) we were streamed into an education which suited our needs and (2) we both work equally hard to succeed.
The first of my children to enter secondary education has opted for a comprehensive school education as he is more gifted at music, art and sport than he is academically. I full support his decision, but I am also pleased that he still had the choice to go to a grammar school had this been his preferred route. I have no doubt he will do well as he is already showing he is willing to work hard for what he wants, not sit back and wait for the state to supply it.
I expect that one of my other children, who is soon to decide, may try the grammar school route (the ulitmate in streaming). The other, who is too young to show aptitiude either way, may go either route. However, I will vote to give all my children the opportunity to shine (in whatever field) they deserve. Thats why I vote Tory.
The property issue is serious. Most people are ‘buying a home’ and not betting on short-term gains. They should hold to that, buy what they can afford if they like it and enjoy the home. Five, ten years down the road - maybe a profit maybe not. Life is for living not postponing.
275 - So why is taxing windfalls worse as a matter of principle than taxing other things? You are failing to put any positive argument.
On topic: Presumably there will soon be other polls which might shed more light on whether the apparent fall in LibDem support is real or not. I must say that it does seem a little odd, as I don’t see any particular reason for their support to have fallen so sharply (the fieldwork was done 12-14 September, so before the Clegg gaffe and without any positive or negative effect from the Conference).
My guess is that the next set of polls will show a slightly better LibDem figure and a worse Labour figure, as the economic realities begin to be recognised more widely.
Inheritance Tax has no moral basis.
It is about envy.
If I have worked all my life, paid all taxes both direct and indirect - what I do with the residue is up to me as an individual. How I choose to dispose of those assets on my death is my choice.
The state has taken all that it could during my lifetime - it has no moral right to take anything further from me because I am dead.
This is nothing to do with the equality agenda - it is about the rights of the individual to do with their own property what they see fit.
277 Rents are going down in most parts and staying static in most others from what I’ve heard. There’s a massive glut of rental properties, even with the current wave of attempted sell-offs, so don’t expect a resurgence of buy to let anytime soon or perhaps ever
BTL:RIP
276 - Human psychology would suggest that the more money is taxed the less is given charitably. In fact I believe there are studies about that show this effect.
283 Read my post 281 and save yourself a packet. Or perhaps you’re so flush you don’t mind paying top dollar for everything?
@276:
Morus, I think you’re just begging the question.
If you believe that the state should be entitled to your titles and lands after death, be up front about it and say why.
Personally, I’m in favour of going back to a late-Anglo Saxon Witengamot model of inheritance.
Morus, the conservative objection to inheritance tax is that it breaks the taboo of double taxation.
How about taxing any surplus each of us has after paying our income tax annually? If I earn 50k, pay 12k in income taxes, spend 35k, leaving me 3k surplus, I’d pay Annual IHT on that 3k. Fair? It’s the same thing, just done every year, rather than at the end of life.
I don’t intend to have much left over when I die, but I do intend to put something away for my son to make his life easier. Can you give me one reason why there is something wrong in that? I don’t care if he ‘deserves’ it; it’s mine, I have paid taxes in full on it and I want it to go to him. End of.
288 - I think Morus’ point is simply that if you know your pot of gold will go to the state otherwise, you will give it to some local charity you care about rather than see it dispersed by the state, partly to worthy and partly perhaps unworthy causes. Certainly, GAYE has increased giving.
285 “I don’t see any particular reason for [the LibDem's] support to have fallen so sharply (the fieldwork was done 12-14 September, so before the Clegg gaffe and without any positive or negative effect from the Conference)”
My guess would be those part-time LibDem voters who are becoming so exasperated with this Labour Govt. - and so determined to get them voted out - that they have moved to the Tories i.e. a classic squeeze.
correction: that post 290 was addressed to scampis post 284
274-Thanks for your amusing answer but plse try & tone down every nuance from the battlefield.
294 MM - Could be. What is odd though is the timing; the Conservatives have been relatively less visible in recent weeks. Anyway, we shall soon see.
292.Absolutely spot on Baskerville.
276, 288 - Furthermore, IHT is effectively a tax on capital not income. Such taxes tend to encourage capital flight (which is essentially what the mega-rich IHT avoidance structures do. PtP, I know I’m simplifying, here).
The violation of the equality principle, Morus, is not huge in the case of a middle class family that can pass down a family home, maybe some savings. It *is* huge, however, in the case of those individuals who benefit from having very affluent parents - but these are precisely those that can avoid this supposedly levelling tax. Your argument, I’m afraid, takes you down a very draconian, statist road - the Tory argument against all this is based on utility as much as the natural tendency to regard the family, not the individual, as a basic building block of communities.
292 - Double taxation is very common though isn’t it? You are taxed on the earned element, then taxed on spending, on income from saved funds, on property you buy with the money (Council Tax) etc.
