General Election 2017

[BigGully]

In your example the property is now 3 times the price it was. I dread to think how many times the purchasers salary this now is because sure as hell it will not have increased 3 fold. That's an extra 150k the purchaser has to now find in their life time. And I think I have this right, but you're now stating that to square this out they simply borrow much more money over a longer time? Isn't this the very thing which led to the financial crisis?

The figures are for a fix term of 25 years repayment, its the current interest rates that offsets to some extent the current high (to us) buying price that help with the subsequent affordability.

How can the lenders effectively and accurately predict future interest rates and the recipients longer term future income progression, but this has nearly always been part of the process anyway, the problem for the lender and the recipient is how to mitigate any likely mistakes and perhaps is why current lending criteria seems quite tight.

Accepting my 1990 and 2017 examples are no more than snapshots, if you take them purely as those individual mortgage figures on those two sets of circumstances then £80 000 @ 12% and £230 000 @ 2% on a 25 year repayment mortgage make the repayment amount similar, so if affordability is the critical point when based on those two examples it might suggest that it hasnt changed very much, but I am sure inflation, any wage growth etc might even fall in the £230 000 favour, however its all a bit hypothetical.

Purchase price year 1990: £80 000 @ 12% @ £843.00 per month over 25 years = £252 900 on a property worth after 25 year term + 2 years 2017 £230 000
Todays price 2017: £230 000 @ 2% @ £925.00 per month over 25 years = £277 500 on a property worth after 25 year term in 2042 ??

Of course the key points are that 12%+ didnt hang around forever and we cannot know how long low interest rates will too, but in our own discussion overall it doesnt necessarily show that the current property market is anything particularly unique nor less affordable then it has been at some periods in the past 30+ years, its just different and I am sure it will find a way to assist first time buyers to access it again.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Labour have lost Glasgow City Council. Shettleston has returned a Tory?! I'll repeat that, Shettleston has returned a Tory?!

The world has gone mad.

 

[Hastings gull]

Labour have lost Glasgow City Council. Shettleston has returned a Tory?! I'll repeat that, Shettleston has returned a Tory?!

The world has gone mad.[/QUOTE]

Instead of arrogantly claiming that -why not ask yourself why the voters have done so?

 

[Hastings gull]

That article is not a labour politician saying that they encouraged mass uncontrolled immigration to put one over racists.

It's an ex labour advisor saying that labour encouraged immigration to make the Uk more multicultural. In addition they 'sensed' it was to 'rub the rights nose In It'.

Not the same surely?

you are struggling!

 

[Soulman]

Labour have lost Glasgow City Council. Shettleston has returned a Tory?! I'll repeat that, Shettleston has returned a Tory?!

The world has gone mad.

Oh dear oh dear what a shower of shite

 

[Hastings gull]

Looks like my ward has eschewed the 3 candidates who live within it in favour of a Tory who lives 15 miles away. I'm sure he'll have my interests at heart.

Now is this genuine principle or simply because you didn't get the result you wanted? The reality is that if there is a huge national swing, local reps tend to suffer, which is a pity if they are otherwise excellent people, but don't forget -it cuts both ways. Labour gained in 1997 and the Tories now.

 

[Soulman]

That article is not a labour politician saying that they encouraged mass uncontrolled immigration to put one over racists.

It's an ex labour advisor saying that labour encouraged immigration to make the Uk more multicultural. In addition they 'sensed' it was to 'rub the rights nose In It'.

Not the same surely?

Stop digging, you are at rock bottom.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Labour have lost Glasgow City Council. Shettleston has returned a Tory?! I'll repeat that, Shettleston has returned a Tory?!

The world has gone mad.[/QUOTE]

Instead of arrogantly claiming that -why not ask yourself why the voters have done so?

You seem arrogant, so perhaps you could answer it for me because I don't know anymore than the Labour Party or The SNP does.

 

[pb21]

Now you're just digging a deeper hole for the sake of it!

No I'm not.

Labour encouraging mass immigration to make the UK more multicultural (possibly to increase Labour's chances of victory in elections too) is one thing.

Labour encouraging mass uncontrolled immigration to put one over racists is another. The fact one ex-adviser (quite possible an ex-adviser with an axe to grind writing in the Telegraph) sensed that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity, doesn't lend much if any credence to the claim!

Its quite frankly ludicrous and absurd to think it was.

Still waiting for this Labour politician that said this though. If you have that source I will stop digging.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Oh dear oh dear what a shower of shite

Yep, I agree. That is an incredible result.

 

[Soulman]

Yep, I agree. That is an incredible result.

Again, will Labour listen to the people....no chance

 

[ManOfSussex]

Nationalism alive and well down in Cornwall.

[tweet]860463268376317953[/tweet]

 

[Soulman]

Yep, I agree. That is an incredible result.

It may be a surprise to you but, that Ruth lady has been getting a lot of support, she has been battering Sturgeon.
I can tell you that Sturgeon is not very popular atm.

 

[LlcoolJ]

Inbreeding alive and well down in Cornwall.

[tweet]860463268376317953[/tweet]

Ftfy

 

[ManOfSussex]

Again, will Labour listen to the people....no chance

There is PR there though, so 25% does get you somewhere. Still, Labour arrogance over Scotland again.

 

[ManOfSussex]

It may be a surprise to you but, that Ruth lady has been getting a lot of support, she has been battering Sturgeon.
I can tell you that Sturgeon is not very popular atm.

I know The Scottish Conservatives are on the front foot. That's one of the most deprived areas in The UK there.

 

[The Rivet]

Fair enough. I can picture the individual now -he was part of the Miliband jetset talking about the Blair years, but cannot for the life of me put a name to it. Perhaps those on here who foloow politics more can help.

Andrew Neather

 

[ManOfSussex]

Latest standings:

[tweet]860469255065800704[/tweet]

 

[Chicken Run]

I'm sure she'll be back in Eastbourne too - it is a key marginal and her birthplace after-all. Perhaps she'll venture further east next time as well though and drop in to support Amber Rudd in Hastings & Rye and perhaps go on a walkabout through the town centre to the Salvation Army foodbank or maybe wander up London Road in St. Leonards from the seafront where the homeless and street drinkers congregate, past the bus stop with Eastern European staff getting the 26a to The Conquest Hospital and then visit the Job Centre Plus to see all the fine work The DWP do for ordinary people for herself in front of the cameras.

Probably be a quick walkabout in front of some supporters though then a written interview with The Hastings & St. Leonards Observer on strong and stable leadership though.

Unfortunately all of the above was apparent in 2007 minus the food banks of course, what was the government of the time doing about them I wonder?

 

[Gwylan]

It may be a surprise to you but, that Ruth lady has been getting a lot of support, she has been battering Sturgeon.
I can tell you that Sturgeon is not very popular atm.

Davidson is a really impressive politician: a great speaker but with a real knack of talking ordinary people's language. She certainly wouldn't be scared of a leaders' debate in the same way that May is - she'd wipe the floor with all-comers.