kevinjohnsonmbe

Applies to domestic too.

With such internal turmoil it's just the sort circumstance when the party leader's judgement must be sound and his leadership strong - a trustworthy, reliable and committed policy advisor would be a great help. Dhoooooooh! 🌺

First Green in the House of Lords!

No on a number of levels, not least of which, it'll be a good while before Labour are anywhere near electable. He alluded to the concept of unreasonably high rents and the potential for political intervention to cap private rents but was characteristically slippery on a possible policy stance. It starts at about minute 30 and he is pressed at about minute 38. Dimbleby had to press him and force him to commit which must have been a real affront to his silver tongued, non committal, middle of the road, friend-to-all vote chasing norm. It made for an entertaining few moments! Peter Hitchens & Victoria Mitchell (hot!) spoke frankly, with passion and avoiding the spin/BS. Umunna & Greening trotted out the usual sanitised party line with little credibility or independent thought and were frequently jeered or laughed at by the audience. Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb babbled some fairly irrelevant and nonsensical Green Party jibberish. Not a bad show overall.

Your suggesting that a wealthy bunch of individuals should shaft another bunch of wealthy individuals at the same time taking the care to ensure some poorer individuals don't suffer? Who'd have thought it...... Chuka Umunna MP on QT last night suggesting exactly that!

I know..... Almost inconceivable! 😆

:thumbup:

Ah, bugger!! I must be unreasonable AND in a minority.....

Here's a link to registered suppliers: http://biomass-suppliers-list.service.gov.uk

I'll have to look them both up to see how I feel about that.....

It's definitely a complex situation as you say Bob, and why would an investor buy into all that hassle (to add to your list - agency letting fees, periods of vacancy, cost of updating / upgrading fixtures & fittings, late / non paying tenants, damage, eviction etc, etc.....) unless there was a return on the investment? The answer is they wouldn't but since rent/mortgage is probably one of the largest single costs to a family, it is a major factor in achieving a decent/acceptable standard of living for a great many of the population. Just my take on it but I believe there should be publicly owned housing stock. It's only since the prevalence of the MBA qualified management and accountants contrived to convince public institutions that physical assets on their balance sheets should be regarded as liabilities that there has been this purge of physical assets. The historical abject failure of such a policy would be proved by a comparison of the perceived localised budget savings as compared to the increased cost (through tax credits for example) to the central budget. It's a total crock and instead of taking the tough decisions our politicians (all flavours) have chased the vote rather than address the issue.

GreenGui, a belated apology if I caused any long lasting psychological trauma with the "raving liberal" comment! Just to put it back in context though and to avoid "selectively quoting", from memory, wasn't it in a discussion about potential terrorist activity? I think you were railing against the intolerably oppressive police state and I may have got a bit of a hairy shirt on and used the raving liberal comment?? There's a whole world of discussion there - controls v reduction of Liberty, but perhaps another time / place. Genuinely no offence intended. 👍🏻

Richard, you're right of course. The price is set at what the market will tolerate. That's business. Except that, in the case of rent, this is not true because successive governments have buggered it up and allowed private rent to sky rocket by consistently topping up beyond what the market (individuals) can afford. Stop topping it up and the market will settle back to what can be afforded.

Dan, is the problem rooted in Tory preference for Laissez-faire, market forces dictating market values or is it a case of private land lords charging in excess of that which can be sustained by an unencumbered market? (the "encumberment" in this case is state subsidy inflated rent) Rents are high BECAUSE tax payers have to subsidise them. Take away the subsidy and market forces will take effect. The problem is the greed of the landlords. But like good socialists, they'll take as long as the state gives.

A thousand apologies! I'll get right to it! Keep going with that hobby and you'll go blind! Is that the voice of experience I hear? Who said that.....?

Jesus, for one with such a quick thinking mind, that response was a long time coming, I could maybe fit my hobby in between your responses:) A thousand apologies! I'll get right to it! Keep going with that hobby and you'll go blind!

Wholeheartedly agree with the first paragraph! But wouldn't the task have been easier if he'd loaded more thoughtfully? Less effort & less exposure to unnecessary risk of mechanical failure & potential injury. Poor efficiency in a subsistence lifestyle is a recipe for failure!