Again, I’m not arguing any tax is a “good” thing so I don’t understand your “what is wrong with that?” point. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to give money to your son, but equally there is nothing wrong with wanting to keep earned income. Just we have to strike a balance and spread the burden.
299- sorry, should have referenced 285, not 288.
297 - One would imagine that the Labour plotting and the plotters referencing the Tories means that the only two parties that have been visible have been the big two. That and the ongoing financial issues will concentrate voter minds on the only realistic choices, that will depress Lib Dem opinion polling.
286. There is no ‘moral basis’ for income tax either, nor “National Insurance”, nor VAT and so on.
I feel it’s more justifiable to tax wealth that someone has inherited purely through birthright than to tax wealth that someone has earned through their own hard work and endeavours.
As for the “double tax” argument - this applies for many taxes. VAT, for instance. Plus, as money circulates - so long as there are more than one taxes - it is inevitable that it will face “double” (or even triple, and so on) taxes. Even if we accept this is wrong, then it is only follows that we should drop all taxes, but one - and in the case of wealth being “double” taxed via income taxes and then inheritance tax, I’d much rather drop (or at least reduce) the former.
274-Sorry Jack meant to be 275.
281 - I do have a bit of an interest as I’d like to sell and most likely to a 1st time buyer. It depends on how much you think it is going to fall and how quickly. A £200,000 house/flat would cost c.£15,000 a year to rent so on a 25% fall over a year you’d be better off renting. On a 10% fall over a year or a 25% fall over 3 years I still think (when you add emotion to logic) that some people would prefer to buy.
Incidentally - there has been a remarkable number of viewings of the house in the last week including a couple from buy-to-letters. Despite my attempt above to talk up buying I am very surprised.
297 But Tory “visibility” now isn’t an issue; it isn’t like no-one knows the Tories are there. The general exasperation level is so high, there is only one realistic outlet for that frustration for a LibDem - vote to get the Govt. out, which means voting Tory.
Exasperated Labour voters started moving six months ago. The LibDems were just a little slower to react. Perhaps they still have stronger residual reservations about the Tories than Labour voters?
Just a theory.
I judge taxes by efficiency: how much do they raise? how easy are they to collect? how easy are they to sidestep?
Inheritance tax is a lousy tax. It is easy to sidestep, so the richest barely pay it at all. It raises next to nothing - stamp duty raises twice as much.
It should be scrapped and more emphasis should be placed on taxes that can be easily collected.
305 - I think you’d be being a bit ripped off if you were renting a £200,000 house for £1,250 a month. I think £850 would be more realistic and you could probably get it cheaper.
280. Ensuring that there’s a proper and visible answer to ‘What do the Lib Dems stand for?’ may not be reflected in the polls at the moment, but it’s work that has to be done.
It’s the LD equivalent of the Tory ‘brand decontamination’ (but with better long-term durability, no doubt).
282 etc. voxpop
your whole argument hinges on the idea that prices will fall in the future, and that is a special insight, “inside information” if you will.
if the price was guaranteed to fall in the way that you suggest, or even a majority of people thought that it would, it would already be lower.
the reason a house fetches a given price is because both buyer and seller think it reasonable, taking into account future expectations, and their own motivations.
268, 283 & 292 - that’s why i’m a Conservative as well.
It’s all about aspiration - for yourself, your family, your friends and society in general. Labour just don’t get it. They expect us to be given what they think is a good education (for example) and be grateful for it.
Can’t believe this thread…Cable made one (poor and unfunny) joke that got him in the media spotlight, and suddenly he’s the saviour of the Lib Dems?
Give me a break.
If you were ever serious about winning a General Election, you wouldn’t have ousted Kennedy. I happen to think Clegg’s alright. He won’t ever win a GE, but he’ll pick up disaffected Labour voters until they sort out their current crisis.
Cable would have no effect whatsoever on the LD’s opinion poll ratings.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/sir-victor-blank-favourite-to-take-lloyds-tsb-chair-524141.html
“Sir Victor has extensive experience of banking and retailing, and Lloyds shareholders will hope that he will bring the kind of retail nous that Andy Hornby, a former acolyte of Archie Norman and Allan Leighton at Asda, brought toHBOS.”
Classic Quote from the Indy, back in 2006 !!!
308 - am going purely on the estate agent who valued our place to sell and rent at the same time
Mike - Cable did not put himself forward for the leadership, so how could the party membership “have made a big mistake”?
277 Morus
While I have some sympathy with that view - how does one square this with the following situation:
Child has two parents who live until they are 21 and they pay for private education, healthcare etc.
Child loses both parents in a car crash when they are born. Child loses accumulated earnings of parents through inheritance tax. Doesnt get private education, healthcare. (Assume no insurance).
Either case 1 is unfair or case 2 is unfair. Given that case 1 is the status quo, ergo case 2 is unfair. Do we then start trying to create special cases or admit that in reductio ad absurdum inheritance taxes are unfair?
I tend towards the middle ground - some IHT, but above a fairly high threshold. Which is what we have at the moment.
307 - I don’t wholly disagree with that. The debate we were having was more of the “as a point of principle” type.
It is undoubtedly true that the rich generally avoid IHT whereas the middle classes get stung which is unfair in practice. My personal view is that it would be better to tax inheritance as income in the hands of recipients, encouraging the wide dispersal of gifts.
303 - Inheritance tax applies to all legacies above the threshold - irrespective of the relationship between the parties.
The mega-rich have always managed to find a way round inheritance tax by the clever use of trusts and other mechanisms. So that form of wealth-transmission will continue.
Direct, lifetime taxation does have a moral basis - we are making direct contribution towards the running of the country in which we are living and enjoying the services provided by the state.
306. “The LibDems were just a little slower to react.”
Not so much slower to react, in my opinion, as didn’t have the necessary groundwork in place, which the Tories did.
311. don’t kid yourself about the society bit - it’s for yourself, family and friends. always has been.
Martin - I’ll be as honest as I can! Not about envy - I’ve made clear to my parents that they are to spend or donate every penny.
People are talking about right to money, or there being no moral case for inheritance tax. I want to tease out some thoughts.
There is a model of thinking, best exemplified by Robert Nozick in ‘Anarchy, State, and Utopia’ that says that what I earn is mine, and no-one or nothing has any greater right to that than I do. If you accept this line of thinking, then not only is IHT morally wrong, but all compulsory taxation is wrong. I disagree with this, because I believe in progressive taxation as the price we pay for living in a civilised society, that cares about the least well-off and recognise that their plight is not always deserved.
I cannot see anything worse about IHT than about other types of tax - in fact quite the opposite. If I earn money, but accept that tax isn’t evil per se, I would prefer that my estate was taxed when I was dead and could no longer enjoy my wealth than to be taxed when alive so it cuts into my enjoyment of being wealthy. I would be happier with a cut in income tax (on ‘earned’ wealth) rather than IHT (’unearned’ wealth).
The double tax taboo? Not a taboo. All money is taxed multiple times - you are taxed on your income, and then you spend that taxed money on food and pay VAT, which is used by the shop to pay staff who pay income tax etc etc. There is no taboo as far as I’m concerned.
The question is, once you have paid your taxes (when alive) do you have complete right to distribute what is yours as you wish. I would say ‘yes, but only to a point’. Everyone wants to look after their children - a tax-free lump sum of liquid assets of up to £100,000 plus the principle family homestead seems a fair amount to look after the kids. To allow more than that has a couple of negative effects: not donated to charity, not used for the public good, and *undermines equality of opportunity*.
This last point is the key for me - if you truly believe in equality of opportunity not equlity of outcome, why allow the playing field to be so skewed without any deserving aspect. Bear in mind I would allow a house and £100k to be inherited, we are only arguing over sums capable of massively distorting equality of kids’ opportunities, and discouraging the idea that people who want to be successful should have to work for it to a certain degree. Notwithstanding, as well, that consolidation of wealth without it being spent and distributed makes little economic sense either.
I wouldn’t go as far as G - people want to leave something for their children, and I think £100k and a House is enough. No-one needs more than that without working or inventing or doing *something* to deserve it, so I think it better that the money of dead people goes to reduce the tax burden or charity burden on the living, rather than allow obscenen amounts of money to undermine true equality of opportunity as well.
303.”I feel it’s more justifiable to tax wealth that someone has inherited purely through birthright than to tax wealth that someone has earned through their own hard work and endeavours.”
No, you are in effect taxing someone after death who has already paid their tax on that money which they earned through their own hard work and endeavours. Yet again if a parent/parents work and save hard, you want to penalise them and their children for that fact.
Its the same with pension credits, two people can work and earn the same amount throughout their life. One can spend it all while the other saves frugally, they should get the same state benefit at the end, but they don’t.
A thought for the Labour posters.
I think a lot of the reason why Gordon Brown has kopped all the blame for the fincial mess is that no-one else has been held accountable, or prosecuted.
For example, a proper inquiry might actually lead to some apportioning of the blame, some prosecutions (as well as some insight into what needs to be fixed.) This would help Lanour, as it would drive home the point that some of the blame properly belongs to financiers taking reckless risks.
The prosecution of the board of Northern Rock would be a good place to start.
Instead of which, I believe Applegarth received 1.36 million pounds in salary last year, for destroying a company that had existed for over a hundred years.