Haha, I like it Kev, I'm the same! I only take the bait when I'm bored, which is usually after reading one of your posts:-) 😂 stop reading them then! Or get a hobby 😆

You have the same difficulty spelling you're as I do. He's been spitting his dummy since Scotch independence thread though Eggs, I throw him a bait once in a while but only when I'm bored.....

Mike, it's not something I've suggested - the discussion point comes from Eggs' post 211. I do know people that won't take extra hours because of the negative effect on tax credits though and it's a government aspiration to cap benefits at 23k (widely reported) - I struggle to see how that can be considered unreasonable. It may not be obvious, but I am a very strong believer in the state providing a safety net when needed. Unfortunately, the system that has evolved is abused by too many to the detriment of those that may truly need help. The system is sick and unsustainable, it sounds like you suffered as a consequence.

You might have misinterpreted my meaning Bob (equally, I may have misinterpreted yours?) No offence intended. Have a care with your scenario though, it's sensitive ground. Safety, liability, responsibility, morality are attributes I would never knowingly compromise. I would never knowingly exceed what I understand to be the legal or manufacturers stated safe loads and the limits I am comfortable with are considerably lower - probably 50% lower cause I'd rather go back tomorrow than squeeze another 1 on top. What I meant by "it grates" is that it grates to have to have a piece of paper to show an official to ensure I am able to go about my lawful business unimpeded. I always read "Justme's" posts because he gives quality tips on driving / towing / regs etc.

That's just how I write Eggs. Don't hold it against me! Doesn't mean it will make sense - especially when I'm thinking quicker than writing!! There are big profitable companies that (appear to) have dedicated, motivated, satisfied staff at all levels - to be fair, I could only think of 3 off the top of my head - John Lewis, M&S & Waitrose. Not sure if there is any corporate linkage between them and my assessment of staff satisfaction is only based on a fairly limited / anecdotal knowledge. But things like staff shares, discount purchases, shared profit dividend seem to result in a workforce that is feeling valued and in a relationship where shared endeavour equates to shared benefit. That seems to work and perhaps it would be good if more companies were geared towards staff moral. There have been more than enough threads about arb employers / employees on here. Some people just wake up, get dressed, go to work for the allotted time, do as they are told, pack up, go home, and others that live, breath, eat, drink and sometimes sleep (or have lack of it) because they are not just going to work but living the work they do. Each to their own - what works for 1 might not work for another. I don't know what the answer to your original question is - other than to say perhaps, these days, more people have aspirations that exceed their income than at any previous time in recent history? And perhaps more people think it's somebody else's fault rather than attempting to readjust their personal aspiration? I heard a radio interview of a woman complaining how unfair it was that tax credits were being adjusted and that it would make it difficult for her to pay her mortgage. I mean, really? WTF does she think will happen when interest rates jump 5/10/15% (it's only a short while (relatively) since they were at those levels. Who's fault is it going to be when she defaults on her mortgage? Her's for massively over committing beyond her means or 'the system's' for an interest rate change? I 'get' what you're saying fella, I don't know the answer.... Other than to say, people have got to live within their means and that might be as simple as getting a grip on unrealistic aspirations. Having a benefit cap at, what is it 23-25k, jeez, and they're still complaining? Look at the average wage in Cornwall - The annual earnings in Cornwall split into gender is: Earnings for males averaged £21,085, 78% of the UK average. Up by 3.8% on 2013. Earnings for females averaged £14,102, 82% of the UK average. Down by 0.4% on 2013. Full-time workers averaged £22,012, 81% of the UK total, part-time workers £8,633, 96% of the UK total. The weekly and hourly wage in Cornwall: Average weekly earnings totalled £320.9, 77% of the UK average, full-time £425.7 and part-time £150.4. Average hourly earnings totalled £9.11, 79% of the UK average. Cornwall’s Average Wage | Cllr Andrew Wallis I think there is a national scandal that is housing benefit paid by the 'system' to private landlords that are achieving high % return on their property investments. It's a tough call but, pass a law that prevents current tenants being evicted, reduce housing benefit to a sensible (sustainable) level.

Really useful - thank you! Even though it grates that you have to have a form filled in to say what you're entitled to do in any case but if it keeps the jobs worth from trying some old flannel it's worth it!

Loon with a limited life expectancy. Maybe he'll get lucky and when the cable parts it won't cut him in half but just remove his reproductive organs which would be of benefit to mankind more broadly. He doesn't look like the kind of bloke to be in such a rush that a second a run would have ruined his day?