IHT, as it was, was iniquitous, since it fell disproportionately on the (middle-class) elderly and sick. In 1994 my Dad had a cancer scare, and I can tell you the trauma of us having to run round solicitors in advance of him going in for surgery, trying to mitigate his liability in the event of him not making it. Happily it didn’t come to that, and he’s still going strong at 80, and has since had plenty of time to put his affairs in order. Nonetheless it was a horrendous experience..
Some people are caught out simply because they are unworldly, or illness strikes unexpectedly.
321 - good post
on tax: most taxes are rubbish or immoral for one reason or another. pragmatic solution is to tax a bit of everything and ignore the crazy ideologues.
IHT i would keep. but not at crazy levels - it needs a threshold, a low rate, and no loopholes. there needs to be a mechanism to make it easier to pay - if you inherit a land estate it is a bit harsh to be landed with an instant cash bill large enough to necessitate selling up.
324 - Rod - still think it is going to be a hung parliament
242-ha ha ha
I’ve used that line many a time and no one has yet come back to me telling em they felt they paid too little tax so sent an added cheque to the tax nazis.
324 - Rod, IHT is due on the estate after the person’s death. The actual liability falls on the residuary legatee.
321 - Nature can be cruel in the equality of opportunity stakes though. Some people are born with sub-standard intelligence levels which will impact their ability to progress. Are we therefore to take things to extremes, deliberately cripple the naturally advantaged in order to create a veneer of equality. Personally I prefer to take the approach that I’m not equal to others and never will be and it’s best just to plough my own furrow.
Vox Pop, even now there are plenty of people buying property. Quite a lot of them don’t need mortgages, or are getting private mortgages, or don’t need to borrow 90%+ of the property’s value. And they’re not fools.
There are good reasons for this. They include:-
1. Finding somewhere you really like. Even if prices fall considerably, there’s no guarantee the same house will be available for you next year. In fact, the more prices fall, the more likely someone else will snap it up. If you’ve ever gone househunting you *know* which is the one you’ll want to live in, and, if you can afford it, you should buy it.
2. Long term investment. A client of mine has just bought a property for well above the market price, and its price will have fallen since then. However, it’s next door to a big site he owns that he’ll develop for housing in a few years, and gives access to that site from the main road. Buying that house when it came up made excellent commercial sense.
3. Business expansion. A client of mine sold his house last month for well above the market price. But his neighbour runs a nursing home, and he needs extra premises. Again, the neighbour’s decision made excellent commercial sense.
4. Buy to let. The price of small flats has fallen so much in some areas, that rental yields are looking attractive again.
310 ed
House sales in the UK have collapsed from a year ago and are continuing to dry up. Ask any estate agent how things are in the market. The unprecedented excesses of recent years haven’t just left certain banks floundering. Many millions of people are also saddled with debts which will curtail new purchases and take years to unwind.Combine that with the ongoing squeeze on new credit which will also take years to ease and you will see why house prices are heading only one way and at an accelerating pace.
247 - “Utter dominance by the biggest companies - sounds like capitalism to me”
This is classic neo-Marxist misdirection. Dominant monopolies are *one possible situation* that can arise from a capitalist system and a free market, but they are neither necessary nor necessarily desired for a market to constitute Captialism.
Capitalism is merely the stage, not the action that takes place thereupon. It’s the canvas, rather than the painting etc.
There are people out there who believe - erroneously - that Capitalism is a hands-on ideology in the same way that Socialism/Communism is, and that Evil Authoritarian Capitalist Governments go out of their way to try and make big business bigger and give huge amounts of money to the already-rich.
But then people will believe anything about the opposition if it improves their own sense of self-righteousness…
328. that’s because it is an incoherent argument unworthy of response
321 I see you argument, but there are two flaws, IMHO;
(a) house prices would be hugely inflated as the family home became an inheritance tax shelter;
(b) it’s wrong that people should be required to sell family businesses/farms, or massively mortgage them in order to pay the sort of IHT you’d be talking about.
330 - That’s just silly.
I’m talking about ameliorating massive inequalities of opportunity to give everyone as good a chance as possible, not crippling people. To compare limiting the amount of unearned wealth that you are given one day to being crippled is pretty gross.
It’s not as though I was suggesting a statist confiscation of all assets on death. This is the sort of typical, self-interested overreaction that makes conservatives sound pathetic.
332. you are in fact describing many of the symptoms of a classic market bottom. i.e. if things are already so bad, and prices are where they are, then why would they accelerate downwards.
p.s. i’m not saying it is the market bottom - just that your logic is fatally flawed.
333. have you ever played a game of monopoly to conclusion?
painful isn’t it.
317-How is that going to work?
You have an estate at £300,000. You spread it to ten people so each gets £30,000. Because of Gordon’s tax theft in respect of tax thresholds chances are most if not all will be taxed at 40%. Don’t see a huge advantage. In any case, the bequeathor can always distribute his/her estate among 10-30-100 people if they so wish.
IHT seems to boil down to envy and who do you think is best able to spend your money. Labourites and their acolytes are more than keen to have a population depending on government handouts. Unfortunately too many people buy the krap. Like being taxed to the hilt and then being grateful because Gordon allows you to put £1000, or some such derisory sum, into a baby account or some other gimmick.
Lastly, why should taxes be progressive? On a flat tax regime, someone on £100,000 pays more than someone on £10,000. Not, as the screaming hordes claim, less. In any case, someone on £100,000 is less liekly to use government services than someone on £10,000 so they are, in effect, already subsidising those on £10,000!
327. I like to be contrary, so I have to say yes.
329. I know that (it actually falls on the executors, I think), but my Dad had made no provision in 1994 to mitigate his liability. I’m not sure I understand your point..
331 Sean, House sales have halved from last year and are continuing to slide. Why buy something now when you can get it for a lot less next year? Of course there will still be some house sales even in a market that has started to crash. I realise that some people are too thick/impulsive or rich enough not to worry about saving themselves £20k, £50k, £100k or whatever but such people are in a tiny minority and besides, the credit has dried up which should protect most of the infantile impulsives from themselves.
I don’t have a vested interest in the property market. Perhaps you should declare if you have. Same goes for Ed
James at 279: “The truth is that inheritance tax doesn’t seriously disincentivise dying.”
281. The reason I don’t think it will resonate (& why it doesn’t damage his credibility) is that it is not something that is widely know (apart from by pensioners!). Everyday living costs would resonate far more.
If you were going to allow a house to be included what about those who had to realise capital to move into care then die shortly afterwards. I can see another complex set of rules be drawn up in HMRC, so it probably has a chance of happening.
335 And investment decisions would be very badly skewed as people diverted resources from commercial property, and business assets into buying the biggest house they could afford.
335 - I think House Price inflation has a limit - it couldn’t be so far removed from the price of new houses as to increase exponentially. A good point but could be dealt with by people brighter and better informed than me.
I don’t know how to deal with farms/family businesses - maybe consider them in the same bracket as principle property. They are clearly not liquid assets in the same way as cash, and there is an extent to which the living have also invested in them. Both excellent points, but neither insurmountable I’d guess. I’m more interested in the principle than anything else.
336 - that came out harsher than I meant it to - sorry
317 - I simply don’t see taxation as a matter of principle. It is a matter of revenue raising. Principle comes in when we consider how to spend the revenue, and the net impact of revenue and spending.
Quinnipiac Poll: Obama 49, McCain 45
CBS/NY Times: Obama 48, McCain 43
[CBS News 09/05 - 09/07 McCain +2]
Palin’s email account hacked:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1919
336 - as already noted, IHT can’t be used for “ameliorating massive inequalities of opportunity” - those estates large enough to confer this are already subject to intelligent planning to minimise IHT exposure. Tighten the rules enough, and you’ll just drive the wealth off-shore.
334-So you haven’t got an answer.
If you feel taxes are too low, send off the cheque. Or are you only willing to have higher taxes if “everyone” has higher taxes. I’m screwed but I’m happy so long as everyone is screwed. It’s the “if the plane crashes but I’m not the only one to die” mentality. Or best of all, those who can “afford to pay”, a group which normally does not include the one screaming for higher taxes.
341 I’m knocking my head against a brick wall here. The average seller isn’t going to hang around for 12-24 months, just so you can buy his property for far less. He’ll cut the price and sell to someone else.
It would be a very strange world if we only bought houses in a rising market.
341. with that attitude you will never buy anything, in case it loses value and doesn’t recover.
my only vested interest in property is my small but beautiful house. but it’s not for sale.
346 - I was of course being deliberately controversial, don’t worry I have had harsher responses in my time.
321-good argument but still unconvinced.I don’t believe fundamentally in “double taxation”.By paying tax during your working lifetime you have “earned” the right to pass on any residue to others-family or whoever.
O/T - Gordon has a plan… help!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7623053.stm
Gifts to political parties are exempt from IHT. I wonder if one could set up a politcal party, simply to act as a tax shelter.
348 Philippe. Link to the Q poll - M-45 O-49
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1215
351. try looking up ‘tax’ in a dictionary, that may provide the eureka moment you seek
337 I’m relieved you’re not saying this is a market bottom as that would be a ludicrous thing to claim, wouldn’t it
As for my logic being ‘fatally flawed’ I wasn’t aware that I was applying logic since when does logic apply to asset markets?
What is the market value of a house these days? Nobody knows. I look in my local estate agents here in the Cotswolds and some houses are still at last years prices while new arrivals are priced considerably lower but still aren’t attracting buyers (or even viewers from what I’m hearing)
What is selling these days? Some auctions are reporting vastly lower numbers of sales and considerably lower prices than expected for those which attract one of the few buyers still in the market.
The housing market is on the skids but that won’t stop some obstinate, and ultimately unsuccessful, sellers from trying to ride it out. The price drops have only really started.
The “Washington Post” reports that recent Obama ads are more negative than Mccain :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703581.html
357. at the moment there are so many loopholes, it isn’t necessary to get that complicated.
356 - Not quite
Gordon says that something needs to be done.
He doesn’t actually say what that something is.
I suppose we should be grateful that he has acknowledged that things are not perfect. But he needs to set out exactly how he will act. Not just the idea that he knows that something must be done.
Rod I actually admire your stubborness on the hung parliament. It would only take a couple of events and we would be back in 10% tory lead which could equate to a hung parliament. Then you will get to be a smug git for a very long time!!!
341. Everyone has a vested interest in the property market. Homeowners relating to price. Private tenants due to availability and price. Social tenants due to availability. Taxpayers due to stamp duty receipts. Workers due to flexibility of location of employment.
Do you think it is a good thing that at the moment an out of work homeowner may be able to get work which requires relocation, but they cannot take that work, and therefore require state support.
This is why people have really turned against Labour. They trusted them when they said no more boom and bust, and that they would ensure house prices were not in a bubble. All the prescott style spouting about global economic conditions rubbish coming out of labour doesn’t wash because they firstly took credit for benign conditions, and secondly they expected that the government would have taken account of global issues, that’s their job.
re 300 just because it’s common, doesn’t make double taxation right. I’d do away with the lot and replace it with just taxes on income and profit. You have to make the money in the first place to have the ability to pay it.
Inheritance tax and before that Estate Duty has been one of the most devastating taxes on the rural way of life. People may disapprove of large tracts of land being owned by a small number of people for many reasons but the rural economy is heavily dependant and always will be on a small number of people maintaining largely unproductive and uneconomic areas of land. Large numbers of small and scattered communities are dependent on a single owner maintaining the status quo.
20 years ago I inadvertently bought back a small pile my family had occupied for most of the 19th century and slowly but surely I am buying back as much of the estate as I can. It will probably take me the rest of my life but I will be damned if any Government of greed and envy will prevent me handing it over to the next generation (assuming I can find some female stupid enough to want to breed with me). I can no longer buy back the family pile in Lancashire because it has long since been subdivided and some energy company wants to cover much of the land surrounding it with windmills (which I approve of).
Maybe I am fortunate in that I know who my ancestors were (both rich and poor) 300 or 500 years ago but I happen to believe one of the major threads which holds this country together is the traditional attachment of families to their heritage, whether they be the Dukes of Devonshire or the latest in generations of blacksmiths.
246 Martin Coxall
That’s a distinction I’ve often thought myself, and rarely seen written.
Equality of opportunity is what matters. Trying to tax and spend and socially engineer equality of outcomes is where Labour people might be well intentioned but are proved wrong by the results time and time again.
360. you have one thing right - you are indeed not applying logic.
The “Chicago Tribune” on McCain and Obama courting the three western states of Colorado, New mexico and Nevada :
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-western18sep18,0,2771194.story
360 - aren’t we seeing a move to a different sort of market? One which is to do with the requirement to buy somewhere to live, rather than to realise cash or increase asset value?
McCain should really be running this :
———-
OPENING - Scan of Wall Street Journal article, “Critic of the Firms Sadly Says ‘Told You.’
“Hello, my name is Peter Wallison. I served as the chief lawyer to President Ronald Reagan. For years, I’ve been warning that there was a big crisis coming in the mortgage market.
There weren’t many people who wanted to listen - maybe because there were hundreds of millions of lobbying dollars on the other side. But there was always one person on my side - and yours. Senator John McCain.
“Senator McCain has been fighting this problem since 2002. In 2005, he sponsored legislation that could have prevented today’s crisis.
“Unfortunately, Barack Obama was always on the wrong side. The lobbyists’ side. Barack Obama took more money from Fannie Mae than almost anybody in the Senate. And he appointed the former head of Fannie Mae to run his vice presidential selection committee.
“John McCain was right and brave when everybody else was wrong and scared. He stood up for you - and against big money and cozy deals.
“He saw this crisis coming. He showed us how to stop out. Now he’s the man to lead us out of it.”
http://frum.nationalreview.com
————
366 - there aren’t too many blacksmiths around any more. Things change …
352 Sean, on the contrary I think it’s me thats banging my head against a brick wall. Forget what sellers want, this is a buyers market but you seem unable to grasp that when prices are clearly falling and will continue to do so any sensible person puts off his/her purchase in the expectation of paying considerably less for it next year or the year thereafter. Particularly if the bank won’t dole out the money to pay these bubble prices. The credit crunch is still with us.
Clearly there are some people with the cash to buy outright but if they are in that position then, unless it’s an inheritance, they are presumably canny with money and won’t be paying top dollar in a falling market.
As for this ‘dream house’ you keep harking on about (are you an ea?) plenty of sellers are now slashing their prices but they’re STILL not selling. The ‘dream house’ nonsense of Kirsty Allsopp et al was fine for the boom but the bust is a far less sentimental creature.
268 Easterross
Terrific post. Real wisdom as well as practical common sense.
There was some pretty bad political meddling in the education system under the previous conservative governments, so it’s not all Labour failure, but they’ve certainly been pretty apalling.
Social mobility and real educational standards have reduced under Labour’s failed policies which I’m sure at least some of them have the decency to be pretty embarrassed by. (Nick?)
I have a different approach to taxation.
There should be a flat rate which starts at £12,000 . The rate falls after (say) £25,000 but at that level you have no access to any form of income benefit..
It is economically crazy for the state to support people fincially above a certain level…
And the tax rate applies to all forms of income including benefits… thus removing the problem of work being less profitable than being on benefit..
341 so voxpop do you live in some wonderful free cotswold cave collecting berries for food and using internet in a library which allows you no exposure to the housing market
341 So you’re not interested in saving yourself a packet. Fine.
360 As I said. There’s no logic to asset markets though they are understandable if you study them.
Oh Dear. Where’s Stewart Dickson when you need him. Private Eye has a nice little piece this fortnight about the SNPs links with a Muslim Brotherhood front organisation. It seems that ‘public money was handed over to a body [Scottish Islamic Foundation] which had neither been incorporated as a company nor registered as a charity at the time the grant was given’.
The foundation is headed by Osama Saeed, the SNP candidate for Glasgow Central. Funny that.
Cable is not a leader as he has twice refused the chance to stand for the leadership if the Lib Dems. Also his CV reveals that he has always worked as an adviser and not held a post of real leadership, where one’s decisions cam come to haunt you.
As an economist he was with Shell for only two years and probably using his overseas experience in advising them regarding the political/economic prospects of a country in which they were thinking of investing.
As an economist he has shown the ability to analyse a past situation but fallible in recommending sound policies to solve the problems posed by a present or future situation.
Regarding the discussion on taxation, the worst taxes are those imposed on savings and employment, as both are assets are vital to the economic well-being of a country.
However, currently NuLab has (for political reasons) packed the civil service with nigh on a million extra paper pushers when this country needs vital infrastructure development on transport (mainly railways) and energy (especially renewables). So we have the need to retrain more than 1 million people. Which party is bold enough to take up the challenge?
376 No, I’ve rented since selling in 2003 (move abroad) and I won’t be ‘exposing’ myself to the housing market again until I consider it’s value for money. Another year, perhaps two. Until then I’m keeping my powder dry
367. unfortunately it is written too often - because it is nonsense.
the two are completely interlinked, so to have massive inequality of outcome guarantees inequality of opportunity.
“equality of outcome” is a nonsensical straw man, but some sort of levelling out is essential to have a civilised society.
Latest Research2000/DKos tracker :
McCain 43% .. Obama 49% .. Barr 2% .. Nader 2%
http://www.dailykos.com/dailypoll/2008/09/18
375 - how about changing the thresholds and rates but in order to abolish whole tiers of tax collection / redistribution. If we raised tax thresholds to really reduce the numbers actually paying taxes that would be a massive boost.
No comment on this (65)?
New Selzer/Indy Star poll for Indiana :
McCain 44% .. Obama 47%
Would be sensational if so - Ind has been Republican pretty much forever - though 538 has a CNN poll 48/43 McCain
but even renting constitutes exposure to the market - you are just making a different choice, and hoping that it works out better. as with any investment decision, it is going one way at the moment, and could flip the other way at any moment.
betting on the market going down indefinitely is as ridiculous as those who did the opposite on the way up.
383. that didn’t go down too well with the 10p abolition did it?!
re: compensating shareholders - i think it is important to draw the distinction between compensating shareholders per se and nationalisation. Nationalisation without some share support risks incentivising short sellers to drive any financial institution into government arms. Northern Rock did this. It should therefore never have been nationalised because of the moral hazard involved. If shareholders are to lose money it should be in the ordinary way, through the market. Once government takes over, you have an inflammatory situation.
New thread - Frank Luntz on the Labour leadership: September 2006
It was the ‘political’ introduction of the 10p tax rate that was the mistake, not the abolition.
384 Hywel. Clearly a very good poll for Obama froma gold standard pollster. Will McCain now devote some financial resources tothe state or hope it turns red to form come election day ?
………..
The Research2000 daily total for yesterday was M-42 O-50. The strong focus on the economy is killing McCain presently.
385 Ed, I make my own decisions and I’m very confident that renting rather than buying is the correct one at this time. If I’m wrong I’ll take it on the chin but I have no fear of that happening
As for betting on the market ‘going down indefinitely’ I agree that would be ridiculous which is why I’m not doing it. My view is that house prices will fall considerably for 12 to 24 months then drift lower/stagnate for some time thereafter. Prices will start to pick up eventually as they always do.
I’m not aiming to get my timing right to coincide with rock bottom but I aim to be thereabouts so I get considerably more bang for my buck than I would if I bought now. Sounds sensible, no?
266: Why is streaming controversial??? I woudl say it is more controversial (i.e. stupid) to pretend that kids are all the same ability. I don’t think in practice that kids would be streamed on the basis of 1 exam, more likely to be on the teachers’ experience and knowledge over alonger time period. All the children KNOW in any case who is bright and who is not, it would not be news to themm, they could very likely set themselves accurately based on their own experience, so this lefty talk of people being “branded failures” is so much claptrap.
I was under the impression that it most certainly was Tory policy, one thing that reassured me that they hadn’t completely abandoned all principles after the grammar school affair. I would be very disappointed if they instead maintain a commitment to bog standard comps.
I went to to a state grammar school after passing the 11+ and am convinced I would not have got into Oxford had I been to a comprehensive school instead. Our education system must aim to get the best out of every single pupil, and this inevitably means different (not better or worse, just different) teaching for different abilities. Instead we have this arbitrary 5 Cs or better benchmark, and schools focus mainly on those around this borderline, since getting pupils up to 5Bs instead doesn’t help with the league tables, and nor does helping less able kids get a couple of Cs. Bright kids, for whom 5 Cs is easy, do not get stretched.
I accept a return to the sheep and goats 11+ system is not going to happen, and probably not ideal. But we must have a diversity of schools with provision for a diversity of talents, and a recognition within the system and crucially within individual schools that we have a RANEG of abilities, all of which need to be catered for, not one blanket curriculum for all - which actually fails most.
Can any tory confirm their party’s policy?!
392: I would clearly be in the bottom set for spelling and grammar, sorry! (Well, maybe one above Martin Day…)
RANGE of abilities
“you seem unable to grasp that when prices are clearly falling and will continue to do so any sensible person puts off his/her purchase in the expectation of paying considerably less for it next year or the year thereafter.”
I’m unable to grasp it because plenty of sensible people have good reason to do otherwise, as I’ve already pointed out. The sensible person you have in mind is the one who sees property purely as a short term investment.
Contrarty to what you believe, houses are in fact still selling.
372 Tabman that is why we have had to import hundreds of them from Eastern Europe!
@ 351 Absolutely. Either the high-tax brigade want everyone to be as badly off as themselves*, or they hypocritically expect these “fair”, higher taxes to fall on others but not on themselves. I have rarely come across a lefty who was personally thrilled to be paying higher taxes to fund cuts for others - indeed both as individuals (eg Bono) and corporations (the Grauniad), lefties dodge taxes like they dodge soap.
* which essentially is also the argument against grammar schools, and ofe appears to be made by the same people - funny, that!
396 - “often”
I’m sorry but this article looks smart but I bet there was no observatiuon from this commentator of this type at the time! So called ‘wisdom’ acheived through hindsight is pretty cheap.
The article also ignores the point that the last leader, Ming was 1)utterly ignored by ALL the press no matter how many times he made good political points or avoided the punch and judy pony and PMQ’s and, 2) Completely lambasted for his age from all sections of the media, even from those who should know better who would usually pass out from shock if anyone were to be racist or sexist in newspaper articles or media broadcasts. Let us be under NO illusions, that Cable would have had exactly the same treatment from the media once the initial honeymoon was over. Cable is doing an excellent job where he is. The media turns to him for comment on financial matters in preference to the joker at the Tory Party, and he avoids the ageist cobblers he’d get as leader.
Clegg was good at Conference. He made a stupid error but he’ll learn from it and it’s no worse than cycling along for green reasons with a car following with your briefcase in it…..
re 375 spot on - it’s ludicrous that a couple with a combined income of £50k+ get child tax credits.
Would they have been on 12% with Vince, very probably. He is too old and the same arguments around MC would surface again.
There is no market for the Lib Dems at the moment, they are in very serious trouble. just accept it. Could be a wipe out, a real wipe out at the next General. Probably worth putting money on that.
Hey, I am both a Lib Dem and Tottenham supporter, nothing like everything going down together!!!!. Think I will do a Rip Van Winkle and when I wake up in a few years time it may all have turned round, maybe not.